Mr. Wills knows these things is not be disingenuous in corping where he knows no error but the vulgar rules Justifie If he knows them not how can it be thought that he came honestly by the stile of M. A. Or that he is a person qualified to be such a Corrector of Books as he proclaims himself Besides be perverts my meaning in that verse for by patrocinio novo I mean not Mr. Baxters Whistons and Wills's successors in the Controversy But I meant as may be easily understood thus that the cause viz. of Paedobaptism is not to be substituted or set up instead of the true Baptism by that new Patronage or Sanction viz Gen. 17.7 which I call new because it was not made the maine prop of Infant Baptism till the other foundations it was built upon by the Popes grew crazy and the Reformers being ashamed of them as being too rank inverted this in the 16th Century viz. a Covenant made Gen. 17.7 with â—elievers and their Natural seed which they say intitles to Baptism And the participle substituenda is not a prophetick but an ennuciative term An enunciation being defined Oratio in qua aliquid de alio verè vel salsò pronunciatur So that this Bagle-ey'd corrector of small and sometimes no faults is out in his Logical as well as his Grammatical faculty I have one thing more to reckon with him for and that is his presumption that I was the person pitcht upon to examine the particulars of his Appeal who by my ignorance brought them to justifie Mr. Danvers his addition to the Milevitan Canon by the passage in Pervetusto Codice insinuating as if none but my self had examined it which is imply'd in that expression of his that he is satâ—sfied some of them have learning enough to have discovered the mistake had they considered it themselves But here also I must inform him that his presumption is false and no better then the petulant excursion of an idle thought that has no umbrage of truth to guide it And to leave him no cloak for that presumption I do assure him that those persons whose learning he acknowledges sufficient to discover the mistake have as well as I individually examined every particular of his Appeal And that they are not under such a mistake as to this of the Milevitan decree is already apparent Thus Reader you see this particular charge against me is no instance of the Baptists partiality in their examination of Mr. Wills his Appeal And to put the matter beyond any surther exception that Epistle of mine which he Cavils at was but then in the Press and was not seen by any of the Subscribers at that time of our examining the Appeal which is enough if no more had been said to clear them from this frivolous insinuation The Reason why I am â—o large in my Return to so inconâ—iderable a charge as this is because I observe Mr. VVills strikes at the cause he opposes through my sides and therefore I am the more concern'd in my particular vindication For 1. You see he insinuates though nothing more false That I was the only person to whom the examination of his Appeal was committed 2. When he has possest his Reader with that suggestion he represents me as a very ignorant unqualified person for such work on purpose that the Reader may conclude the answer coming from such a person to be but sorry and ignorantly managed and that Mr. VVills is therefore apparently abused But that artifice shall not serve his turn for as I said before I declare that I was so far from being the single Examiner that I was no more then an assistant to those persons whose learned accomplishments parts and worth I readily own far superior to mine And are possessors of a Reputation too well fortified for Mr. VVills his art to Undermine And who I question not will as they see cause vindicate themselves and their professions from the Criminations of such an unrighteous Accuser and Gainsayer The 5th of the 3d. Month 1676. Tho. Delaune FINIS Mr. Richard Baxter's REVIEW Of the State of Christians Infants EXAMINED And his Grounds for the Baptism of such found to be Insufficient and groundless With a Postscript in Defence of Mr. Danvers his Third Reply further discovering Mr. Baxters Notorious Equivocations in palliating his Slanderous methods of Writing against his Opposers By Tho. Delaune 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athen. ex Passid Quae in singulos essundos inspiciam obiter verborum acrimoniam in os Autoris retorquebo Puâ— 12. Diatrib Printed Anno Dom. 1676. Mr. Baxters Review of the state of Christians Infants Examined c. THat Baptism as administred to Believers is a Gospel Ordinance no man I presume but such as reject all Ordinances ever could deny it having so express a sanâ—â—ion in the word of God And whether any but such ought to be baptized has been an ancient Controversy and much agiâ—ated in this and the neighbouring Nations of late years Insomuch that any inquirer into the state thereof may easily â—urnish himself with what 's alleadged on both hands therefore I see no necessity of Polemical Aâ—â—ditions Among all the opposites of Antipaedobaptism in this Nation no man in my opinion has with more virulence be stir'd himself then the 〈◊〉 of this Review His Books of Baptism save me the labour of demonstrating it And the experience he has given the world convinces me that he is the person his own Pen describes in the Preface to his More proofs viz. One that can find words at length for almost any cause And p. 45. of this Review where he tells us That there are but few confess so clear that a man may not talk against as long as his talking faculty holds out And that Mr. Baxter hath not yet lost this faculty this Review plentifully instances At every turn he takes in the lists of dispute he rails with plenty of exclamation at such as divert him from doing greater service to the Church and extort such striâ—â— from him which is an outery without Cause for doubtless he is never more in his Element then when he is tossing the Ball of Contention and I think there is scarce any Sect that call themselves Christians but have been made the objects of his talking faculty and have selt the keeness of his Polemicks and mostly without any challenge from them And what exploits he hath done for the Church in his peaceable Intervals is worth another Review It is known to such as converse with the Writings on the Subject of Baptism what Mr. Tombes Mr. Danvers Mr. Hutchinson c. on the one hand and Mr. Baxter Mr. Wills Mr. Whiston c. on the other have produced about that point For me to re-captiulate it is needless My present task is only to consider briefly what weight there is in this Review The occasion of which is briefly thus Mr Baxter having in some of his VVritings exprest a great deal
enumeration hurt us 4 Besides of Mr. Walker's witnesses Tertullian is the eldest who lived in the 3d Century Nazianzen and Basil flourished in the 4th and Chrysostom in the 5th Century Of these Tertullian being the earliest and therefore worth more then all the rest expresly opposâ—s Infant Baptism from the same ground we do Let them come says he while they learn let them be made Christians that is baptized when they can know Christ veniant dum discunt fiant Christiani quum Christum nosse potuerint Tert. de bapt p. 264. So that this witness is expresly for us though Mr. Walker was pleased to forget this ground of delay in the right latitude in his large indâ—ction though from so considerable a witness the rest we regard not We grant that in the following Centuries Infant Baptism as well as Infant Communion and other corruptions grâ—w to be more generally practised which about the â—d Century were obscurely creeping in therefore the witnesses produced against us of those times if to prove a matter of fact viz. that Infant Baptism was then in the world are very needless for we confess it viz. first as being only practised in peril of death to save their dying souls as other sick and dying persons afterwards upon all Infants as enjoyn'd by the Councils to take away Original sin Regenerate and save them If to prove de jure that it ought to be so we reject their authority as unfit Judges to determine our Controversies being frail men lyable to error and corruption As to those 4 particulars concerning the delay of Infant Bâ—ptism for which he says Nazianzen reproves the deferrers if it were so it does not hinder but that there might be other Reasons for their delay for Nazianzen himself was against the Baptism of Infants till they could Answer for themselves except in case of urgent â—â—vil of death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orat. â—0 p 658 the good man being infected with that superstitious conceit that Baptism was simply necessary to salvation So that this witness contributes nothing of disservice to our Hypothesis nor of advantage to our â—dversaries The Text whereon Mr. Walker grounds his discourse is Luke 18.16 Suffer little children to come unto me c. from whence he infers that little children are to be suffered to come unto Christ and ought not to be forbidden coming unto him which I confess is a sound conclusion And be it noted by the way that Dr. Hammond says the Arguments from this Text are imperfect ways of probation sect 23. of his Resol to 6 Queries about Infant Bapt. whose word should do much with Mr. Walker He that would evince that this Text is a sufficient foundation for the fabrick of Paedobptism should have proved that there is no other way of coming unto Christ but by Baptism or that Christ or his Disciples actually baptized these children or that the blessing in the Text is baptizing 'T is true we have an ipse dixit from Mr. W. p. 19. that there can be no other way of their coming to Christ but by Baptism but he cannot blame us if we rely not upon his authority in so material a point Now if those things be not clearly demonstrated no certain consequence will flow from this Text that Infants ought to be baptized and if it will not certainly follow what rational man dares build his belief upon a foundation so uncertain and that in opposition both to that plain precept and example we have for adult baptism But this is so far from certainty that there is not the least shew of probability that our Saviour did or intended to baptize them That Christ hath no other way to bring Infants to himself but by Baptism is a speech too harsh if not bordering upon blasphemy therefore Mr. Walker should recall what he says that is liable to such an Interpretation for if it were so then doubtless our Saviour would have ordered those children to be baptized for whose approach unto him he was pleased to express so much willingness So that as Dr. Taylor notes very pertinently p. 230. Lib. Proph. we may say that from the action of Christs blessing Infants to infer that they were baptized proves nothing so much as that there is a want of better arguments for the Conclusion would with more probability be derived thus Christ blessed children and so dismissed them but baptized them not therefore Infants are not to be baptized That Christ did not baptize them is an argument sufficient that he hath other ways of bringing them to Heaven then by Baptism Many thousand ways there are by which God can bring any reasonable soul to him but nothing is more unreasonable then because he hath tyed all men of years and discretion to this way therefore we of our own heads shall carry Infants to him that way without his direction the conceit is poor and low and the action consequent to it bold and venturous let him do what he pleases with Infants we must not 'T is a most rational conjecture that if it had been the practice of that time to baptize Infants as well as the adult and that they had 〈…〉 true lawfull and wonted subjects of Baptiâ—â— the 〈◊〉 could not be so ignorant of and contraâ—â—â—â—nry to theâ—r own known custom as to forbid them or 〈…〉 their â—â—wardness but would have rather encouraged 〈◊〉 m. But this circumstance discovers that Paeaobaptism was 〈◊〉 none of the Disciples employment the ground of whose rebuke to those that brought the children doubtless was their unwillingness to have Christ too much prest and so they reproved others when they throng'd so fast upon him that they had no leasure so much as to eat bread Besides in the 15th verse we have the end noted for which these children were brought to Christ viz. that he would touch them and what doubtless in order to their cure from bodily infirmities which are as incident to Infants as Men which is very probable if you compare this passage as it is in Mat. 19.14 with the 2d verse where 't is said that he healed great multitudes And Luke says that they brought little children also which term also shews that others were brought too because they heard that vertue went out of him and that as many as touched him were perfectâ—y made whole Mat. 14.36 If we pass by without any opposition what Mr. Walker says in the 1 2 3 Chapters it cannot hurt the cause we maintain for we are willing to bring our children to Christ as far as we are able and he hath prescribed to resigâ— them up to him and dedicate them to his service to pray for them instruct them in the Faith and in a word to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord we cannot bring them unto Christ who is now in Heaven by way of personal approach as the Infants in the Text were brought therefore we know no other way to bring them unto him
Of answering a man before he hears his Arguments Or if Mr. Whiston would have no Answers made him till he publishes all he has to say It will be found an Imposition of two Majestical an Aspect And in my opinion it had been more Consonant to the general Reformation he bespeaks not only from us but from those Paedobaptists that hold up that practice upon grounds different from his to have published his labours in an intire Tract then thus by parcels But since he is in the humour of Writing as we know not when it will be over so he must give us leave without staying for what 's behind to ataque his forces already mustered and incounter the rest if worth any opposition as they come on Yet from me who am by the last Commands of Mr. Hutchinson now with the Lord oblidged to give Mr. Whiston this Return to his Postscript which Mr. Hutchinson saw a little before his Death I think fit to let him know that I have more value for my time then hereafter to consume it upon the refutation of his Dictates already sufficiently defeated And though in Mr. Hutchinsons Animadversions p. 54. he was earnestly called upon that if he thought himself concern'd to appear further in this Contest he would lay down his Thesis distinctly and set down his Arguments Syllogistically Yet how little notice he hath taken thereof and how like a Dictator be appears in his Essay is left to consideration And since he over passes the Arguments opposed against their practice insinuating as if Mr. Hutchinson had mistaken the right ground thereof since he does but aâ—d Dictates to Dictates And his Essay is but a 〈…〉 built upon a foundation already overture 〈◊〉 since be takes those 3 prepositions for granted p. 3. bâ— by and upon that suppesition feigns those high priviledges of the seed of Believers those gloâ—â—â—â— benents and advantages which he tells us p. 244. have been assigned to them as in Covenant and having the token thereof he means Baptism applyed to them since I say these tedious branches of his Disâ—â—â—se sprang from an unsound Root or meer figment viz. A supposing that the Covenant of Grace is made with Believers and their natural seed in their generations and so have a right to Baptism We might spare the labour of confuting such fancyes afresh Therefore the method I shall use in this Return shall â—e 1. To Refor the Reader for an answer to the Argumentative part of Mr. Whistons Books to such places where they are soundly confuted already by the late Writers of our way 2. I shall wholly wave his impertinent fictions in his Essay concluding that in the overthrow of those points he takes for granted p. 3. Those glorious priviledges he dreams of will vanish into guilded Chymeâ—â—'s or the meer apparitions of a beguiled 〈◊〉 3. With same Restâ—â—ions upon his Poliscript a Cant way of consuting Books by the Argument used against Belamine I shall leave all at the Tribunal â—f the Reader A Brief Survey and Confutation of Mr. Whistons Books c. I Shall begin with his large Preface of about 46 pages Wherein he sayes page 7. That if he errs it is cum ratione To which I say that errour is too often disguised under the plausible shew and semblance of truth and some man have the art so to paint it But instead of making it therefore reasonable it is rendered the more pernicions in as much as 't is so much the more likely to insnare and deceive And Satan is never more capable to do mischief then when he is transformed into an Angel of Light Therefore Mr. Whiston had need be wary lest what he goes about to establish be found in the great day to be no part of the Doctrine once delivered to the Saints For then an erravi cum rations will scarce be sufficient to answer that Question Who hath required this at your hands Preface p. 14. Mr Whiston assigns 6 causes of our Rejecting Infant Baptism the substance of which are 1. Want of tender affections towards Relations 2. Confounding either some supposed or real irregularities in the administration with the practice 3 Not considering the true Reason of primitive Christians Baptisme at Age. 4. Our comparing the little good and small advantage accruing to believers seed with the variety of inconveniences and ill consequences of Paedo-baptist Doctrine 5. Placing too much of our Religion in an external way and mode 6. By preposterous enquiries after the will of Christ as not taking our rise from the Covenant made with Abraham To the first I say that as Mr. Whiston only speaks his thoughts without proof so little more needs be said in disproof of it save to tell him that it is not so We have as much natural love to our Children as any I presume that oppose us and we look upon that as no instance of affection to them to cross our Lords Institutions which should be more dear to us then that Imaginary fondness he talks of in Communicating an Ordinance to them that 's not appointed for them 2. VVe have produced our Arguments even such as we find unanswerable against the Pedo baptists mode of administration and the subjects they apply Baptism to and therefore the 2 d particular is frivolous 3. We make the New Testament Scripture our warrant in the practice of New Testament Duties and Ordinances and the primitive Christian 's exact conformity is the best explication and comment upon the precepts there and ought to be our pattern VVe find neither express nor Consequential warrant for Baptizing Infants there For A necessary consequence is that which proves the matter concluded certainly so to be Yea certe ita esse nec aliter se habere passe There must be tam necessarius nexus indissolubilis aependentia such an infallible dependance between the subject and predicate that the conclusion must be universally and perpetually true And every necessary consequence demonstrates à priori For Demonstratio est ex prioribus notioribus causis A posteriori only the discovery of habits is made Now we never yet could find a Medium in Scripture that proves Infant Baptism nor that they have any qualification that Intitles them to it by any consequence in the true logical and direct notion of it 1. No acts of faith or repentance can be seen in them 2. Nor any discovery of gracious habits 2. Nor yet can it be demonstrated that they have in foro Ecclesiae any interest in the Covenant of Grace till at years and capable to profess and act faith Though for ought we know they may in foro Dei be invisible members of the mystical body of Christ and in a capacity of salvation through the presentment of that satisfaction made by Christ the free gift coming upon all Rom. 5 18. Yet that being uncertain of any Individual can be no ground for Baptism And how can we without incurring a most dreadful breach of
I refer him to what I have spoke to Mr. Baxter about this and to Mr. Hutchinsons Animadversions p. 20. In the course of his writings he frames sundry Objections which in my opinion though not stated with such advantage as they might he are enough to confute his allegations And some as being too strong for him he avoids giving a dâ—rect answer to for he fetches such circuits and cunningly wasts the time in circular preambles till he thinks the Reader forgets the Objection and then stoutly sets upon another yet when all 's done he either very sorrily or not at all answers it Insomuch that as it happens his Book carryes a sufficient antidote against its own ill influence to any persons that have not a mind to be deceived There are several things more lyable to exception in this Book But I shall spare him having I hope sufficiently though briefly razed his strongest hold with which the other petty Auxiliaries will stand or fall And therefore I have done with this first part His Essay is wholly applicatory Therefore as I said I pass it and come to his Postscript where I shall have occasion to enlarge where it is meet by way of Vindication of Mr. Hâ—tâ—hinsons Animadversions upon this second Book Mr. Whistons Postscript p 246. alledges That they Baptige no Infants from the ground of their Relation to Abraham as his seed But from the tenor of the Covenant as made with Abrahams seed in their generations and sayes that because Mr. Hutchinson proceeded to disprove that opinion which is none of his he is not concerned to answer him But I shall shew the evasion to be frivolous For whoever pleases to peruse Mr. Whistons book will find that he makes this very ground he renounces the main foundation of his pleading as preface to the first Book p. 3â— 33. he calls it in express terms the foundation to his whole structure so p. 62 63. 107.114.117.126 127.262 and almost all along raises his Arguments from that Topick Therefore doth it not naturally follow that when he is put to it he will quit his main Garrison rather then stand to it This is an Instance of a weak Cause Abrahams seed are to be understood in a twofold sense 1. Natural 2. Spiritual And each of these again is to be considered as his next and immediate or more remote seed The Jews were his Natural seed some next some remote And such as were born of his body as Isaac and such as believed as he did were his spiritual seed too Yea more distant generations bore that title as well as those that more immediatly sprung from him Hence the Jews stifly pleaded their priviledge Mat. 3.9 but were rejected the dispensation that gave it them being expired No Gentile can lay claim to Abraham as their Father upon a natural account he standing in no such Relation to them But he is a spiritual Father to them if they believe and nor otherwise Gal. 3.29 Nor can a believing Gentile convey that title to his Children which he has not himself The title of Natural Sonship to Abraham no believing Gentile has Therefore he cannot convey it to his Posterity For nil dat quod in se non habet A spiritual son of Abraham 't is true every believing Jew and Gentile is but spiritual priviledges as Gospel Sonship c. are not hereditary A believers Child can no more be saved by his fathers faith then an unbelievers child can be damned for his fathers sin And if the Fathers faith must serve the childs turn there 's all the reason in the world that the farhers Baptism should also be Baptism enough to the child Why the one shou'd not be imputed as well as the other is a question worth Mr. Whiston's Resolution Now Mr Hutchinsons Arguments in his Treatise of Baptism were managed to make out That Infants can stand in no Relation to Abraham now neither immediatly or remotely considered And consequently not to be baptized upon that account as p. 4 that Act. 2.38 39 is no ground for Infant Baptism p 7. That Abrahaeâ—â—s own natural seed are not his spiritual seed without personal faith p. 12. That there 's no such thing as a Jewish Birth-priviledge in Gospel dayes p. 14 That Abraham has two seeds neither of which are Infants of believing Gentiles p. 20 That the Law of Institution not the Covenant is to be the ground of vâ—sible administrations in Gospel-dayes p. 26. That 't is a mercy not a misery to be broken off from the piviledges of Circumcision p. 4â— That Christians Children lose no priviledge by being unbaptized p. 48. That the same Arguments urged to prove Childrens right to Baptism will as well prove their right to the Supper and that in Infants there is the same thing wanting which qualisies for both p. 55. That Infant Baptism is Will-worship p. 60. That Infants of believers have no more faith then unbeliever Infants And Animadversions p. 16 that Mat 28.19 is a full and plain Commission to which we must adhere and thaâ— Infants are not there included p 19. That Infant Church-menbership is repealed p 22. That the promises to Believers houses are not to be understood in Mr. Whistons sense p. 22. That infants are are uncapable of the ends and uses of Baptism p. 35. That the Jews came to Johns Baptism Mat. 3.7 upon the same mistakâ— of a federal right as the Paedâ—baptists do now and that their rejection is a notable Argument against this practice p 36 That Baptism succeeds not in the pâ—ace roam and use of Circumcision p. 45. That Circumcision was not administred to the adult as â—rlievers p. 49. Nor to their seed as such p. 50. All which points with many other particulars directly tending ter refute the practice of Infant Baptism are in the said â—reatise fully and substantially made out And if the disproof of these Arguments concerned not Mr. Whiston as he 〈◊〉 a promoter of Paedobaptism I know not what does But since he waves theâ—â— so slightly we look upon them as substantial and unconfured And I appeal to any Judicious Reader whether the Arguments that disprove Infant Baptism from that pretended title they are said to have to Abraham as their common father as believers Children do not also disprove it substantially when urged â—â—om the like title derived from their immediate Parents 'T is certain that the title that 's found rotten in the root cannot be found in the branches And if Abrahams next and natural Children have no title to Baptism upon that account much less his more remote Children and least of all other believers Children whose title is originally pretended from him Mr. Whiston p. 247. Denyes that the Covenant of Grace is made with the Eleâ—l as such Answ Our sense of the Covenant of Grace you have in the preceding pages Let Mr. Whiston shew where any Covenant of Grace is made with Reprobates 'T is true such were under external administrations under the Law
of wrath and contempt towards the Antipaedobaptists and their practice of adult baptizing And loaded them with some standerous Charges which when to his shame detected he yet persisted in a pertinacious defence or rather equivocation endeavouring with all the artifice of his talking faculty to disintangle himself and further to bespatter and Reproach his Monitors VVhich kind of Carriage as it bespeaks a desperate Disease that will not be Cured as Dr. Pierce tells him with soft usage so it could not but justly provoke the indignation of those that were under the lash of his Calumny to express some Checks to him to awaken his Repentance Amongst the rest Mr Ed. Hutchinson sent him a private Letter which Mr. Baxter makes the occasion of his Review and yet ingenuously conceals the Letter though he publishes an answer of about 46 pages to it To supply which defect it shall be here incerted It was Verbatim thus Sir Though the fiery temper your reprovers commonly find you in Mr. Hutchinsons Letter to Mr. Baxter might discourage them from any further adress of that kind to you yet Christian Charity oblidges me to represent unto you some of those Grâ—evances you gave an Original to and which are likely to survive you unless you can be perswaded to make the abused world some reparation I can say and I know that it is the mind of many that what of Christ and his Gospel is visible in you we highly prize and esteem and your works as far as they tend to advance true Piety we duely value But you must give us leave to say also that as in some things you have surpast a vulgar eminence so the corruptions alwayes concomitant to frail nature have more notoriously raged in you then most of your size and denomination and that which superadds no mean aggravation is that you have had frequent admonitions and reprehensions but with a contrary effect then usually is seen in Saints For instead of reforming and allaying that unhappy spirit you were acted by it has been but the more disturbed and invenomed And though in the intermissions of your passion you drop many wholsome truths and aphorisms worth notice and which impeach their author roundly at other times yet some unlucky fit of rotten Dictating or fiery intemperat Disputation spoils all and tend strongly to convince us that you are then left to your self to rove in the wide wilderness of your own spatious imaginations And this is motive enough to us to be cautious what we receive from you and examine whether it comes from the Lord or instampt with your own authority and accordingly to receive or reject it Hence it is that whereas the point of Infant Baptism which you tell us has its considerable difficulties came under a fresh disquisition several pious and judicious persons hoped that a serious and full debate thereof would fix the minds of men and establish that truth so long contraverted But Mr. Wills appearing in that insulting rude and vain-glorious manner made wise men doubt whether God had appointed him to be one of those Prophets that should feed his people with knowledge and understanding But when he became your herald loudly proclaiming your approath to the lists after so tedious an interval our hopes were pregnant since we could not but think that the whole force of Paedo-baptism was muster'd up to encounter us in your teeming self and what a combat must that be But upon the appearance of that bulky piece of Circumlocation artifice and distinction we found our expectation frustrated and that you had shamefutlly baffled your admirers who may justly exclaime in the language of the Prophet Surely every man in his best estate is altogether vanity And pray to be delivered from the Comination pronounced Jer. 17.5 Cursed is the man that trusteth in man and whose heart departeth from the Lord. Therefore Sir you must give us leave to tell you that notwithstanding that keeness so essential to your humour in treating your opposites we find little of argument in your attempt And your More proofs instead of confuting the allegations and sentiments of Mr. Danvers has strongly contributed to confirm and ratifie them and inclines not a few that were before wavering to close with that Scripture Baptism so evidently demonstrated from undenyable arguments drawn from the Example and Commission of our great Lawgiver into whose throne you tell us no man must step pretending to mend his work Christian Dire p. 683. the practice of the primitive Churches and the best and purest Antiquity And since this effect of your Book was against your will the accident greatly adminishes the kindness Therefore we hope neither you nor any Judicious person 〈◊〉 blame our perseverence nor their choice unless you or some of your party can produce some more nervous and convincing demonstrations which we despair to hear of then is hitherto exhibited in your most eager disputations I confess the truth is therefore thus much beholden to you that as Contraria juxta se posita magis elucescunt so it s made more transparent by being confronted with Cavil and terâ—iversation ' Sir As you are esteem'd the Goliah of your party so it was expected you would produce those invincible argument so often threatned and whether it be fair for you to put them off with proofless Dictates loud outeries and frightful exclamations with some new miuted distinctions is submitted to your second thoughts But Sir you must not expect that men of Reason will any longer swallow your â—â—certain Dictates They are Camels too gross for their throats And I must inâ—orm you that not only your Notâ—rious aberrations from Scripture Reason and the practice of antiquity but also your frequent waverings and unsteadiness have mightily weakned your authority and â—ncâ—ested your credit insomuch that we are necessitated to hearken to the Counsel of Solomon a wiser man then your self meddle not with them that are given to Change And if we utterly reject that opinion you have so stifly espoused I dare say we are Justified in your own Conscience considering how lamely you have vindicated your self in your Diminitive Rejoynder to Mr. Danvers's several notorious charges against you in plain matter of fact and his just anatomizing of your Changes self Contradictions and Repentances Certainly had you not been grosly and egregiously guilty and beyond the slyness of your distinction to wipe off you would have published a Vindication to each particular needing it far more then your corrupt Aphorisms And wise men judge you had never in your life more need of employing your fluid Invention and never before sailing faculty of gainsaying if you can say any thing then at this time But your prâ—ting us off with a flam is the wonder of the Age and will be so to the next if your numerous progeny of Books furvive so long though others think it an instance of no mean craft in you to hold your peace since you can say nothing but
as are acknowledg'd and allow'd making good that which is doubtfull by that which is certain and clearing that which is obâ—â—ure by that which is evident The Word of God is our Common Book let us search into it for that upon which we may ground our own belief and by which we may overthrow error Regula est mensura sui obliqui The Scripture sufficiently delivers us the positive truth which is enough for as whatsoever rightly followeth thereupon is true so whatsoever clasheth with or contradicteth the same is false No Science gives us any certain account of Negative Propositions for as much as to go about to number them all would be both an infinite and also an unprofitable useless piece of work Therefore such as go about to establish an opinion because not expresly forbidden in Scripture as Mr Walker seems to do p. 218. whose words are Never stand hunting for a Scripture for it so long as there is no Scripture against it do not consider that they undermine the securest ground we stand upon against the invaders of Religion For by that argument as Dr Owen well says ten thousand things may it made lawfull there being no express Scripture sorbidding the upstart inventions and impostures of Seducers by name and circumstance And what a croud of such corruptions have crept into the worship of God under this pretext in times of Superstition under the Antichristian servitude All the use we can make of Antiquity is either in matter of fact viz. whether such an opinion was in being in their time or matter of right viz. whether it ought to be so For this later no sober person will take any of the Antients to be competent Judges for that were to slight the Word of God and bestow the prerogative that belongs to it upon frail man which the Fathers themselves durst not usurp Therefore it rests that we can make no further use of them then to witness matter of fact And though we find them avouch a matter of fact yet that proves not that the thing is lawfull As for instance we find Cyprian the earliest pretended Patron of Paedobaptism in the 3d. Century if that Epistle to Fidus be a legitimate piece of his make mention of Infant Baptism and if that proves the lawfulness of that practice it will also prove the lawfulness of Infants receiving the Lords Supper because the same Cyprian asserts it to be necessary for them in order to their Salvation lib. 3. test ad Qui. c. 25. And Maldonate affirms in Joan. 6. num 116. that this opinion of Augustine's and Innocent the first 's prevail'd in the Church about 6â—0 years que scil sententia Augustini Innocentii primi sexcentos circiter annos viguit in Ecclesia Eucharistiam etiam Infantibus fuisse necessariam Therefore that practice of Infant Commanion being as gray-headed as their Baptism deserves equal veneration with it It appears by this that it is worth enquiry upon what grounds those alledged Patrons of Paedobaptism went for if they have erred in the Reason of the foundation it will be easily believed they did also in the building Cyprian held Baptism simply necessary to salvation lib. 3. Ep. 8. ad Fidum So Jerom contra Pelag. and Austin l. 1. de peccat mor. remiss Si ergo ait ut tot tanta divina testimonia concinunt nec salus nec vita aeterna sine baptismo corpore sanguine Domini cuiquam spectanda frustra sine his promittitur parvulis That is Therefore if so many and so considerable divine testimonies agree that none must expect salvation nor life everlasting without Baptism and the body and bloud of the Lord without these it salvation is vainly promised to little ones This was the Universal ground and motive of the Fathers that assert Infant Baptism for many hundred years And as for their warrant 't is certain they built their practice upon Tradition not written being no more able then other men to find a word of Instituio for it in Scripture where it is not 'T is true that word Tradition is general signifying all Doctrines written or unwritten 2 Thess 2.15 But 't was by the Fathers as 't is now accommodated to signifie a Doctrine not written yet supposed to be Apostolical which if allowed to every pretender would bring miserable confusion into Religion and soon metamorphose it into an adulterated Form of humane Invention Mat. 15.9 10.16 Act. 5.19 Gal. 1.9 Now all those Fathers that practised Paedobaptism as an Apostolical practice not written as most have indeed done that being their best plea are justly to be reputed ours and of our side for they judge it not from Scripture therefore fetch its rise from Tradition which because it cannot bear the weight of an Institution the whole building is to fall for by flying for refuge to Tradition they do with us affirm that there is no better ground for Infant Baptism then humane Tradition which is indeed none at all And thus all the Testimony and Authority of these Fathers becomes ours There hath been we own such a thing as the Traditions of Christ and the Apostles which are of the highest and greatest authority but they were such things as afterwards were committed to writing by the Evangelists and Apostles other Traditions we avow none but esteem them Apocryphal So that it follows as I said that such as avouch Infant Baptism from Tradition acknowledge in so doing that there is no better authority for it and so conclude with us that it hath not the Scripture for its foundation And so those that give it to Infants as simply necessary to Salvation will be of no authority against us nor of any credit to their cause because the building must be levell'd according to the foundation and that being false they are necessitated to the mistake of their building And if there were any force in these authorities for Infant Baptism why should it not regulate our practice in the other Sacrament which was as anciently given to Infants as the other and says Dr. Taylor p 231. they were honest that understood the obligation to be parallel and in some places to this day as Brerewood in his learned Enquiries affirms viz. by the Jacobites Christians so called in great numbers in Syria Cyprus Mesopotamia Babylon Palestine so by the Habassines inhabiting Ethiopia and the Armenians c. so that if Antiquity be our guide it will lead us to administer the Supper as well as Baptism to Infants and if it fail in the one 't is to be suspected in the other I see not why the Supper should be a greater mystery then the other or the ceremony more significant or that the Duty of examining should need more of the use of Reason then believing repenting and confessing our sins 't is as natural and proper to Infancy to be nourish'd as to be born therefore as capable of the ceremony of their nourishment as of their birth