proved to be his Luke 12.52.53 Math. 24.9.2 Tim. 3.12 1 Cor. 1.27 2 Cor. 6.4 5. So that where there 's none of this I avouch the Gospell in its purity is not there though where these are the Gospel is not the cause for that is men lusts and flesh fighting against the light but the only the occasion whereupon they arise when Satan the strong man holds the house the goods are all in peace but when Christ the stronger man comes to storm him out there 's contention in hearts houses Towns and Countries as when Christ came to Ierusalem all was in an uproar and when Paul came with his Gospel to Ephesus Athens Iconium Lystra Derbe lewd fellows of the baser sort were set on by others to raise tumults for truth tormented them into rage thus we often judge of Causes as good or bad right or wrong by the effects that flow from them but to reason upon a cause as good or ill true or false right or wrong according to the might or moaness the abilities or defects of the persons that stand up for it is the right way to wrong it indeed sith the Antichristian cause hath the mighty wise and prudent Priests and Potentates of the world for its Patrons when the poor only for the most part receive Christs Gospell and the strength that God ordains in defence thereof against the persecutor is the mouths of Babes and Sucklings Causes are to be rejected as wrong and false according to the defects and weakness that is discovered to be in the Arguments that are brought to maintain and not by the weakness and defects that may seem to be in those that are more zealous then able to mannage them if there appear to be weight in the Arguments these if strong however weakly and babishly propounded will carry the cause in the conscience of any but such Priest-be-charmed Christians as in Charity to their Churchmen are resolved to yield themselves up to be carried away with every wind of doctrine that passes from them and covering the weakness of them to be whifled any way by such arguments as the men themselves that make them are fain to grant to be weak to prove what they are brought for for no Argument is weak that is sufficient to evince the thing it s used in proof of though it fall from the mouth of never so weak a man if a weak feeble hand letfall an heavy Axe upon it or a sharp sword even the sword of the Spirit the word of God that is quick and powerfull it may serve to cut off the Popes head Tripple Crown and all but if the Pope himself and all his children which are the ablest Humanists in the world come out to warre against Christ and his cause with reeds and rushes blind non sequiturs weak and broken Consequences they must ride back to Rome for stronger swords or else they may force fools into conformity to their follies but never guide wise men after the spirit to believe their cause to be good as therefore t is not good that an ill cause that hath but weak Arguments to uphold it should be owned for good either in Charity or upon pretence of ability in the persons that patronize it as the Clergies crooked cause of Infant-sprinkling is for what saies the Parish to those poor ones in it that entertain the Gospel are you wiser than a whole Synod of able Orthodox Divines so it is a thousand pitties that a good cause that hath strong Arguments enough from Scripture and reason to prove it right should be wronged so as to be rejected as rotten yet so Christs true baptism is through the defects of the persons called Anabaptists who are supposed at least to have more zeal then ability to prove it of which sin of wronging a right cause upon account of such defects even the cause of Christs true baptism which in his strength those Babes that are baptized with it are not only zealous but able to make good against the Ablest Baby-Baptist that is among you I know no men under the Sun more guilty then you Clergy men who take your advantages to cry out the lowder against it as error by the defects of Christs Disciples that plead and practise it of whom you say commonly as you say complementally of your selves here they have more zeal then abilities to maintain it yea verily you who seem here whether more simply or more simulatorily who knows not so to implore the charitable benevolence of well disposed people to cover the weakness of your Arguments and not to suffer your cause of Infant-sprinkling to suffer throw your defects and inabilities to maintain it are men so far from teaching facienda faciendo from doing to others as you would be done to that you rather disclaim and proclaim those Arguments of ours as weak which as feeble a folk as we are are strong enough to storm you out of your strongest holds and cause that cause to be despised under pretence of our defects which though weak in our selves and pretending to little of that outward accomplishment which you call ability yet throw Christs word assertaining it to be his and his spirit assisting us thereunto we have both zeal and ability to maintain who is it I trow that trumpets about the eminency and learnedness of their party and illiteracy of the Anabaptists whereby to render the way the more contemptible more then the Priesthood who charm their people against the receipt of the Gospel in such sort as the Pharisees of old when they said are you also deceived have any of the Rulers of the Pharisees believed on him but this people that know not the law are cursed Ioh. 7.47 48 49. So brags Dr Featly and his fellows despising the way of dipping viz. joint suffrages of so many Bishops in such a Synod as for the Anabaptists they are a few mean sylly men and women an illiterate and sottish sect the father and head of whom quoth he was Nicholas Stock and a very blockhead was he p. 164. Simple rude Mechaniâ—ks Russet Rabbies Apron Levites whom we own not quoth he but detest and abominate p. 113 who know not how to dispute for truth because they know not the original and cannot conclude syllogistically in mood and figure p. 1.2 Thus Featly defeats them in their cause by dilating on their defects and which of you almost do not confirm your people against their cause by their infirmities of one kind or other like flies you feast your selves upon their sores and let go their sounder parts you make much of their little to your purpose you make your best out of their worst and out of their personal weaknesses strengthen your selves and others against the truth which wise men know is nevertheless truth for the poors receiving it you root in their very excrements whereby to find matter to make their good cause bad and yet here oh how mendicant of other mens mercy not only
to spare sentencing your cause as wrong by your personall defects and want of abilities but also in charity to couer the weakness of your Arguments which is such an unreasonable request as was scarce ever put forth before by any Disputants who if they find their Arguments to be weak ought rather to recant them specially after such publique acknowledgement of the weakness of them and to desire people that they would not suffer themselves to be swayed by them then otherwise But Sirs do you think in your consciences that there is such weakness in your Arguments as is here intimated to us in your own book and likewise that your cause which is so far from a good one that it deserves to bear the name of Abaddon is in danger of suffering so much through your defects in disputing it unless men be so charitable as to wink at the weaknesses of both I speak seriously in my mind you had then better by far have conceal'd then reveal'd your disputation in an Account and had provided much better for the honor of it for now you have vindicated it from the disgraces with which it was loaded in private like him that fetches a frisk out of the frying pan into the fire whilst you publish it in the same weakness onely robbing your Respondent of the strength of his Answers in which it discover'd it self at first and hang it out against the Sun so that all men may see clean through it so thin and thread-bare it is and that without spectacles and not onely so but make proclamation of the weakness of your Arguments with a petition to pardon the weakness of them that 's an ill bird which in hast bewraies his own nest and leaves it to others to make all clean and such are they that uncover their own nakedness so far when they need not that they are fain to be beholding to the benevolence of others to cover it and yet are so inexorable as to hold the cause of others inexcusable in the self same case wherein they are earnest to be excused by them for our cause is at a loss among you for the sake of what ere defects you spie in any persons that profess it But I believe you are not cordiall in your aâ—knowledgements here for if you were you would surely have endured your Respondents private representations of the weakness of your Arguments and your pedling in your proof of Infant-baptism with more patience then you did but its evident by your impatience towards him in that kind that what ere you say here of your selves in a voluntary humility yet you have so good an opinion of your selves and your work too that day that Tam nil as nothing as it here seems to be in your Account as well as ours you take it ill that any should esteem so poorly and speak so plainly though but privately of your trifling doings as you dispense with your selves to do here in publick before all the world and howbeit here 's weakness and defects and defects p. 3. overtly worded over by you in a general way yet it 's an hundred to one if a man take you at your word and yield to what you say as truth and say it ore after you that there 's much weakness in your Arguments and that there were many defects in your Disputation and your zeal of Infant-baptism is great and your abilities but mean to maintain it you will be half angry with him and think he casts scandals upon your disputation and be ready to gainsay all this and to stand up in vindication of your Arguments as strong and sufficient and lay all the defects that were in the disputation at your Respondents door and if you be askt what one individual particular Syllogism Term Argument or Scripture you were out in the framing uttering urging or underctanding of throughout the whole day of the disputation I am perswaded you will sooner bite your nayles then assign any or if it be specified by others that in this and that you were out you misunderstood such or such a Scripture such a speech or passage you faultred in I am afraid your pretended self-deniall will be found so little that you 'l justifie your selves in every bit and scrap of that which past from you during the whole discourse which makes your confessions deserve but little of that favour you so much implore by how much they savor of juggle and complement more then of a real true sense of what is wanting to you indeed which verily is a right-baptism to maintain rather then abilities to maintain that right-none that you stood up for nevertheless I must needs grant it to be true that you say here that your abilities were far short of your zeal yea so short that howbeit you had a good mind to do it yet you neither did nor could maintain it at all but wherefore was it but because you had a bad cause in hand yea had your zeal been as big as your cause was bad there had been no standing before you indeed the defects of your cause was the cause of your defects and not your own defects the cause of your causes had not the fault been more in your faith which was a false one then in your faculty to maintain things and had that and your baptism been as good as your parts are great and both these as probable as you capable to prove the meanest among you might have done more at the disputation then as it happend all of you did per vim unitam because though you fought with one who was no more then a flea in your ears yet you hapned to be fog'd so that you faced the wrong way and fell in unawares against the truth which in these daies of its return falls upon inquisitive consciences with more force from the mouth of fooles and babes then meer tradition doth from the wisest Babists in the world The deepest defect is in the cause you defend in the way you warrand t is a crooked cause an unwarrantable way and therefore those that will warrand mens walking in it can never do it without faultring and fumbling in the work and such after occasions of fawning on men for their charitable excusation Gentlemen that I may neither seem to defie nor yet to deifie your persons but put things upon a true Account you are men that have some worth and excellency and yet some weakness and exigency too but I impute your miscarriage in the disputation not half so much to your own as to your causes indigency your business was well man'd but ill manag'd because there was but an ill matter to be maintain'd you were at the wrong end of the staff and therefore well might you be defective in the strife this makes the least of the flock draw you great Leviathans out now adayes and the feeble to be as David before Goliahs that have been Polemically exercised from their youth
required Fourthly it had been stark non-sense for Mark to have said of Christ as he doth Mark. 1.9 he was baptized of Iohn in Iordan if he were not dipt or if by baptized we must understand sprinkled for he was sprinkled into the River is as absurd and unelegant English as to say he was dipt into the rain Secondly it was not by powring water upon them that Christ and the Eunuch were washed this is the baptism Mr. Baxter pretends to as that and that only which ever he saw dispensed in all his life as it were disclaiming the way of sprinkling which yet is your onely wonted way I believe he saw good cause to be ashamed of owning that any longer for baptism as many a one besides him is who with him puts it off thus that their baptism is not by the way of sprinkling but powring of water upon the infans for my part saith he p. 134. I may say as Mr. Blake that I never saw a child sprinkled but all that I have seen baptized had water powred on them and so were washed And Mr. Blake saies p. 4. of his answer to Mr. Blackwood that he never saw nor heard of any sprinkled O the egregious shifts and shuffling evasions of these men who perceiving the perverse practise of sprinkling infants summoned and sub paena'd to come to a trial by the word of God do disguise it out of its old name that it hath born with content and without controul for ages and generations and doth still among many of their own party till now they begin to see it more strictly then ever enquired after and likely to come into trouble for its transgression from Christs command and shroud it under another name whereby to secure it so that now they know not nor ever saw or heard of any such manner of thing done in all the world No Sirs what never that is strange what parts of Christendome have you lived or do you live in I profess for my part I have lived a Sprinkler of infants my self about some seven or eight years not only in several parishes but in several parts of our English Christendome far distant yet so far as I remember I did never see till I came acquainted with the people whom you nick name Anabaptists any thing done by any in that particular that might well bear any other name then that of sprinkling yea I know where a dispensation of baptism as t was called was done so slenderly once to the child of a noted Clergy man that the father himself was so far in doubt whether there was so much as sprinkling or any water at all dropt from the fingers of the Dispenser that he doubted a while after whether he do still or no I know not whether it were not his duty to have it done over again a little better the Gentleman I speak of if ever he read this will surely remember both what and what Child of his I mean Mean while what more then sprinkling was ever done by my self or any other in that place or any other wherever I have been I cannot call to mind neither do I know that ever till of late that men see advantage lost by it in this controversy the name of sprinkling was denyed to what was done in all places of England save such where the manner was and very newly is upon sight of the falsenesse of the way of sprinkling to dippe a little more then the tippe of their Noses Besides though the Rubrick did prescribe dipping as the onely right form wherin baptism is to be dispensed and in case of weakness declared it sufficient to pour water upon a child yet what kind of powring was universally used by them who never used dipping is evident by the Rubrick if we will give it leave to expound it self for in the Catechism thereof which is not unknown to Mr Blake and Mr. Baxter both to have been taught or commanded to be taught all children at any years in all parishes of England this question viz. what is the visible sign or form in baptism is thus resolved viz. water wherein the person baptized is dipped or SPRINKLED with it in the name c. So that howbeit the Bishops were pleased to use the word pouring water as you do yet a great piece of pouring it was I promise you that their Priests practised to infants and it is a chance whether Mr. Baxter and Mr. Blake have not in the infancy of their administration which I suppose was in the bishops reign done the like though now happily they make a little better measure or at least seen the like at some time or other but me thinks they cannot chuse but have heard of the like in one place of the world or other a poor piece of pouring I say when their hands onely being put into water were after held up perpendiculariter over the infants face that it might be wetted a little with what fell guitatim from their fingers ends And this hath been the most usual way that I have seen in respect of which I may say the Priest that administred all commonly by book and wiâ—hin book did act beside book and without book in that service for howbeit he was in joined to dip the child in the water as the most expedient way at least and not so much as to dispence by powring water unlesse in case of weaknesse onely yet he made bold having an inch given him to take an ell i. e. upon leave granted him to forbear dipping in time of weaknesse only to forbear dipping altogether and being authorized by the same Ghostly fathers the Bishops to make powring suffice instead of dipping at such time onely wherein dipping might not be safely used to make sprinkling serve instead of pouring also and in this manner I am perswaded the world was gulled by the Clergy in Cyprians daies and after who having the verdict of so grave a Father as Cyprian was that application of water in the bed might stand for baptism in time of sicknesse in case the sicknesse proved unto death for if they recovered even in his judgement they ought to be had to the River and dipt for ease sake to the flesh and such like self ends made some slender slabber to stand for baptism altogether And that sprinkling only hath been the general way of England its evident enough to any save such as seeing see not and have ears and hear not yea as shy as Mr. Blake and Mr. Baxter are of that name sprinkling as blind and deaf as they would make themselves in this case as though they never saw nor heard of any sprinkled yet there are Divines famous in their account who own it some of which seem to speak as if they never heard of such a thing as powring of water in the dispensation of baptism but only of dipping and sprinkling as the only forms that ever they had the hap to hear of witnesse besides
for infant baptism from the several Housholds that are said to be baptized discovered and disproved p. 185. to 188. Old England Scotland New England concurring together by the ears about their infant-rantism 227. to 237. All those Eulogies or high commendations that are given to little infants in those Scriptures Mark 10.14 Mat. 19.14 Luke 18.16 cannot possibly prove them to have any right to baptism and the childish disputings of the Ashford disputers therefrom disproved also Dr. Holms's weak Arguings from Mark 10. for infant baptism and that Scripture opened and urg'd as a strong Argument against the Priests in that point p. 132. to 142. F Faith their apparent having of which is the first way whereby the Ashford Disputants would prove believers infants to have the Spirit not possible to be in any infants much lesse to be manifested to be in believers infants more then in those of unbelievers the childish disputings of the Ashford Disputers in proof of infants Believing from Matth. 18.6 from Faiths being and witnessed by their circumcision to be in the Jewes infants from their uncapablenesse to be justifyed and saved without it and from all other considerations whatsoever abundantly disproved p. 69. to 75.195 to 201.271 to 279. and their unreasonable repulses to such objections as themselves confesse Reason makes against infants faith on Reasons behalf replyed to p. 279. to 299. Not onely the primitive Fathers viz. F. Peter F. Paul F. Jude F. James F. John are all for us but the sub-primitive Fathers which the Ashford Disputers pretend they would fain have pleaded it from perhaps are more versed in then in the other discovered to be more against then for Infant baptism p. 214. to 226. H Imposition of Hands asserted unanimously by Paraeus Calvin Hophman Marlorat Bullinger Cotton and Dr. Holmes who cites these to be dispensed in antient time to baptized persons when at yeares in order to their admittance into church-fellowship p. 139. One undeniable Argument for the present use and practise of that doctrine of laying on of Hands on baptized believers before their admission into fellowship in the Church p. 492. in prosecution of which A Paper newly extant stiled Questions about laying on of Hands with the grounds thereof is answered p. 493. to 510. What Heresie and Schism is who is a Schismatical Hereâ—ick p. 524.525 the PPPriests proved to be the chief Hereticks and Schismaticks p. 526. to 528. the Churches of the Baptists clearing themselves from the crime of Heresie and Schism out of Calvins own mouth p. 529.530.531 Heresies Idolatry false worship 〈◊〉 to be tolerated in civil States the parable of the tares and Wheat Mat. 13. opened liberty of conscience in matters meerly of Religion proved and pleaded therefrom and by many other Arguments as the mind of Christ and the Higher Powers of the earth strictly summoned in the name of Christ as they will answer the contrary at their peril to cease acting according to the PPPriesthoods bloody Tenet of persecution for cause of conscience p. 532. sundry causes why God suffers Hereticks to be four great causes of the CCClergyes so great Heresie and erring from the truth viz. 1 Amor sui self conceit 2 dislike of their own places 3 Gloriae secularis Aucupium a desire to be Some body 4 Covetousnesse p. 590. to 608. Holinesse threefold 1 Morall none of this in infants p. 75. to 78. 2 Matrimoniall this in all infants as well as some save onely Bastards but proves not the holy Spirit to be in its subject nor gives any right to baptism yet this proved to by the Holiness onely meant in 1 Cor. 7.14 p. 78. to 85 3. Ceremoniall viz. that of the Jewes by nature that entitled them to circumcision commonly called Faederall by the Priests the common Topick whence they Analogically plead a Birth Holines in believers infants consequently their right to baptism proved abundantly to be abolished and the extream contradiction follies absurdities of Mr. Blakes Baby book stiled the Birth-priviâ—edge discovered p. 85 to 132. The Holinesse of the Iews seed confest by both Mr. Blake and Mr. Baxter to be the same whereby the Land City Temple were holy which being ceremonial and abolished the other must needs be so also p 114.115 The Babish disputings of the Ashâ—ord Disputers and of Mr. Baxter for infant baptism from the Hope or Hopelessnesse of their salvation according as we dispense or deny baptism to them discovered and disproved and grounds to hope the salvation of all dying infants whether baptized or no exhibited p. 189. to 193. also 442. to 462. I Innocency of infants no argument for their baptism but much rather for the contrary p. 77.78 As Ishmael and his seed was cast out of Abrahams house before Isaac so Isaac and his seed before Christ. Gal. 4.22 to the end and many other Scriptures illustrating that truth opened Johns Baptism why called Johns how differing from Christs and how it was Christs p. 478.479.480.401 M The National Ministry whether we consider their ordination or manners and many more matters no Ministry of Christs making but of the Popes p. 558. to 588. O The reasons ordinarily rendred against the use of baptism or any Ordinances at all refelled p. 476. to 491 509. to 522. P The Gospel Promise not made to believers seed as such nor to the meer fleshly seed of any man in the world Act. 2.39 which is made so much of by the Priests as of force to prove infant baptism opened and cleared to make against them p. 89. to 95.261 to 266. S Scripture up in armes against infant baptism as coted in proof of it out of Mr. Baxters own mouth 206.207.211.212 Of Sprinkling when and how it came instead of baptism p. 311. P. 311. line 27. for Fidus read Magnus Caetera tam nil sunt ut vix funt digna notatu Crimina Typographi parva remitte precor ANTI-DIABOLISM OR THE TRUE ACCOUNT A TRUE COUNTERFIT ANd now Sirs to say nothing of your pretty Preface till anon for even that also must then be forth coming to give Account of its dawbery and incongruity as well as your Account it self I will begin with your book which as diminutive as it is you have for all that stitcht up in no less than three Treatises First A Report of your Disputation Secondly A Review of your Arguments Thirdly A Ratiocination about Hereticks In all which how far forth you quit your selves like men of truth and reason comes now before the world to be examined The first I say is a Story of the long Disputation that was held at Ashford Iuly 27 1649. from noon till neer seven at night and it 's contained in the five first leaves whereof two whole ones at least but say so they had need are spent in your exact setting down of the Arguments and Answers and the rest in praevious and posteriour passages So that in this first part of your Pamphlet there are two things in generall
as if your selves had been very forward that I should give account or shew my Arguments and Reasons onely my selfe was against it and opposed it and that with importunity as if I had urg'd that at any hand I might not give account of what I did 't is such a cunning contradiction to your selves as I never saw penn'd by the hands of prudent men since I was born to this day Sirs if I should have said so much as this of my self that I ought to have shew'd my grounds upon which I denied Infants-sprinkling but was at that time importunate with you that I might not my own conscience which is Mille testes and a thousand witnesses besides would condemn me as no ordinary self-belyar for I profess before the Lord and those many people that then heard me many of which unless willingly cannot be ignorant hereof I was most forward that day to give out the grounds of the way I walk in but that your selves not the people were most froward against it but the people have believ'd you so long at a venture in other cases that though both you and they know the truth to be contrary to what you say yet you hope they will believe you so still but the Lord grant them to find out your forgery for the future and to be no more guld by your ghostly glosses Report Sixthly That there should be no tumults no interruption of the Disputants that no provoking terms whereby offence might be justly given or taken should be used that if any such were warning should be given and satisfaction made or the Disputation to break up and the blame to ly upon that side which did transgresse Reply You might as well have given Account who they were that did violate this agreement as of the Article it self but then you had brought no little blame upon your selves and thereupon very likely you forbore it for as when you propounded this Article little considering that your selves were most likely to grow regardless of it you made a Râ—d for your own tails so you had assuredly slashed your selves soundly therewith had you told all the truth indeed for though this as all the rest was your own by Proposall your Antagonists only by assent yet verily even you the Law-givers were the the men that did most grosly transgress it yea some of you seem'd to sit there for nothing else but to blur and blunder the proceedings by some impertinent interposals or other so that after questions askt me three or four times over by your selves and leave as often askt you by me to answer yet the anticipations of some or other of you either forbad me to begin or at least cut me off before the end This Article therefore being broken by you in the other parts of it must be kept in the last clause thereof at least viz. the blame of the breach ly upon you Report Seventhly That after the Disputation ended it might be lawful for any one of the Congregation leave first obtained of the Ministers to ask questions and to propound his arguments not being tyed to any Syllogistical forms and to receive satisfaction Reply 'T was the facultie of the Pharisees of old to affect the chief seats in the Synagogues and t is the fashion of you Masters in Israel now to take upon you to be the Chaiâ—-men still and to bear such sway in the publick places that the people may not meddle there to speak a word or urge an argument or ask a question or without leave from you Masters of the Synagogues so much as once to quack in youâ— presence but Sirs the best on 't is you have now in this year of Iubilee 1650. for so doth your book beare date given not only toleration but advice and invitation too to all people to Ask the Priest p. 27. and therefore though formerly they might not do it at all and even now they do it oft to little purpose yet I hope you will have them excused for do it they will by your leave now and then when they ask you questions in your Cathedralls without asking you any more leave so to do Report Next you tell us That it was also moved by the Ministers that two Moderators might be nominated and also Clerks appointed for the writing down both of the Arguments and Answers the Originalls to be left in the hands of the Moderators that so no mis-reports might be raised concerning them or if any were the truth might be made appear to any that should desire satisfaction by repairing to them which I utterly refusing the Ministers superseded from further urging of it Reply I did indeed refuse to chuse any Moderator my self save the whole Auditory as knowing how basely the truth hath been captivated and kept under for Heresy by the Clawes of the Clergy when subjected to their determination yet did I not deny to have any chosen for I left you the liberty to chuse whom you would who very goodly but how justly let all men judge made choise of one to determine as judge in his own cause who was the only opponent almost altogether if the True Account were not false which sets down no Arguments but his but however the prime Plantiff in the Disputation and as finely he fitted your fancies that are affected so much with falsity and foppery of both which there was great store in his Reâ—â—pitulation As for me could I easily have suspected there would have been such immoderation amongst you as was striking up so many of you together sometimes that neither I could be heard by any of you at all nor your selves very well by one another it had not been amiss to have admitted of Moderators to have kept you in some better order for â—lerks also for the setting down of things truly had I thought you would have taken such advantage for want thereof as to raise and that in print too so many mis-reports as your selves have done I had probably closed with you in that motion and though I refused to do it then as being better opinion'd of you then you have since deserved for yet it 's more than I am like to do again if e're I meet you in another Disputation for that slippery tricks sake you have serv'd me concerning this Ictus Piscator sapit But as to this there 's no remedy now save my Nâ— to your Yea and the memories of the people that heard us my Supreme appeal for moderation is to Christ the Supreme Moderator of Heaven and Earth before whom as I told you then I hoped I should speak nothing of which I should have cause to be ashamed so I tell you now I hope I shall pen nothing of which I maie be affraid to give account when he appears and we appear before his Tribunall the same Lord come quickly and judge between us even so Amen Report After these Propositions were agreed upon you say I moved to have liberty to make
if you be not sanctified one in to and by the other as lawful man and wife by your union formerly contracted notwithstanding your now disunion in Religion then your children are unclean and this is truth for so the children are in this civil sense if begotten and born out of matrimony whether the parents be believers or no buâ— the other is not truth for whether both or but one or none of the parents believe the infants for that cause alone and without respect to matrimony are in no sense ere the more holy or unclean Thirdly and this will yet appear more plainly if you consider that faith alone in either one or both the parents begetting out of wedlock cannot sanctifie the seed so begotten with this civil holiness here meant no nor with that faederall holiness you plead for nor could it do so even then when that holinesse or birth priviledge you talk of was in force as now it is not viz. in the daies of the law for if two believers came together then out of marriage their seed were not onely base born and so unclean in this our sense but also to the tenth generation uncapable to be admitted into the congregation and so consequently unclean even in your own Deut. 32.2 whereupon how Pharez and Zarah were dealt with it matters not sith they were born before the law was given Ieptha was exempted from any inheritance with his brethren because he was the son of a strange woman Iudg. 11.2 and Davids unclean issue by Bathsheba that in the wisdome of God was taken away by death on the seventh day might not surely without breach of the law have been accounted holy and of the congregation if he had lived beyond the eighth whereupon your selves also are much fumbled about the holinesse of bastards and the baptism of base-begotten babies so that you scarcely know how to behave your selves about it though the parents sinning be believers at least en-churched in your Churches yea it s generally known saith Mr Cotton that our best Divines do not allow the baptism of bastards and though he is pleased to say they allow it not sine sponsoribus without Sureties yet I wonder sith Deut. 32.2 Gods denial of such of old is made the ground of their denial of such now to enter into the Congregation as unholy that our Divines dare take on them to admit cum sponsoribus and so to go besides their own Rule viz. the order of things under the law wherein God gave no such allowance but to let that tolleration pass which they take to themselves you may learn thus much of your selves if you will that though wedlock without faith make a holy seed in our sense yet faith without wedlock in the parents can make a holy seed neither in our sense nor in your own nor any at all for the infants of the married are holy but believers bastards are both civilly and federally unclean inso much that your selves see cause to refuse as federally holy the spurious seed euen of those whose lawfull issue you unlawfully sprinkle Fourthly if you more seriously consider that the holinesse in the Infant here must needs be the fruit and result of that and that must needs be the cause of the holiness here spoken of in the infant quo posito ponitur sanctitas sublato tollitur which being in the parents a holinesse must necessarily be thereupon which not being in the parents a holinesse cannot be in the seed for positâ causà ponitur effectus sublata tollitur abstract the cause and the effect cannot be suppose the cause and the effect cannot but be now that which if it be not in the parents the holiness is not but being in them the holinesse is consequently in the infants 't is not the faith but the conjugal or marriage Relation of the parents for as for the first of these viz. faith it may be in one yea in both of the parents and yet no federal holinesse at all be in the infants witness Ishmael the seed of Abraham the father of the faithful and his Sons by Keturah also born of him after Covenant made with him and his seed in Isaac and Iacob and yet neither of them in that Covenant witnesse the base born children of true believers among the Jews suppose David and Baâ—â—sheba which for all the parents faith could not by the law be admitted in thâ— Congregation nor have that birth-priviledge to be reputed holy which from the parents faith you universally intail to the infants moreover this birth-priviledge and Covenant-holiness by generation which did inright to Church ordinances which once was but now is a non-entity and out of date might be then when it was in being in children in whose parents faith was not found at all for most of the Iews were unbeiievers yet all their legitimate children were holy federally therefore faith in the parent cannot be the cause of such a thing yea if you will believe Mr Blake himself the strictest pleader for a birth-priviledge of federal holiness in Infants that ever I met with and that from this very place he condescends so far as to contribute one contradiction to himself toward the helping of the truth in this case viz. That faith in the parâ—nt is not the cause of this holinesse whilst making the holinesse in this text to be a birth priviledge or Church-Covenant holinesse and to be the fruit and result of the faith of the believing parents and consequently their faith to be the sole and proper cause of the same he confesses flatly elsewhere page 4. that a loose life in the parent and mis-belief which is as bad in some cases worse then unbelief for which is worse to believe false things or not to believe true yea Apostacy from the faith which all if they be not inconsistent with faith I know not what is do not divest nor debar the issue from having that holiness which himself saies is meant in this text Babist Perhaps he means not by faith strictly the parents true believing but in generall his being in the covenant and faederally holy himself and so a cause of this federal holiness in the issue Baptist. First Paul means true believing here in 1 Cor. 7.14 whether Mr Blake do or no. Secondly what will he get as to the point in hand by his Synonamizing faith and faederall holiness for still neither the one nor the other is made here the cause of the holiness of the seed for the holiness here spoken of may be where neither of them is and may not be in the seed even where they are both in the parent as for example in Ezras time Ezra 10 3. we find abundance of the Jews both Priests and people that were in the faith or at least in faederall holiness yet the children were put away as unholy as well faederally as otherwise because their marriage was unlawfull and that bed adulterous wherein they lay with strange
wives Ezra 10.3 and that both parents possibly may be faithful and faederally holy and yet their seed be in all senses utterly unclean is evident for the child of two believing Jews begotten besides the marriage bed was both a Bastard and also barr'd from the Congregation Deut. 32.2 again this faederal holiness as well as faith may be in neither parent and yet the issue not be unclean but holy still and so are all Matrimonially and civilly at least that among Pagans are the issue of the marriage bed and with the holiness of the Covenant of Grace too when they come to years and believe themselves as not a few children of unbelievers do and sometimes the seed of Turks and Tartars this therefore i. e. the faith or faederal sanctity of the one parent nor of both cannot be the cause of this sanctity is here denominated of the seed for holiness in the infants is not alwaies when this is and sometimes it is in the infant when this is not in the parent which being of each without other cannot be between a true cause and its effect but as for the second viz. the marriage sanctity in the parents it is that which being in the parents holiness is naturally and necessarily in the seed that is born of them whether they be both or either or either in faith or unbelief but being not in the parents there can be no holiness no birth holiness in their infants nor Matrimonial nor Congregationall neither therefore this is that which is the cause of the holiness of the issue in this Scripture the result of which and not of faith in the parents is this non-uncleanness in their posterity and so I have done with this kind of holiness and with this Scripture which speaks of this Matrimonial holiness and no other Thirdly Ceremonial holiness I call that same holiness which properly peculiarly and pro tempore only pertained to the whole nation and congregation of Israel denominating them all holy every one of them and distinguishing them from all other people and nations which during the time of the Iews pedagogy according to Gods own imposition were then accounted sinners common and unclean by a certain â—â—s-rationis an extrinsecall meerly notional and nominal rather then either real moral or substantiall sort of sin and uncleanness to which the others holiness was directly opposite and answerable The subjects of which Accountative holiness were not only the people of the Jews themselves which were a holy people Deut. 7. ver 8. Exod. 22.31 but also and more specially the Priests and more specially yet or in a higher degree but in the same kind of holiness for degrees do not vary nature the High Priests which were holiness to the Lord Exod. 39.30 also their parents which were not matrimonially only nor often morally yet to allow your own phrase here because they were outwardly in Covenant with God concerning outward promises and priviledges on performance of outward ordinances everâ— faederally a holy parentage a holy root Rom. 11. also their natural if withall matrimonial issue which were not at all in their infancy and but seldome when at years spiritually allwaies faederally holy branches a holy seed also their land of Canaan which was the holy Land their Metropolitan City Ierusalem which was the holy City their Temple which was a holy Temple the Utensills vessels vestments and other accomplishments which were all holy a holy Lavar a holy Altar a holy Ark holy Candlesticks holy Cherubims most holy place c. and in a manner all things belonging to the Law of Moses and that first Covenant made with Abraham and his fleshly seed whether hollowed or consecrated by God himself or dedicated to him by men at his appointment viz. the first born the first fruits tithes offerings sacrifices daies feasts which were al holy and had relation as shadowes and types for a while unto things Evangelically Spiritually and substantially holy that were to be there after yea with this same kind of holiness some meats were holy some flesh Hag. 2.12 13. was holy some birds and beasts were sanctified as holy and lawfull to be used and eaten when others were prohibited as prophane common and unclean not so much as to be touched without sin without contracting such an outward fleshly kind of guilt and impurity as made their souls in that ceremonial sense abominable yea with an uncleanness oppositely answerable to this carnall holiness those fleshly purities and purifyings that then were some actions as the touch of a dead body some issues of men and women some diseases as the Leprosie some bodily blemishes as crookedness dwarfishness blindness lameness yea the very easements and excrements that passed from them in the camp without covering did defile and render them sinners prophane unclean unholy and guilty before the Lord Levit. 5.2.3.5 11.43 to 46. also Chapters 14.15.22 also Levit 20.25.26 21.18 to the 24. Deut. 23.12.13.14 which defilements did then reach to pollute the flesh only which the bloud of Bulls and Goats that could not cleanse the conscience morally did sanctifie to the purifying of Hebr. chap. 9. ver 13. neither do these things defile any man now in any such sense at all This is the holiness which when you say infants of believers are holy I have ground to perswade my self you Ashford Disputants mean not but rather some inherent morall holiness when I consider how you talk of infused habits in the hearts of infants in your Disputation and Review and yet again I have ground to believe you mean this holiness which was in the Jewish infants and their implements if I may imagine your meaning by what is extant in the writings of your brethren upon the subject specially if I may measure your meaning by Mr Blakes in his Birth-priviledge or covenant-holiness of believers and their issue wherein he laies himself out at large and yet is too short when all is done in proving from the like under the law among the people of the Iews and their issue that even now in the times of the Gospel also a people that enjoy Gods ordinances convey to their issue a priviledge to be reputed by birth not unclean but holy persons and thereupon to be baptized the absurditie and inconsequence of which doctrine and so I hope to make it appear now I am upon it is little less then if he had argued thus as the Pope doth from that time to this viz. there was an Hierarchy or holy principallity among the Priests under the law therefore there must be such another under the Gospel and as then the high-Priests Aaron and his Sons who were holiness to the Lord wore holy garments in their ministration for glory and for beauty viz. Coats and robes embroydered with gold and blew and purple and scarlet and fine linnen and curious girdles of needle work nnd miters and holy Crowns upon the miters so his Holiness to the Lord the High-Priest of Christendome Appollyon
cut off from standing as till Chirist they did now any longer upon their own Root Abraham because of unbelief I say then that no infant in infancy of what believing parent soever is either Abrahams spiritual seed or dying in infancy is saved upon any such account as a believers seed or Abrahams seed nor whilst living an infant onely may be signed by baptism as an heir apparent of salvation for if Abraham stand not a spiritual father to his own meer fleshly seed he stands not so sure to the meer fleshly seed of any believing Gentile for that were to priviledge every ordinary believer and his natural seed above either himself or his own Nor doth this hinder or deny the salvation of the dying infants of believers or dispose them ere the sooner muchless necessarily to damnation to say they are not Abrahams spirituall seed quâ believers infants nor heirs to salvation upon any such account as that for though neither upon that nor any other account at all they may warrantably be baptized yet it s more then possible or probable either because infallible that there 's other Scripture account enough upon which when we see them die in infancy we may assert them undoubtedly not to be damned for as it is most sure and true that all that are apparently if really Abrahams spiritual seed by faith must so living so dying be saved in token and farther evidence of which to themselves more then others they are by the good wil of Christ to be baptized yet is it neither true nor necessary that all that are saved must be Abrahams spiritual seed by faith but most certain that some shall be saved that never were Abrahams seed in any sense at all witnesse not onely the faithful fore-fathers of Abraham for he was their seed and not they his but also all dying infants of what parents soever both before Abrahams time and since of whom to salvation notwithstanding those are the onely termes on which it belongs to adult ones to whom it s preacht Mark 16.15 16. these being truly capable of neither 't is not required that they should either repent believe or be baptized I know this Iustification of dying infants without faith is uncouth and little less for all it holds forth so much salvation then damnable doctrine among you Divines that plead the contrary but I shall by the help of God make it good to the faces of you all when I come to consider the baldness of your consequence in this point as you give me good occasion to do in some places where me thinks you meddle with it somewhat clumsily as it were in mittins as if because there 's no other way revealed for the salvation of such by Christ to whom the gospel is preached who are capable to hear and do what 's required for such onely the word universally speaks of when it speaks of salvation in that way but the way of belief and actuall obedience onely therefore there 's no other way for the salvation of dying infants by Christ who can possibly neither believe in him nor obey him which as it is such shameful stuff that I cannot bear it with out inward blushing at your blindness so whether you have not as much cause to be ashamed on 't within your selves is well worth your inmost inquiry I say therefore again so far is this from excluding dying infants of believers from entrance into the kingdome of heaven to say they are neither Abrahams spiritual seed by faith nor heirs thereof upon that ground onely of being so that it rather concludes and supposes there 's some other ground that is common with them to the innocent infants of even infidels and all the world upon which these whom though they are hundreds to one yet your selves in your fierce wrath and merciless cruelty devote universally to damnation may dying in infancy universally be saved also which ground if you will yet know it is the righteousness of Christ the free imputation of which universally from the father saves not onely all that believe from both that and their actuall transgressions too but even the whole world whether they believe it or no from the the imputation of Adams transgression so that none at all ever perish upon that account in which respect he is said to be the Saviour of all men but especially of them that believe much more doth it and that without faith save all dying infants who as they believe not so have not as yet by any actual sin bard themselves or deserved exemption or become liable at all to the second death i. e. the damnation of hell which befalls not any but upon personal neglect of the light and grace of life brought in by the second Adam as the first death onely overtakes mankind for onely that sin of the first Adam Babist If all dying infants are saved then not few but many if not the maior part must be saved contrary to that of Christ Mat. 7.13.14 Luke 13.23.24 where he saith few there are that are saved Baptist. There are indeed but few inter adultos among persons that come to years of whom alone and not of Infants at all Christ there speaks and even every where else where he speaks to us of the way of life and this is plain by the reason he there gives why so few are saved which is the straitness of the gate and narrowness of the way that leads to life viz. of self-denial and suffering for Christ which men mostly being very loath to walk in it comes to pass that few of them come to life by it but infants being altogether uncapable to walk in it are are altogether dis-ingaged from walking in it till they come to capacity so to do and yet are not damn'd for not walking in it when we come to years of understanding and to apprehend the good will of God to us in providing a Saviour for us his good will concerning us in order to salvation by him is that we believe in him and obey him and apply his righteousness unto our selves Gal. 3.27 but whilst we are yet in such minority as neither to know what God hath done for us nor to be capable of putting on the Lord Iesus our selves he himself is pleased to impute his righteousness to salvation to us so dying even as we our selves whilst our infants are new born do not onely provide but also put on what clothes we have provided in our pitty towards them for the covering of their nakedness but when they come to years of such discretion as to discern and be sensible of their own shame and capable to dress themselves with their own hands we expect when in our love we have once provided raiment for them they should put it on themselves or go without it thus candid are we towards the dying infants of all sorts nevertheless though we tell you of our charity towards them and of your own cruelty in sending all
be declined that as he who preaches it though an Angell from heaven is to be hâ—ld accursed so he that doth thereafter shall have no thank for his labor for in vain do they worship him that either teach or take for doctrines the traditions of men Secondly and further to prove it least Mr. Marshal and the Dr. should not grant Vossius that Tertullians denial is of the baptism of all infants even of believers as well as infidels I argue that more plainly First from the universallity of the expression of himself in his disswasion which extends to all manner of persons without exception for it may be thought he was somewhat soiled with that superstition which was rife in after ages viz. that baptism was best dispensed towards the end of a mans life that he might have a sign of the forgivnesse of all his sinnes at once whereupon Tertullian would not have unmarried persons baptized until temptation was over so far was as he from desiring such early dispensation of baptism as that to infants I say his perswasion to delay it extends to all manner of persons and therefore to the infants of believers as well as to other little ones Secondly his indefinit and indifferent expression of these little ones concerning which he speaks for saith he specially about little ones promiscuously including all excepting none as it had bin necessary for him to do if he would be understood to speak but of some and not of others for if Mr. Marshall should preach or write his opinion against the baptism of unbelievers children onely retaining to himself his present earnestnesse for the baptism of other little ones and deliver himself downrightly and indifinitely thus onely in way of dissawsion viz. I would not by any means have little one baptized I find no ground baptizare parvulos to baptize infants c. so running on and never distinguishing so as to say in that sermon or speech I mean onely infants of infidels I should not take him for so judicious a man as I yet hold him to be saving his holding so stiffly still for infant baptism Thirdly by the reason he gives why he would not have little ones baptized viz. least their sureties should be in hazzard of non-performance of their words by reason of their own death or their God childrens untowardnesse which danger may come as well by baptism of believers infants as of others As whose Sponsors whether fathers or mothers or God fathers and God-mothers may die before they grow up or if they live be frustrated of their ends by the wickednesse of these children or god-children also Fourthly in that he speaks of such children of whom the Lord said forbid them not to come unto me which in the Priesthoods own sense at least are believers children yea and them onely by which clause according to you he may seem to speak of them onely rather then of infidels childrens onely whom you your selves forbid to be brought to Christ at all Fiftly in that he saies let them become Christians when they know Christ belike then if your sense be true some Infants may be warrantably enough made Christians before they know Christ but some infants again may not at any hand be made Christians till they know Christ which if it were Tertullians meaning as t is yours he might mean honestly in it as you do but t is too mean an opinion to keep touch with the word which never knew any way but one wherein disciples and Christians were made i. e. of profest faith repentance and baptism after they knew Christ by the preaching of the Gospel Sixtly in that he saies we should be more wary then to commit Divine substance to them to whom earthly substance is not committed now we know that earthly substance can be no more wisely committed to infants of believers in their non age then to infants of infidels Seventhly by one end why he would have them be capable to beg salvation first viz. that God may seem to give it to them that ask it which end is destroyed if baptism be dispensed to believers infants in infancy for they can no more ask it then the infants of uâ—believers Eightly because he saies it behoves them indifinitely meaning all them that enter into baptism to pray and confesse sin c. which conditions are as exclusive of all infants as of some those of believers being no more capable to do that then infants of infidels are Ninethly what ever children he disswaded from the baptizing of here and so saith Mr. Marshall and Mr. Blake its most evident de facto that they were wont to be baptized then or else there had been no object of his diswasion therefore if his advice to delay to them were concerning infants of infidels then its evident that in Tertullians time t was the custome to baptize infidels infants as well as Christians and so if antiquity of infant baptism were an argument of its goodnes it s as good an argument of the goodness of baptizing infidels infants also which with you is well-nigh as bad as the other is good Babist True de facto we have evidence that the baptism of infidels infants then was but that fathers disswading from it is an argument that t was nought and though crept in yet a thing that was not so from the beginning Baptist. Then I hope if ever you come to be perswaded and it is a wonder that none of the reasons above be cogent that t was indeed from baptizing of any children at all that Tertullian diswaded we have an argument of your own for it that the baptism of any mens infants is naught also and a thing that was not so from the beginning and so if Mr. Marshall himself be not by this time sick of Tertullian I assure both him and on all that I am and of all the Fathers also with whom in this controversie I would not have meddled but that your Pamphlet flutters so so with naming the Fathers and takes iâ—â—ll that testimonies from the Fathers were not taken on the day of the Ashford disputation I say again I am sick of them not so much with fear at the sight of any thing in any of them that makes against us for I find nothing that hath the strength of a straw against our way throughout them all even these few Iunior inferior ones themselves that are most against us for the Seniors are more fully on our sides and some of the Iunior ones also as Basil and Chrisostome both in the fourth Century whose words as Mr Blakwood cites them p. 28 29. of his storm are thus viz. First he ought to believe and after to be sealed with baptism and if any one have not corrected the transgression of his manners and hath not made vertue easie to himself let him not be baptized Which words are exclusive of infants t is not therefore any disadvantage that comes by them to our cause which I am sick
adversaries are put to their shifts to finde out a new way for the salvation of infants dying in their minority viz. The presentment of the satisfaction of Christ without faith otherwise they conclude they could not be saved which invention of theirs destroies the Gospel covenant which is the righteousnesse of faith and either damns innumerable innocents whose right to the kingdom of heaven our Saviour hath declared or grounds their salvation upon a figment of their own brains such as the Scriptures are wholly silent in and the Churches of God never dreamed of They alleadge two texts for their proof Rom. 5.18 As by the offence of one judgement came upon all to condemnation so by the righteousnesse of one the free-gift came upon all men unto justification of life Rom. 11.7 Election hath obtained it of which two texts the latter is nothing for them for it excludes not justification for the Apoctle saith plainly Rom. 8.30 Those whom he predestinated he justified and though the elect onely shall be saved yet justification goes between The former is directly against them for it expressely mentions justification of life so that the Anabaptists must either prove that justification is not to go before salvation and so pull in pieces the golden chain by taking out the link Rom. 8.38 or else that justification is not by faith and so destroy the Covenant of the Gospel till when they justly deserve the censure of damning all infants dying contrary to evident testimony of Scriptures and the sentence of our Saviour that to them belongeth the kingdeme of heaven And whosoever shall consider the impertinences of their proofs in a cause of so great consequence shall have just cause to suspect all their other doctrines and take heed how to take any thing upon trust from these new masters Re-Review Here is an argument hath neither head nor tail in it able to hurt for both have bin bruised already we having had to do with them before the one in the front the other in the rear of the disputation therefore no need to fear it yet sith it turns about again and Reviews us hisses in ouâ— faces and makes such a flutter as if it would both bite and sting us to death I shall secure it a little further how ever The head of the argument is this syllogism viz. Such as have the holy spirit and faith are the subjects of baptism but children have so The first proposition whereof you say the Anabaptists will not deny but I tell you what the Anabaptists will do I know not because if there be such a people in the world yet I never was so privy to their principles and practises as Dr. Featley and his fellows pretend to be who paints them out and presents them to the world in his title page as dipping naked and daily But in the name of 100s of them you commonly and abusively call so I mean the truest baptists that are in England I le be so bold as to deny it to be true without more for t is not the inward unseen seeds of grace and faith nor that invisible having of these which is the uâ—most you dare or do affirm concerning infants but the visible having thereof so that we see they have them by the fruits effects acts opperations and professions that quoad nos makes a subject for baptism as for what is within it is nothing to us we are strangers to it neither can or may we intermeddle therewith till it shews it self without secret things belong to God onely and things revealed onely to us and therefore for your blind brazen faced minor wherein you positively affirm here again that children not specifying what children nor whose whether of believers or unbelievers nor both nor if of believers onely whether all or onely some of them have the spirit and faith I shall be as bold to deny it ever till they give some better specimen of it then the best infant that ever you or I saw did in that nonage wherein you sprinkle them specially so long as to the stark spoiling utter unsaying and clear contradicting of whatever your own selves would prove it by you are fain to confesse page 16. That all have them not and p. 18. Which have and which have nâ—â— the spirit being no more bound to believers infants then others and no more bar'd from working in unbelievers infants than believers cannot be certainly presumed and that whatever the spirit may work in children yet this is not known to us so that there can be no conclusion made And howbeit this Argument being by your own concession thus crushed in the head i. e. this Prosyllogism turns about with his tail and thrusts at us therewith I mean this ensuing Syllogism viz. No Iustification nor salvation to them that have not faith But justification and salvation is to infants Ergo infants have faith Yet I return thus to your Major viz. that though there is no justification nor salvation without faith of such as are capable to believe and of whom to believe it is required yet of such as neither are capable nor called on to believe in order thereunto there may be and is a justification and salvation without it and this is the case of all dying infants in the world the presentment of the satisfaction of Christ without faith and without obedience also in any thing else both which are in ordine ad vitam injoined to adult ones doth save dying infants or else innumerable of those infants are damned neither is this any new way for the salvation of infants dying in minority nor a grounding their salvation upon a sigment and invention of our own braines nor such as the Scripture is altogether silent in nor such as destroyes the Gospel Covenant which is the righteousness of faith for howbeit it is true that the Scripture runs on this wise saying The just shall live by faith he that believes shall be saved he that believes not shall be damned and to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifyeth the ungodly his faith shall be accounted unto him for righteousnesse and twenty more such like expressions of the Gospel Covenant Rom. 1. Rom. 3. Iohn 3. c. as that which gives righteousnesse and life by faith only without the works of the Law yet I beseech you set your wits on work and see whether these Scriptures were written of infants or to them either or whether only of and to mens at years only to shew unto them on what terms the Lord will accept and save them in the Covenant and promise of the Gospel Me thinks your own reason should dictate thus much that all those places speak no more of infants then they speak to them in minority and that you will assuredly yield that they do not yea you may as well say these places viz. T is a people that have no vnderstanding therefore he that made them will not save them and he
ours therefore I shall not trouble my self with it but the first of them which you say is so directly against us t is because you are blind if you do not perceive it to be an express downright declaration of a general justification of all from Adams sin as to life i. e. a resurrection from that bodily death which that sin brought upon all mankind and from which as there is now a universal return of every individual by Christ so there had never bin any returning for any one man in the world but by Christ to all eternity world without end 1 Cor. 15.21.22 Yea as universally as that judgement or condemnation to that first death came by Adam upon all men so that it spreads its black wings upon them all and brings them all down to the dust from whence they came so universally is justification unto life i. e the benefit and resurrection from that death from which else no one man should ever have risen come by Christ upon all men really and truly and not onely so but a capacity also and possibility of eternal happinesse and well being after that resurrection and all this whether persons believe it yea or no yea and a promise and certainty of it in case of belief in this Christ otherwise indeed a losse of the Resurrections becoming a mercy and benefit to them and a lyablenesse even after that escape of the first death that came by the first Adam to a sorer even that second death that lake of fire which by the second Adam by whom comes eternal blessednesse on believers comes upon all unbelievers and that for ever So that if there be no salvation to infants without justification yet ther 's justification of infants without faith or baptism either And whereas you argue from the cart to the horse from the justification and salvation of infants to their faith I argue from their non capacity to believe to their justification and salvation without it no salvation or justification without faith say you but infants are justified and saved therefore they believe if no justification and salvation without faith say I infants who cannot believe can neither be justified nor saved but infants so farre as they need justification for they have no sins of their own are justified and saved also for the kingdome of heaven belongs to them therefore there is justification and salvation for infants without faith To conclude therefore this opinion of you adversaries to the truth which allows no salvation to infants without faith puts you miserably to your shifts viz. either to find out a new way of coming by faith which Paul saies comes onely by hearing or else to damn innumerable dying infants who whilest they lived were uncapable to hear the word preached and so to believe or else as you do p. 18. to dream out a new kind of hearing whereby infants come by their faith viz. an inward wonderful miraculous hearing of some voice of the spirit within such a sigment of your own brains as the Scripture is wholly silent in and no true Church of God nor rational man but your selves who dream dreams and divine â—alse divinations and things of nought deceits of your own heart and tell them to the deceiving of others did ever dream of and whosoever shall consider the impertinencies of your proofs in a cause of so great consequence shall have just cause to suspect all your other doctrines and to take heed how they take any thing any more upon trust as the whole world hath done now of old from these new masters the Clergy who instead of being ministers in truth or servi servorum dei have bin domini dominorum Lords over the heritage and over the faith of all civil powers and people teaching them instead of the true doctrine of the old ministers the traditions and commandements of men And so I have done both with the head of this third argument and with that long tail also that trails after there remains no more of it to be meddled with but a certain slender sting that sticks to this tail put forth against us with more length then strength in prosecution of the argument which I shall cut out into many pieces and after set upon each section severally and then I hope your great hope of help from these three unworthies will prove a forlorn hope indeed Review But to prosecute this Argument for the full satisfaction of the simple but honest Reader since there is no way to come to salvation but by justification and no justificatnon but by faith why should it be doubted by any but little infants which are ordained to salvation are also by faith made subjects of justification those soules which please God so well as they are to see him presently after their separation from the body why should they not be capable of faith without which the Apostle saith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 Re-Review The Reader had need be honest for I dare say he will be simple enough that receives full satisfaction your way by your present prosecutions of it because there 's no way for salvation and justification for men that are actual sinners and capable to believe and to whom justification and remission is preached to the end that they might believe it to their comfort is there therefore no other way wherby God willing and ordaining to save little infants from eternal wrath can possibly or doth certainly save them that can neither sin or be preacht to nor believe but that very self same way of believing is he tied to that means to save infants by as we are tied to it in order to the saving of our selves viz. the way of faith if so why not to repentance and self denial also for both these are the way to us Act. 2.38.40 Mat. 16.24 and would it not shift a man out of his seven sences to hear such doctrine that infants as ever they will be saved dying infants must even in their infancy repent is it not manifold more suitable to reason and sense of Scripture that as infants so far as they are guilty become guilty unwittingly to themselves by the presentment and imputation of the first Adams sin without personal disobedience in themselves so also should be justified from that imputed sin by the presentment of the satisfaction and imputation of the righteousness of the second Adam as unwittingly to and without personal obedience in themselves and because without faith t is impossible to please God for such as have actually incurred his wrath such as come to him by prayer for these indeed must believe that is God and is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him ther fore is it impossible for infants also who yet actually disspensed him nor yet are capable to come to him by belief or prayer Is that Scripture think you intended to infants for shame scope the Scripture a little better Review Is it not the
the principle of reason and facultie of understanding in infants the faculty of understanding is an innate habit necessarily to be concluded and that in the highest degree to be in all infants t is in omni per se quâ ipsum but faith in Christ is by your own confession but an infused habit and by your own confession as not in all infants so in you know not which and which not till you see them act it and yet by your own conclusion to go round again t is in such not in such viz. not at all in Turks and Pagans infants for they are all in a damnable condition with you but in all infants of Christians even such as yet give no specimen of it and that so necessarily that a man may as truly deny that which is naturall to them even the faculty of understanding as deny the habit of faith to be in them Next in order to a fuller and more direct answer you prepare the way by a pannel of six or seven positions which you say you must necessarily hold concerning two or three of which we may say it s no great matter whether you hold them or no for any undoubted and infallible truth that is to be found in them in the sense wherein you take them or at least for any great matter of assistance that acrues to your cause by them and as for the rest of which you say you must necessarily hold them you might have said rather you must necessarily yield them to us for indeed they are the giving up of your cause and no other then the drawing of a dash with your own pen over all that ever you say throughout the residue of your works as concerning that sufficient appearance of faith you assert to be in believers infants yea he is blind that doth not see you thereby perfectly blotting out again what ever you penned in that particular with your own hands First say you the habit of faith must be before it can work I know no necessity of holding this for truth neither indeed would you hold it but that you imagine faith to be another kind of habit then it is for there are more kinds of habits then one though you speak of habit by the lump all along as if you were aware of but one for here 's ore and ore again habit habit habit habit habit but not the least hint of what kind of habit you mean you are never the men that distinguish of habits whereas qui bene distinguit bene docet there being some habits acquired and obtained no otherwise then by acting and faith it self is such a habit as will hardly be proved for all your confidence in the contrary to be any other at least to be apparent in any one or visible to the view of others till some act thereof hath past the persons in whom it is neither is any one in the world that I know of habitually a believer in Christ till having heard of him or his word he doth actually believe Secondly whereas you say the spirit of God infuses this habit I grant he infuses it if you take the word infuse in a true sense i. e. for begetting it in persons by the preaching of the word other infusion of faith if yet that may be properly called infusion which is a phrase rather of your own coining in this case the word knows none God indeed gives it but he gives it in the way of hearing the word of faith in the way of hearing Christ preached in which way he never gave it to infants neither is it his gift to them in any other the spirit works it but not without the use of means not per saltum and in nictu oculi i. e. so suddenly as you fancy but by the discharge of that office he bears from the father to that end and purpose towards the whole world i. e. moving striving perswading inwardly whilest the word doth without inlightning convincing a man of sin in himself of righteousness to be had and of a judgement to come wherein we shall be saved or damned according as we believe or believe not accept or neglect so great salvation upon which motions and convictions which are â—tricter and stronger in some then in other some some yield and believe and obey the Gospel and some for all this rebel and obey not so that t is true the spirit thus effects the business within us yet not so as that he is said wholly to do it without us he is the supreme efficient the operative cause of it but we are to be concurrent cum causà operante we have a part to do as well as he when he hath done his part towards us i. e. to believe which if we do not he will not force us he will go no further nor shall he be blamed but we and we not onely blamed but damnd for not doing it accordingly but if we do believe and turn at his reproof then indeed there is a promise of an infusion or rather effusion of the spirit in other i. e. those more special and peculiar offices of a witnesse to our spirits that we are Gods children a seal a comforter a revealer of the things freely given us of God a supporter under suffering c. all which it performes towards the Saints and in â—espect of which onely its called the holy spirit of promise Eph. 1.13 in this manner the spirit of God in order to that sweet infusion of it self into us may be said if you will call it infusion for which a fitter word may be found to infâ—se i. e. to work faith other infuâ—ion of faith into men much lesse into iâ—fants or such a downright infusion as I suppose you dream on the Scripture makes no mention of at all Thirdly in that you say he is not bound to work it in all the children of Christian parents nor barred from working it in any of the children of infideâ—â— this indeed you must necessarily hold as you say for t is undeniable truth but in holding it you must wholly let go all you held before concerning believes infants appearing to have faith and that in contradistinction to the infants of unbelievers for first you use to say as p. 14. out of Act. 2. that the promise of it is to believers and their seed i. e. as believers seed and so consequently to all and onely their seed not the seed of unbelievers for quod convenit qua ipsum convenit omâ—â— soli semper belongs alwayes to all of one sort and not any man of another and thereby you use to bind the spirit unlesse he will bee unfaithfull to work faith as without which you think he cannot give them salvation in all the seed of believers for a promise that is made to such or such a seed qua si must needs be sure as the Scripture saith Romans 4.16 and made good or else God that cannot lie breaketh his word to
out of the City by a Rivers side and there sate down and spake to as many as resorted thither to hear viz. certain women for men for the most part were more shy of the Gospel as now they are that they might conveniently dispense baptism to them as should imbrace the Gospel as a certain woman named Lidya and her houshold did and thereupon out of hand were all baptized Act. 16.12 c. Rantist Their baptizing where there was much water for this reason that they might do the work so effectually to every person as by dipping is a frivolous conjecture as if there could be no reason why Iohn should chose a place where many waters were but that he might dipp the whole man in the water the cause rather seems to be this because waters in those hot Countryes were rare and in some places could not be had in a great distance and because there came multitudes to be baptized for the dispatching of which they might well seek places of many waters where John and his disciples might at once be imployed one water of depth sufficient would have served for the use of dipping for dipping sake he might have sought for a deep but needed not to seek many waters Baptist. So saies Mr. Cook indeed to A. R. p. 15.16 and Mr. Blake to Mr. Blackwood who jumps as just with Mr. Cook as one that never saw nor heard of any sprinkled can likely do with another who maintaines sprinkling to be the onely way of baptizing but both weary themselves to little purpose The question is not whether Iohn had no reason but that which we alleadge of baptizing where there was much water but whether that which we alleadge viz. that he might dipt the whole man be not one reason as for that you bring viz. because there came multitudes to be baptized and that Iohn and his disciples might at once be imployed in baptizing that can be no reason at all of their running into rivers to baptize nor of their dispensing in Iordan In Enon and in places of much water or in many waters and therefore for ought I see yet ours is the onely one for verily were it not for the sake of totall dipping they need not for the multitudes sake that came to be baptized nor yet for the multitudes sake who did baptize I mean Iohn and his disciples who no doubt were all at once imployed in that work have sought for a place of much water or many waters for as one bason of water may well serve to sprinkle a whole parish of many persons or if not it s easily replenisht so many persons imployed at once in sprinkling might easily put their hands into one or if not might they not easily have it in many basons what a poor shift is this Rivers Iordan Enon many waters and why because many were baptizing and many to be baptized one water of depth quoth Mr. Blake would have served for the use of dipping for dippings sake they he might have sought for a deep but needed not seek many waters but would not one water of no great depth as a bason yea of no depth at all as a cock or conduit have served for the use of sprinkling 1000s for sprinkling sake even of multitudes they need have sought for neither deep waters nor for many waters neither or if they must needs have had as many waters as they had dispensers they might quickly have made many waters out of one by filling out of one well one cock one bucket many basons Mr. Blake rejoices in Mr. Blackwoods rendring the word plurally viz. many waters which the translators render in the singular viz. much water supposing he hath such a prize in our yielding to read it so as takes off the whole force of our reason but I hope he understands himself better then to believe that by many waters is meant several waters waters in several sourses or channels divisim Sigillatim seor sim sumptae divided and a part one from another for by many waters is meant a confluence of much water together many waters meeting in one flowing running contiguously and contained jointly in one sourse river channel otherwise in one River Enon it could not be said there were many waters for t was but one floud as Iordan was so that by Enon or many waters he must needs understand much water a sufficiency a competency of water for the occasion in hand enough to baptize i. e. to dip and overwhelm in and not several waters for several persons at once to sprinkle in for this might be done easily without much water and if not without several waters yet at least in several basons of water onely but the other could not many shallowes were sufficient for many to Rantize and be Rantized in but they sought some one deep one Iordan one Enon of depth sufficient those being onely the most fit to baptize i. e. to dip in Fiftly it appears plain that the Saints in the primitive time were totally dipped or overwhelmed in water by that denomination that is given to them after baptism Rom. 6.3.4 where the Romans are said to be baptized into the death of Christ and buried with him in baptism into death also Col. 2.12 when the Collosians are said to be buried with Christ in baptism and therein also raised with him through the faith of the operation of God who raised him from the dead Now we all know that he that is buried is totally put under that element wherein he is buried whatever it be whether water or earth and all over covered with it not sprinkled with a little onely Non quaelibet aquae guttula nec quaelibet terrae globula t is not a little parcel of water sprinkled on a man can denominate him baptized as t is not a little clod of earth crumbled on a man can denominate him to be buried for baptism is a burial an ordinance and visible sign wherein every believer is to be visibly buried and every one that 's truly buried is totally covered subjected to that element that buries him and for a time at least translated by it out of sight Rantist Buried yea but mistically and spiritually invisibly and inwardly onely in respect of the thing signified in baptism and effected in them viz. death to sinne by vertue of Christs death in which respect also they are said to be raised i. e. to newness of life by the power of Christs resurrection but this is not meant nor spoken with reference to the visible sign it self as if there were to be a burying of the body under water and bringing that up again It s the inward grace and not the outward sign it self in respect of which baptism is called a burial and a resurrection the things signified being our dying to sin and rising to righteousnesse even as Christ did die and rose again Baptist. I am glad to hear you grant so much truth as you do at the
represent it yet so little is the quantity that you use not of water onely in the one but of bread and wine also in the other ordinarily nor so much as to take off the heart from the spiritual to the corporal thing content with all in my heart that it be not too much on this hand provided that it be not too litle one the other so but that it may reach to resemble the things signified for the whole vertue of baptism lying in signification per ablutionem i. e. per submersionem per sepelitionem in aquâ and the vertue of the supper much what in signification per recreationem per representationem plenitudinis non multum interest quantum quisque abluatur modo obruatur submergatur sepeliatur nec quantum quisque comedat modo comedendo repleatur To conclude Sirs you are too short in that point of the outward element in the supper as well as baptiâ—m in the Church of Corinth there was so much bread and wine that if some hungred others were drunken as neither of these should have been so the latter could not have been but that the use then was to have more abundance of the elements then you have in your parish passeovers wherein the people are past over with so poor a pittance that all may in likelihood be hungry enough but none at all very easily drunken such niggardly snips and sups not at Rome onely where the Priests expounding Christ as speaking to themselves when of the wine saying drink ye all this and not to the people saying drink ye all of this do impropriate the liquor wholly to themselves but in England also do the priests supp I should say dine for it is done at noon dayes with them their poor patient dependant people at the Lords table There 's one thing among Mr. Baxters bedrow which I had almost quite past over without any answer which if I had you would have said it is like I willingly forgat it Christ told Peter saith he that the washing of his feet was enough to clense all Mr. Blake gives us a touch here too through the persons of a popish party p. 10. of Peters mind saith he not to be washed in one part onely which say some from the same place also viz. Iohn 13.9.10 is as sufficient as the washof the whole As if that Scripture even therefore because it speaks of washing doth speak of this ordinance of baptism either it doth Sirs in your opinion or it doth not if not to what purpose do you quibble upon it here if you say it doth I much marvel why you think so but more if in earnest you argue from it that a man need be baptized but in part onely sith you all confesse practically that the face and head but not the feet are the subject of baptism yea verily you had as good have said Pilate took water and washed his hands before the multitude therefore the ordinance of baptism is no total dipping for the story of Christs washing Peters feet speaks no more of the ordinance of baptism then the other does yea it is most evident that the washing of the disciples feet was clear to another end and use viz. not to baptize them much lesse to shew how they should baptize others but meerly to teach them humility one toward another and to condescend to the lowest offices that could be for loves sake to each other this Christ expressed himself to be the direct meaning of what he did v. 12.13.14.15 c. after he had washed their feet he saies to them know you what I have done to you you call me Lord and master you say well so I am if I your Lord and Master have washed your feet you also ought to wash one anothers feet for I have given you an example that ye should do as I have done unto you this was Christs end therefore to learn them humility which was done as well in washing their feet onely as all the body yea the feet only indeed because the feet are the viler parts of the body for us to stoop to wash whereby to expresse our humility each to other in which respect and no other it is that when Peter yet ignorant â—o what Christ was about to do cryed out Lord my hands also and my head Christ replies that he that is washed i. e. not in Baptism but in this washing he was then about need not more i. e. ad rem substratam then to wash his feet but is clean every whit i. e. as much as he need be to this intent for which I now am washing you besides that the washing of the feet only is not a sufficient washing to denominate a man baptized according to Christs ordinance is evident by the Eunuch that went into the water and so was washed in his feet and yet not baptized for all that according to Christs will till Philip had baptiz'd or dipt him there it is a sign you are put hard to your shifts when you use such impertinencies to help you as these Rantist Impertinency I think all is impertenency with you still though never so solid that is brought in disproof of your idol dipping but what say you I trow to those two last unanswerable Arguments of Mr. Cook against totall dipping viz. that it is against both the sixth and seventh Argument both which Arguments Mr. Baxter also takes after him and â—angs you about with them a little better then Mr. Cook did and laces your sides so handsomely therewith that I believe you selves will be all sick of Mr. Baxter and your cause scarce be whole of those two Gashes he hath thereby given it salve it over as long as you will for he proves it plain that your plunging practise is no better then flat Murther and Adultery Baptist. I say these are knocking Arguments indeed if they be but as solid as they shew for but for all that let us see a little for our money before we part with it and hear what their Arguments are in words at length and not in figures if it chance to prove as you say they say and as they say indeed in this particular viz. that it is Murther and Adultery to dip as we do I assure you in the word of a Minister and a Christian that hopes to be saved in the way of innocency as well as your selves that dipping as it is no idol of mine for I adore it no otherwise then I ought to do every ordinance of our onely King Priest and Prophet Christ Jesus for his sake that ordained it so it shall never be adored so much as to be owned more by me but be abhorred rather with deeper detestation then I dispense it with affection to this houre but I believe that their proof will fall wondrous short of so high a charge as they venture to charge us with be pleased therefore since you mention it in gross to repeat their Arguments more at large
small businesse that does more then think his think to his own self of each particular odde conceit that is in it or that â—alkes to the world of it any more then in the general and in the lump In the lump therefore I say in the sincerity of my soul as in the sight of God I see not what to stile it more suitably to it self in short then a lump of Logical superfluity a systeme of Syllogistical simplicity wherein the man mannages his war like some fresh man that is newly metriculated into the faculty of Logicking in mood and figure that delights to hear himself syllogize out every syllable as he hath scribled it over afore hand and treasured it up in his papers so he comes out with a huge heap of hypotheticals arguing at a vast distance from the business of baptism and some times ex suppositis non supponen lis too as if he would fetch infant baptism from far sith t is so dark in Scripture as he confesses it is that he cannot have it nigh at hand proving more roundly then soundly in a great circumference of consequence upon consequence syllogism upon syllogism thus if this then that if this then that if this then that but this therefore that when not seldome neither this nor that is true but will you hear the conclusion of the whole matter it is this ma. If some infants be disciples and churchmembers and to be devoted to God therefore to be baptized mi. But so they are Therefore to be baptized To which besides the sequel of the Major which I shall shew to be utterly false I 'le prove the Minor false by the prosecution of this Syllogism If infants be neither disciples in any sense much lesse that in Mat. 28 nor church members of a Gospel Congregation nor are to be devoted to God in such a sense as the Jewish males then not to be baptized But so they are not Ergo not to be baptized As for his Mediums whereby he Argues infants to be disciples they are so frivolous and foolish that a very child may be ashamed of them The first which is taken out of Act. 15.10 is so abundantly declared to be absurd before that I need not clear it further and therefore I 'le say the lesse to it here he argues thus viz. Those i. e. all those on whom the false teachers would have put the yoke of circumcision were disciples But some of those on whom they would have layed that yoke were infants Ergo infants are disciples The Major of which is a foundation so â—alse and infirm that I stand amaz'd at it that a man of Logick should dare to lay it yet well nigh every one of you builders lay it as your basis from whence you divine a discipleship to infants and thereon build the businesse of their baptism as Doctor Featley Mr. Marshall and others yea who would think it inter scribendum while I am a writing this very line in Answer to Mr. Bax. there is a trifle brought to my hands oâ— a sheet and a half piping hot from the presse penned by Mr. Simpson of Marden son to that Mr. Simpson of Bethersden whose private letters I answered above stiled a soveraign preservative against Anabaptism in which there is nihil novi no newes at all for t is a furtive collection of some few fraggments out of other men viz. Mr. Blake the Ashfordian dispute and others which all are also more then enough enervated before whereupon I shall trouble my self no further then thus with that toy the author whereof in his epistle to the Anabaptists as he calls them about Marden tells strange stories of his being stormed on every side and almost tired out with onsets and oppositions from their private letters and among the rest he minds them how he had once to do with a host of them viz. September the tenth 1649. in which conflict my self who was more then an eye witnesse though much inferior to a worthy brother then in presence also viz. Mr. Blackwood and therefore far from arrogating to my self the title of Champion with which he smites me in his Margent can testify how uncivilly and shamefully the man stormed against the truth insomuch that unlesse he repent of the mad-blind hare-brained zeal he then expressed many if not most of that Auditory he then interrupted whether he remember them of it or no will surely never forget it while they live In which book I say as there is no new Argument so to be sure there is this old Argument as well as some more translated out of Mr. Bax. or some other whereby to prove infants discipleship p. 20. because the false Teachers would have put the yoak of circumcision on them But Sirs what though they would have put the yoak on the disciples necks will it therefore follow that they were all disciples on whose necks they would have put the yoake me thinks it should not if you look well about you any more then this viz. Augustus Caesar put the yoak of Tribute on all the Jewes i. e. taxed all the Jewes Ergo all they were Jewes whom Augustus taxed Nay verily had it been said they would have put the yoake of circumcision on all the disciples as it is not yet would it not have held Retro that therefore all those on whom they would have put the yoak were disciples but in very deed neither of those was true for as it was not all the disciples on whom they would have put that yoake for they did not teach that women should be circumcised so all were not disciples on whom they would have put that yoak for male infants not being capable to be taught cannot possibly be disciples at all much lesse such disciples as are meant in that place of whom it is most evident that they were taught verse 1. Much more might be said in disproof of this foolish fancy but that enough is spoken to it before yet this is the first Medium whereby Mr. Bax. bends himself to make it good that some infants are disciples and his other are as mean to the full as this he proves it next by a disjunctive thus If infants be not disciples it is either because they are uncapable so to be or else because God will not shew them such a mercy But neither of these can be the cause Ergo some infants are disciples To which I answer that t is not because God will not shew them so great a mercy for most undoubtedly the Lord shewes far greater mercie then that though not that to infants that dy in infancy for he saves them and gives unto them everlasting life and admits them into the Kingdome of Heaven and as for that bare simple notion outward account and denomination of disciples what extraordinary great mercy is that I wonder if it be abstracted from the other t is not so great a mercy but persons may have it and yet be damned for all
a tradition though more antient and reverent then some others as Mr. Rogers said of it and of which the church hath been posâ—est for 1500 years as Mr. Marshall a little more then he could undoubtedly prove too said of it is confest not onely by the Italian Clergy as Bellarmine who said it could not be proved by Scripture but as simply as our Clergy wrests the Scripture into the proof on t by the Remonstrants also who held it but as a very antient Rite that could scarcely be left off without great offence yea and Dr. Gouge also that would not be intreated to say ay or no to it at Dr. Chamberlains request now he sees people begin to pry into it did once acknowledge that it was a tradition of the church see Dr. Chamb. to Mr Bakewel p. 3. where he saies he hath under Mr. Barbers hand that he said so and used it as an argument to perswade him to take the oath ex officio And I desire all men to understand by these presents before whom we may happen to dispute this point hereafter that we declare against infant-sprinkling as a novelty in the faith and when we plead the dipping of believers as we are not in jest intending otiosam disputationem such idle dribling demi disputes and dainty dispatches as the Priesthood put us off with wherein he flams us i th mouth for an hour or two with the flap of a fox tail and lends us two or three licks of Latine and Logick and away again but a more serious earnest and constant course of conferring till the truth be tryed to the utmost so what we are so careful to contend for it is no new one but that old faith and baptism which was once delivered to the Saints this course of continued discourse though it suits not with such as seeing see not whose waies and courses are so much the more suspitious to be naught by how much the lesse they abide the light And a Modern Author whose Learning and Judgement lives in the Memories of many of our Kentish Clergy passed this sentence on it Pruritus disputandi scabies Ecclesiae yet I say is that the very life of the truth is so far concerned in that there 's very little of it comes to light in the CCClimate of the CCClergy by reason of their subtle sneaping things as much as may be out of sight that make against them I know the perverse disputings against the truth of men of corrupt minds destitute of the truth supposing that gain is godlinesse that t is reformation enough to mend the means of Presbyters out of the Bishops superfluities is the scabb of the Church of England indeed but I speak not of the pravity but purity of the disputation when plain minded men destitute of all self ends are minded to be serious and self denying and single-hearted in this work in order to more then either money or meer dispute it self nor is it Pruritus disputandi an itching simply after dispute for who are we simple Coblers Cartars Smiths Fishermen Farmers c. to stand before the wise and the Scribe and the disputer of this world in that work if God had not rejected them and made his wisdome foolishnesse but it is pruritus disprobandi a deep desiring of disproving your practises as Popish dispelling your smoak of errors and endeavouring to the utmost of our power according to what you have sworn us to in that kind to root out not by the civil sword but the plainnesse of the word your superstition heresie Schism and whatsoever shall be found contrary to sound doctrine that disposes us to desire it Indeed The Heathen said it was a wicked custome to dispute about the Gods for thereby things certain are oft called into question nor have they said thus without reason considering what little strength of Reason they had wherwith to assertain it that their Gods were Gods at all but me thinks it should not be counted therefore a wicked custome among true Christians that own the true God unless to put forth such curious questions about God as the Schoolmen do viz. An deus potius non fuisse whether God could have chosen whether he would have been God or no and such like fooleries to dispute about their God and about his worship for fear it should grow more doubtful by discussing and howbeit considering the strong causes that commonly stiffen and harden the CCClergy in their Heresies or the utmost of their ends in disputing and some of those sorry effects that ensue there is but little encouragement to that work of disputing with them yet sith truth can likely be no looser by comming to the light nor is diminisht but displayed the more by how much it is discussed I see no reason why it should be declined and why Heteticks are not to be disputed withall and here it cannot be amisse If we consider 1 the Causes 2 the deâ—ign of Hereticks 3 the Common effects of disputation with them Among the causes of the CCClergies Heresies may be reckoned Amor sui a conceit of themselves a fancied perfection and purity in them more then others Amor sui primum aedificavit civitatem diaboli saith St. Austin self love first set up the divels Kingdome Even that great City BBBabylon that in three PPParts reigns over the Kings and nations of the earth for though there were many superstitions grown in uppon the Christians before in the first three hundred years yet the pompous Kingdome of Priests had no foundation whereupon to rise so long as the Roman Empire remained Heathen for then the very Bishops of the Church of Rome whom the Devil hath since made his Vice-gerents in the world were persecuted to the death by the devil himself acting in the heathen Emperors in bloody butchery against Christians yea the Ministers went under miserable martyrdome as well as others and kept indifferent close to the truth but when once the Dragon who fought against Michael and his Angels with open rage before and acted against them under the very name of Christians by his Angells the heathen Emperors and massacred Millions of Christians when he saw the Emperor himself Constantine the Great turned Christian and resolved to vindicate Christs cause and rescue the Christians from their bloody sufferings and finding that Michael and his Angels did now prevail against him and his cruel Cutthroats so that place must be no more found for them in heaven i. e. the high places of power in the Empire and that he could execute his wrath now no longer by them against the saints as Christians a Christian being now come to the Crown he had no other remedy now then to play his cards about another way and turn Christian also himself that he might have the fairer advantage to crush the true Christians that kept the commands of God and the faith of Jesus under the new nicknames of Hereticks Schismaticks c. that
would not obey the orders of the Church insomuch that who but the devill who so busie as he now to have Christian Bishops favoured cherished advanced honoured with all the honours that might be next to that of the very Crown Imperial it self who so earnest as he to have all the world brought about by all means possible and in all the hast to become Christians and to become one holy Catholick Christian Church and so within a while Deo permittente non approbante having set forth the beast or Roman Empire in another shape and christned it with the name of Christendome he scrambles up his Kingdome to himself again makes over his power seat and great authority to this beast thus transformed and this beast gives it all up to the Whore he sets him up a Vicar General and names him the Vicar of Christ the head of the Church Bishop of the Universal See and such like and by him and the Ministers of Christ that issued from him fills all the earth with abomination and reigns with as full force though not so open face but under a mask having all things in a kind of apish imitation of Christs kingdome to the suppressing of the truth as in former daies he had done and all this came to passe through this sin of self love in the Clergy which as it grew great so love to the truth grew smaller and smaller till it came to be totally extinguisht and the light of it wholly ecclipsed from the earth for when the good man Constantine in his zeal to the truth gave them great Revenues to which other princes added more still according to the voice that was then heard in the aire viz. hodie venenum infusum est ecclesiae so it sell out for the Clergy fell to make much of themselves and things of the earth to serve and seek their own interests fell to wrangling and jangling about Primacy Superiority who should be universall Bishop and such base unworthy abominable and self-pleasing practises so that the truth took no more place in their hearts from thenceforth for ever From thenceforth they began to grow in high esteem of themselves and not only to fancy but also to inveagle both Princes and people to fancy some perfection holinesse choicenesse spiritualnesse and purity in them more then in all other men and to distinguish themselves from the people by their garbs and titles of Holy men of God the Spiritualty the Clergy or Heritage of God the Tribe of Levi the lot of Gods own inheritance the Priesthood Ghostly fathers Divines shutting out the people from sharing with them in these terms of honour which belong onely to Gods people whom of all the rest in the mean time they villyfyed with the names of Hereticks as if God himself had no regard almost to any but themselves and did behold all manner of men but these Ministers afar off calling other princes and lords for the Clergy men were become lords and princes too now i. e. spiritual ones Temporall Princes Lords Temporall Secular men and the people the Laity Mechanicks that must not meddle with the Scripture so much as to look in it for so it was in old time not so much as to take upon them to be skilled in it much lesse to speak out of it or expound or understand any otherwise then as these Divines say is the meaning of it yea under the raign of these latter Lords the Protestant CClergy though they have it in such plain English before their eyes yet what a horrible thing was it but a few years behind fancied by Featley and still is well nigh universally by the CClergy here in England who appropriate all the wisdome about the Scripture to themselves what a horrible thing I say for the people to talk on or have more to do with Scripture then to take it as the Priesthood gives the sense of it The Shoomaker goes not beyond his last nor the Taylor beyond his measure quoth he only the trade and well might he so call it for by that craft they have their wealth as handicrafts men theirs by other crafts of expounding Scripture is a mystery which every Artizan arrogateth to himself the Physitian here will be prescribing receipts the Lawyer will be demurring upon Dubia Evangelica and every handicrafts man will be handling the pure word of God with impure and unwashed hands this the pratling huswife this the old dotard this the wrangling Sophister in a word this men of all profession and men of no profession take upon them to have skill in sic ille quid ni quaeso O Sacerdos what was the Scripture given for thee only to look in or wast thou set to keep people out from it under lock and key or may the spirit blow no where but where thou listest must not all people search it or must they search and find no more truth in it then thou findest or must they not take it into their mouths lest they defile it as Bishop Wren thought who prohibited the people to talk on it at their tables for fear they should prophane it It should seem so by Dr. Featley who cryed down the people as Asses Apron Levites Russet Rabbies the Clergy of Laicks c. wondering that their dores and posts and walls did not sweat upon which any note was fixed to give notice of the exercises of men of any manual imployment yea t is a thousand pitties quoth he that such owls and bats and night birds as if the Clergy onely were the children of the day and the people the children of the night and darknesse should slutter in our Churches and sile upon our fonts Pulpits and Communion Tables This was the cause of that great Schism of Corah Dathan and Abiram Numb 16. all the congregation is holy But this is the cause of that schism of Pope Prelate and Presbyter from the primitive freedome that gifted Disciples whether officers or no had to speak to exhortation edification comfort and that the congregation then had to admonish her Ministers upon occasion Col. 4.17 viz. all the congregation are prophane onely the Priesthood holy enough to draw neer within the rails and to preach to the people out of the Pulpit they are afraid I wot least the preaching of others there should sile and bewray it what need else of causing the pulpit to be washed as I have heard one of our Kentish Clergy men did his after two tradesmen had preached there in his absence they think they are men meliore luto of some better mould and taller by far in Gods affections then the People are This conceit makes them go apart look upon themselves as sons of Anack their Brethren as Grashoppers shun commerce and society with them as with publicans and sinners In detestation of whom as not consecrated they say Odi Profanum vulgus and in a kind of proverbiall spel procul hinc procul este profani and as