Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	baptize_v	church_n	infant_n	1,299	5	9.4082	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A94733	An apology or plea for the Two treatises, and appendix to them concerning infant-baptisme; published Decemb. 15. 1645. Against the unjust charges, complaints, and censures of Doctor Nathanael Homes, Mr Iohn Geree, Mr Stephen Marshall, Mr John Ley, and Mr William Hussey; together with a postscript by way of reply to Mr Blakes answer to Mr Tombes his letter, and Mr Edmund Calamy, and Mr Richard Vines preface to it. Wherein the principall heads of the dispute concerning infant-baptism are handled, and the insufficiency of the writings opposed to the two treatises manifested. / By Iohn Tombes, B.D.	Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.	1646 (1646)	Wing T1801; Thomason E352_1; ESTC R201072	143,666	170

words 〈◊〉 the●e For the Covenant or Promise of Grace that is righteousnesse and life as Christ though I acknowledge a peculiar promise to Abrahams naturall posterity mentioned Rom. 11. 27. yet I know not that God hath made such a Covenant to any much lesse to all the naturall beleeving seed of any beleeving Gentile and Propos 3. I say they have some promises though generall indefinite and conditionall And I mean by generall and indefinite such as determine not the kind of good promised nor the particular person and therefore are true if performed to any persons in any sort of good and conditionall upon condition of faith and obedience as when it is said the generation of the righteous shall be blessed his righteousnesse to childrens children to such as keep his Covenant Ps 103. 17. 18. Ps 112. 2. c. I tell Mr Marshall if he can shew any more promises then I doe I shall count them a treasure if not why doth he endeavour to make me and my opinion odious to the people as if I put all the children of the whole Church out of the Covenant of Grace as I doe the children of the Turkes and acknowledge no more promise for the one then for the other whereas when he hath said as much as he can for them he can bring no more promise for them then I doe nor dares reject the limitations I restraine them by But sayes Mr Marshall you leave them to have their actuall standing in the visible kingdome of the Devill I ask whither the children have actuall standing in the visible kingdome of the Devill afore they are baptized or not If he say they have not then by not baptizing I leave them not in the visible kingdome of the Devill they are out of the visible kingdome of the Devill though they be not baptized if he say they have their actuall standing in the visible kingdome of the Devill afore they are baptized then how is it true which the Protestants disputing against Bellarmin alleage against the necessity of baptizing infants to salvation that the children of beleevers are holy afore baptisme The truth is I neither leave infants in the Devills nor Gods visible kingdome for I conceive they are in neither kingdom visibly till they declare by their profession to whom they belong visibly Mr Marshall used often this expression of belonging to the visible kingdom of the Devill and I told him Examen pag. 41. I feared he did it ad faciendum populum to move the people by affrighting them by a bug-beare word if they keep their children from baptisme then they leave them to have an actuall standing in the visible kingdome of the Devill or to please them by making them beleeve that by baptisme their children are put out of the visible kingdome of the Devill This I said not judging his heart but being jealous least it was so and I confesse I am still suspicious he doth so because he still useth it after he hath been told it and it is a meer engine to stirre popular affections For how hath the unbaptized infant an actuall standing in the visible kingdome of the Devill unlesse it be true that all unbaptized persons have an actuall standing in the visible kingdome of the Devill which is false in the Catechumeni of old the converted theefe on the Crosse Constantine the Great and many others who were in the visible kingdom of the Christ afore they were baptized On the other side thousands of people in America baptized by the Spaniards had as visible standing in the Devills kingdome as before I confesse when the baptized professeth the faith of Christ then baptisme is a note of a visible member and a distinguishing badge between the people of God and the Devill and so by baptisme a person is exhibited a member of the Church but otherwise I see no reason why an infant that makes no profession of Christ should be counted after baptisme a visible member of the Church more then before Let a child of a Christian be baptized and after being an infant and taken by a Turke be circumcised wherein is that child more a visible member of the Church of Christ then a Turkes child or is hee not rather a member of the Church of Mahomet then of Christ Are the Janizaries any whit the more Christians because they were baptized infants of Christian Greekes Protestant writers are wont to define the visible Church of Christians a number of persons that professe the faith of Christ So Art 19 of the Church of England and all sorts of Protestant writers Now that which makes the visible Church makes each member a visible member and that is profession Baptisme and the Lords Supper and hearing are notes as they signify profession otherwise if a person be baptized if he should heare or receive the Lords Supper and did not professe the faith he should not be a visible member for all that I confesse I have met with some writings which put Baptisme into the definition of the Church as necessary to the being of a visible Church and the words in the Confession of Faith of the 7 Churches of Anabaptists about London being baptized into that faith Artic. 33. are somewhat doubtfull though they seem rather to import that Baptisme is necessary to the right order of a Christian Church then to the being of a Church and I confesse they that hold that members are added to the Church by Baptisme and not otherwise and hold a nullity of Paedo baptisme must needs say the Churches that have no other then Infant-Baptisme are no true Churches nor their members Church-members as Master Ma●shall sayes pag. 84. of his Defence and so voluntary separation necessary But these points of the necessity of right Baptisme not onely to the right order but also to the being of a visible Church and Church-member and so voluntary separation barely for the defect of it I have ever disclaimed as considering the many errours and ill consequences that would follow thereupon and though provocations still increase yet I have in my practise shunned separation from my disenting brethren and I presume though Mr Marshall count right Baptisme a necessary duty yet he will be more advised then to make it essentiall either constitutivè or consecutivè to the being of a Church or Christian either visible or invisible for feare of giving too much advantage to Separatists and Seekers I suppose in reference to the present point this is the truth that however every infant is either in the invisible kingdome of God or Satan that is elect or reprobate yet no child till hee make profession doth visibly belong either to the one or to the other I acknowledge that in the visible Church of the Jewes the infants were reckoned to the Church and the reason was from the peculiar Church-state of the Jewes For then God took the whole family of Abraham together in one day and after the whole nation of the

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 passion or such like cause usually befals such meetings and is the cause of much woe to the Church of God Be it well or ill taken liberavi animam meam meam I have freed my owne soule There are some other things wherewith Mr Marshal endeavors to render me a suspected person pag. 29. of his defence I cannot but wonder why you who pretend to be familiarly acquainted with the secrets of Antiquity should have so much correspondency with them who are not likely to helpe you with any certaine intelligence Hugo Grotius is the strongest stake to support your tottering hedge and sure I am Grotius was a friend to the Socinians and it is well knowne what they thinke of Baptisme To this I answer it is untrue that I any where pretend to be familia●ly acquainted with the secrets of Antiquity I say so farre as I can by search find it is thus and thus but never did take upon me familiar acquaintance with the secrets of Antiquity It seemes Master Marshal had the helpe of his friend and so there was a Colledge to answer my Booke yet after he and his friend have done all they could in this point it doth not yet appeare but that I was in the right to wit that Infant baptisme is not so ancient as is pretended For he hath not yet acquitted the treatise of questions ad Orthodoxos from bastardy nor hath he answered that which I said that the words and whole scope of Irenaeus lib. 2 c. 39. shew that the place is not meant of Baptisme but with a new device such as it concernes the authors conscience to looke to when he is told the words and whole scope shew that the place is not meant of Baptisme in which I chiefely alleaged the words the answerer saies nothing to that but maimedly sets downe my words thus In the last place you labour to prove that it is not meant of Baptisme from Iren●●us his scope in that place And then sayes that though the scope be so yet the words prove the question in debate before us Which is a manifest abusing the reader never answering the reason I gave from the very words and whole scope that they could not be understood of the rite of Baptisme And for Origen all that is yet brought cannot acquit the passages alleaged from suspicion of being supposititious considering that Origen is taxed for Pelagianizing whereas those words are point-blanke against them which being observed by me the answerer thought it wisedome to say nothing to it And for the rest of the testimonies Master Marshall brought I did confesse Nazianzen Cyprian Augustin Hierom Ambrose mention Paedobaptisme but never upon Mr Marshal's ground federal holines but upon 〈◊〉 supposed necessity to save the Infant from perishing Master Marshall it seems rests much on Augustines words that he saith Hoc Ecclesia semper habuit semper tenuit hoc a majorum fide accepit hoc usque in finem perseveranter custodit He puts it therefore in the Title pag. 55. of his Defence and pag. 9. quotes for these wordes Augustin Serm. 15. de verbis Apost I have read over that Sermon tom 10 of his workes againe and againe and find not those wordes there nor any to that purpose I have also read Sermon 14. de verbis Apostoli which hath the title de Baptisme parvulorum adversus P●lagianos and I find not there those words onely these I find there Sanctus Cyprianus est quem in manus sumpsi antiquus Episcopus sedis hujus quid senserit de Baptismo parvulorum immo quid semper Ecclesiam sensisse monstraver●● p●ululum acc●pit● I deny not but that those wordes may be in 〈◊〉 but if Master Marshall had given me more certaine direction where to find them I might then perhaps have given a more direct answer However for these reasons I conceive litle cause to be moved with those words First because I find not that Augustin tooke it to be the tenet of the Church from any other ground then the Epistle of Cyprian 59. ad Fidum concerning which he saith that Cyprian hath shewed how the Church hath alwayes held it both in the words above cited tom 10. Serm. 14. de verbis Apost tom 7. lib. 2. de peccat merit● remiss c. 5. c. And yet he that reads that Epistle of Cyprian shall find Cyprian onely declaring the determination of the Councill of 66 Bishops there mentioned but nothing of the Churches alwayes holding it Secondly The famous story of the likelihood of cheating Augustine and the rest of the African Bishops with a supposititious Canon of the Nicen Council by three Roman Bishops to confirme Appeales to Rome from Africa in the case of Apiarius doth me thinkes shew that Augustin might easily be mistaken about the tenet of the Church Thirdly The many speeches in Augustin as Epist 118. and elswhere and others of the Ancients about Easter Lent-fast Episcopacy infant Communion and other traditions which are not credited by Protestant nor some of them by some Popish writers doe cleare him from arrogance or impudence that should say there is no great reason to give so much credit to that large assertion of Augustin if it be his as Master Marshal and some others seem to give to it Fourthly Those words of Augustin tom 7. de peccat merito remissione lib. 10. c. 34. Optime Punici Christiani baptismum nihil aliud quam salutem sacramentum corporis Christi nihil aliud quam vitam vocant Unde nisi ex antiquant existimo ● Apostolica traditione qua Ecclesia Christi i●situm tenent pr●ter baptismum participationem Dominicae me●s● non solum non ad regnum Dei sed nec ad salutem vitam aeternam posse quenquam hominum pervenire do me thinkes evidence that Augustin sometimes called that the Churches tenet which he gathered by conjecture from the practice of the African Christians knowne to him But it will be said the Pelagians did not deny Infant baptisme to have been the practise of the Church I answer nor do I deny that it was in Augustines time the practise of the Latin and Greek Churches to baptize Infants in case of necessity but that it was so from the beginning and alwayes in the Church we do not find the Pelagians yeelded yet did they not perhaps question it either because they were carried away with that erroneous rule that what they saw every where practised and found not when it began to take that for an Apostolicall tradition or because of the tyranny of the present custome which Augustine himselfe somewhere confesseth that though he misliked yet liberius improbare non andeo But saith Master Marshal pag. 55. I cannot but conceive it likely that Augustines Ecclesia semper habuit semper tenuit should sway as much with the intelligent impartial Reader as Master Tombes his non semper habuit non semper tenuit I grant it should

Of Mr Marshals untrue charge against me as if I rested on Grotius in setting down the tenent of Antiquity upon occasion of which the tenent of Antiquity is again examined my judgment of their doctrine vindicated Mr. Marshals new all●gations answered and my diligence to find out their tenets manifested § 17. Of my opinion about excommunication Church-government the admission unto all ordinances my former conformity alleaged to alienate mens minds from me and my writings § 18. Of the vanity of Mr Ley's vaunt concerning the deadly wound given to my cause and the contrary demonstrated by a briefe going through the principall points about this argument as they have hitherto been disputed As about Acts 2. 39. Rom. 11. 16. 1 Cor. 7. 14. Colos 2. 12. Matth. 28. 19. Acts 16 15. Matth. 19. 14. c. Baptisme and the rite of eating bread and drinking wine through old ●ites among the Iewes yet used to another end and after another rule by Christians The command confessed to be the formal reason of circumcision by Mr Marshall Circumcision a priviledge proper to the Jewish Church state No command about the Iewes Sacraments now in force Infants not Disciples as Matth. 28. 19. is meant Baptizing housholds inferres not infant-baptisme We have no evidence for judgement of charity concerning infants nor is a judgement of charity to be our rule in adminstering Baptisme § 19. Of Master Hassey his pretended satisfactory answer to my exerci●ation § 20. The Epilogue of this Apology concerning the reason of the enlargement of it the Authors present estate and future intentions § 1. The occasion of this postscript § 2. Of Mr. Calamys and M. Vines their wrong judgement of the dispute Mr. Blakes book and my discussing the point §. 4. They that deny Infant-baptisme need not teach that Infants perish § 5. Of my censure of Master Blakes producing Gal 4. 29 for the birth priviledge §. 6. Or the necessity of my taking paines in my Examen to find out the meaning of Mr. Marshals second conclusion by reason of the ambig●ity of his expressions §. 7. Of the Corinthians doubt 1 Cor. 7 12 13 14. 1 Cor 7. 14. is not meant of instrumentall sanctification and federall holinesse §. 9. Of M Blak●s m●sallegation of Gal. 2. 15. which was the text he chose for his birth-priviledge § 8. That 1 P● 2. 9. is meant of the Church invisible §. 11. Of precedents for womens receiving the Lords Supper §. 12. To say that God hath promised to be the God of every believer and his uncurall seed is a new Gospell §. 13. Or Mr Ruthersurds Mr Blakes opinion about holinesse of a chosen nation mediate An cestors profession intitling to Infant-baptisine the Independents advantage in this point §. 14. Of the word nations Mat. 28. 19. how to be taken §. 15. Of M. Rutherfurds and Mr Blakes and mine opinion concerning the rule to know who are baptizable §. 16. About two suppositions ascribed by m● to Mr Marshal and Mr Blake in my Examen page 130. §. 17. About arguments drawn from Analogy in positive rites and their invalidity and the insufficiency of M. Blakes rules §. 16. That Mr Blake hath not proved that Infants are disciples from Mat. 18. 5. nor pertinently alleaged Isai 49 22. §. 19. of baptizing housholds my censure of Mr Blakes speech concerning it §. 20. About Mat. 19 14. that by the Kingdome of heaven is meant the Kingdome of glory §. 21. That God seales not to every person that is rightly baptized that his Covenant of grace belongs onely to the elect that his Covenant is effectuall and leaves it not to mans liberty to include or exclude himself Of Mr Blakes unjust crimmination of me as putting the children of beleevers out of the covenant of grace and the epilogue of this postscript

sentence condemning all the infants of beleevers as having nothing to doe with the covenant of Grace his imputing to me as if I held that they all belong actually to 〈◊〉 kingdom of the devill no more promise for them then for children of Turks their actuall standing in the visible kingdome of the devill Pag. 67. A large disqui●ition of Rom 11. 17. c. wherein is shewed that the ingraffing there is into the invisible Church by election and giving faith and that it proves not Infant-baptisme Pag. 78. Sect. 15. Of master marshals unjust charge against me as darkning his argument and casting filth in the face of the Assembly Pag. 80. Sect. 16. Of master Marshals untrue charge against me as if I rested on Grotius in setting down the tenent of Antiquiry upon occasion of which the tenent of Antiquity is again examined my judgement of their doctrine vindicated master Marshals new allegations answered and my diligence to find out their tenets manifested Pag 91. Sect. 17. Of my opinion about excommunication Church-government the admission unto all ordinances my former conformity alleaged to allenate mens minds from me and my writings Pag. 9. Sect. 18. Of the vanity of master Leyes vaunt concerning the deadly wound given to my cause and the contrary demonstrated by a briefe going through the principall points about this argument as they have hitherto been disputed As about Acts 2. 39. Rom. 11. 16. Colos 2. 12. Mat. 28. 19. Acts 16. 15. Mat. 19 14. c. Pag. 97. Baptisme and the rite of eating bread and drinking wine at the passeover though old rites among the Iewes yet used to another end and after another rule by christians Pag. 98. The command confessed to be the formall reason of circumcision by mr marshall Circumcision a priviledge proper to the Jewish Church-state Pag. 99. No command about the Jewes Sacraments now in force Pag. 100. Infants not disciples as Mat. 28. 19 is meant Baptizing housholds inferres not infant-baptisme Pag. 101. We have no evidence for judgement of charity concerning infants nor is a judgment of charity to be our rule in administring baptisme Pag. 102. Sect. 19. Of master Hussey his pretended satisfactory answer to my Exercitation Pag. 106. Sect. 20 The Epilogue of this Apology concerning the reason of the enlargeing of it the Authours present estate and future intentions The Contents of the Postscript PAge 109. Sect. 1. The occasion of this Postscript ● Sect. 2. Of M. Calamy and Mr. V●nes their wrong judgement of the dispute mast Blakes book and my discussing the point P. 111. sect 3. Of master Blakes charge of defect of charity and some other imputations Pag. 112. sect 4. They that deny infant-baptisme need not teach that infants perish Pag 113. sect 5. Of my censure of master Blakes producing Gal. 4 29. for the birth-priviledge Pag. 114. sect 6. Of the necessity of my taking p●ins in my Examen to find out the meaning of master Marshals second conclusion by reason of the ambiguity of his expressions Pag. 120. sect 7. Of the Corinthians doubt 1 Cor. 7. 12. 13. 14. Pag. 121. sect 8. 1 Cor. 7. 14. is not meant of instrumental sanctification federal holines P. 125. sect 9. Of mast Blakes misallegation of Gal. 2. 15. which was the text he chose for his birth-priviledge Pag. 128. sect 10. That 1 Pet. 2. 9. is meant of the Church invisible Pag. 130. sect 11. Of precedents for womens receiving the Lords supper P. 131. sect 12. To say that God hath promised to be the God of every beleever and his naturall seed is a new Gospell P. 132. sect 13. Of master Rutherfurds and M. Blakes opinion about holinesse of a chosen nation and mediate Ancestours profession intitling to infantbaptisme and the Independents advantage in this point Pag. 134. sect 14. Of the word nations matth 2● 19. how to be taken Pag. 135. sect 15. of master Ruthersfurds and master Blakes and mine opinion concerning the rule to know who are baptizable Pag. 138. sect 16. About two suppositions a●criby me to master marshall and master Blake in my Examen page 130. Pag. 140. sect 17. About arguments draw●● from Analogy in positive rites and their invalidity and the insufficiency of master Blakes rules Pag. 145. sect 28. That Master Blake hath not proved that infants are disciples from Matth. 18. 5. nor pertinently alleaged Isai 49 2● Pag. 147. sect 19. Of baptizing ●ous●olds and 〈◊〉 censure of Mr Blakes speech concerning it Pag. 149. sect 20. About Matth. 19 14. that by the kingdome of heaven is meant the kingdome of glory Pag. 151. sect 21. That God seales not to every person that is rightly baptized that his covenant of grace belongs only to the elect that his covenant is effectuall and leaves it not to mans liberty to include or exclude himselfe Pag. 155. sect 22. Of Mr Blakes unjust crimination of 〈◊〉 as putting the children of beleevers out of the covenant of Grace and the Epilogue of this Postscript An Apology for the two Treatises and Appendix to them concerning Infant-Baptisme against the unjust Charges Complaints and Censures of D. Nathanael Homes M. John Geree and M. Steven Marshall and M. John Ley. DEcember 15 164● were published with my consent two Treatises and an Appendix to them concerning Infant-Baptisme The writing that could not in nineteene moneths before obtaine a few lines hath now gained foure answers in foure moneths In January came forth Treatise of one Thomas Bakewell in which the Title pretends a briefe answer to my twelve doubtfull Arguments as he stiles them against Infant-baptism in my Exercitation about it This Treatise I think hath honour enough done it that it is named If any man shew me any thing worth the answering in it it may in time gain a reply otherwise for me it may take it's rest The next moneth was published Doctor Homes his Vindication of baptizing Beleevers Infants in some animadversions on my Exercitation and examen The next moneth I received from Master Iohn Geree his vindic●ae paedobaptisms in a full answer as is asserted to my twelve Arguments in my exercitation and whatsoever is rationall or materiall in my Answer to Master Marshals Sermon The next moneth I received Master Stephen Marshall his defence of Infant-baptisme in answer to my two Treatises and Appendix in which also I am informed of two peices at least from New-England in which I am concerned And unto all or some of these Master Iohn Ley in his Epistle to Master Iohn Sal●marsh addes his acclamation in these words There be divers● Davids who are ready for a single encounter with that braving Goliah and some have given his Cause such a wound already as though he may play the Montebanke with it and skin it over will never be cured at the bottom Thus farre they have spoken I presume they will allow me now liberty to speake for my selfe and for the truth My Cause as Master Ley cals it

Ancients especially the Greeke Church have rejected the baptisme of infants for many hundred yeares meaning in the first ages after Christ But as yet neither Mr Marshall nor his friend have shewed me sufficient reason why I should retract it For what he brings out of Photius and Balsamon men of much later standing about the later Canons and Imperiall lawes of the Greekes and one of the 8 Canons concluded in Carthage against the Pelagians requiring infants to be baptized proves not but that the Greeke Church rejected baptizing of infants many hundred of years in the first ages nor doth it overthrow that of Grotius that many of the Greekes he doth not say the Greeke Church in every age to this day doe keep the custome of deferring the baptizing of little ones till they could themselves make a confession of their faith Yea the lawes brought by Mr Marshall rather prove it For why should lawes be made for it but because many did neglect it And the story out of Balsamon about captives of Christians rather shewes that some were not baptized when little ones even among Ch●ristians because they determine if there were no witnesses to prove their Baptisme though children of Christians they should bee baptized As for Grotius his being a friend to the Socinians it is nothing to me who knew not Grotius nor his wayes nor ever pleaded for him Yet I remember I have read that though he was accused thereof long agoe by Ravenspergerus hee was justified by Vossius and what ever Rivet Maresius Laurentius charge him with yet his works have a place among the learned and may be read and made use of cum judicio at least as the works of Papists Lutherans Prelatists c. who yet may be tainted with errours Even Theophilus Philokyriaces Loncardie usis if I mistake not Master Marshals friend doth in the very title page of his Dies Dominica and in the book make use of Barenius his testimony in his Annals an authour and work as much excepted against ●● Grotius Nor doe I find that in that wherein I made use of Grotius he hath deceived me or I or he wronged the truth or our Reader Mr Marshall pag. 54. of his Defence saith that he perceived I have made great use in this controversy of an Arminian booke commonly known by the names of censura censurae Whereas I never read the book or made any use of it till I read this passage in Mr Marshals Defence But since I confesse I have read chapter 23 of it and am by that I find there the more confirmed in that truth wherein I concurre with that Authour though the truth is the chiefe light I had for antiquity in this matter was some little reading of my own and that which I read in Vossius his theses theol de paedobaptisme But because Mr. Marshall hath accused me as having correspondencie with them who are not likely to help me with any certain intelligence that it may appeare that I used what diligence I could to get most certain intelligence when I applyed my selfe to answer Mr Marshals Sermon I presumed to write this ensuing letter to that famous learned Gentleman Mr John Selden of the Inner Temple Clarissime Vir INter theologorum placita haec obtinent baptismum Ioannis Christs circumcisioni Judaicae succedere ejusque locum occupare atque inde paedobaptismi ri●um deduci Mihi verò cum de paedobaptismi origine tum de successione baptismi in locum circumcisionis an vera tradant Theologi isti gravis diu insedit dubitatio Baptismi enim institutum longè aliud esse à circumcisione paedobaptismum in Ecclesiis Christianis nonnisi in seculo post Apostolos secundo obtinuisse plurima suadent Inter alia vero istud urget quod legerim alicubi quanquam libris jam spoliatus locum judicare nequeam baptismi ritum fuisse satis notum ante Joannis Baptistae tempora in admissione Proselytorum aut Discipulorum apud Judaeos interrogatio Pharisaeorum non de novitate ritus sed de authoritate baptizantis quaerentium Joannis Evangelii cap. 1. Co● 25. idem innuere videtur Et forsan 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud eundem cap. 3. Com. 25. ad usurpationem istius ritus spectabat Paedobaptismum verò ignotum fuisse primaevis Ecclesiarum Christianarum temporibus asserit Ludovicus Vives comment in Augustini de civitate Dei lib. 1. cap. 27. Quapropter vir ornatissime super istis apicibus doctrinae successione scilicet baptismi●● lecum circumcisionis paedobaptismi origin● te cujus periti● in rebus scriptis Hebraicis Ecclesiasticis veritatis amor animique candor satis spectantur latè praedicantur consulendum duxi Pla●eat itaque claritudini tu● mihi quanquam obscure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tamen tanquam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 super ●stare animi sententiam tui impertire Et quoniam sat scio te plurimis iisque gravissimis negotits occupari responsum tuum se● pluribus seu pa●cioribus verbis tempore à ●eipso posite expect abit Dignitatis vestrae observantissi●● JOANNES TOMBES Londini ●●dibus Recto●is Ecclesiae 〈◊〉 church 〈…〉 August●●●4 1644. Though the answer was no other then a reference of me to the books I might meet with in Stationers shops yet I conceived this advantage I had by it that what I found in books extant might be the more safely relyed on and that my diligence to discover the truth would be the more apparent for which I denied my selfe rest and without recompense from men layd out more then my estate could beare But M. Mar. seems ready to catch at any thing that may make me suspected and so bring my writing out of credit p. 78. of his Defence thus he speaks I am misinformed by good friends who know love you very well if your self incline not this way to baptize any whether Turks or Heathens who onely would make a profession of their faith in Iesus Christ then admit them to al other ordinances not have them excommunicated à sacris but onely à privato consortio though their lives should prove scandalous To which I say that I deny not but that in private conferēce lamenting the sad condition of these nations that are likely to cut one anothers throats about the differences between Presbyterians Independents I have said that I doubted whether ever excommunication à sacris or the Presbyterian or Independent Ecclesiasticall government would be proved to be Jure Divino by Christs appointment And I confesse that I take it to be but a matter of prudence whether each congregation have it's compleat power and order within it selfe or that it bee ordered in some things by an assembly of select persons out of divers congregations and whether congregations and pastours be fixed or unfixed And I doubt whether the power of the keyes Matth. 16. 19. be any other then doctrinall whether Matth. 18 15 16 17 18. contain

begin at the removing it And it is easie to conceive that forasmuch as the grosse ignorance of people is much occasioned by their baptizing afore they know that if they were not baptized till they knew christian Religion as it was in the first ages grosse ignorance in christian professours would be almost wholly reformed and for christian walking if baptisme were administred with a solemn abrenunciation profession and promise by the baptized in his own person upon that were baptized I doubt not but it would have more aw on mens consciences then many other means used or devised considering how in the primitive times men differred baptisme for feare they might not enjoy their lusts and they were counted by some as guilty of inexpiable crime that fell away after baptisme and on the other side infant-baptisme is the ground upon which innumerable people ignorant and profane harden themselves as if they were good christians regenerate and should be saved without holinesse of life never owning or considering any profession or promise made for them as theirs There have been other suggestions hinted by Mr Geree but amplified in clancular whisperings concerning my former conformity to ceremonies and Episcopall government which are carried about in private to render me a person suspected and to lessen the credit of my writing the chiefe part of which I have answered in my Sermon intituled Fermentum Pharisaeorum and the time end necessity manner and circumstances in doing what I did being pleas sufficient to acquit me and the things not belonging to the present cause but being fitter for private audience I will trouble the Reader no further with my Apology assuring my selfe that setting aside this opinion of paedobaptisme and common infirmities my life labours doctrine even in the judgement of those that dissent from me and knew me will abundantly answer for me against all clancular whisperings whatsoever And concerning my two treatises8 notwithstanding Mr Ley's censure passed perhaps afore he had compared mine and my Antagonists writings together I may rather say that by my two treatises there is such a wound given already to Infant-baptisme that however men may play the Mountebanks and skin it over it will never be cured at the bottome For in point of antiquity it still stands good which I asserted That Infant-baptisme is not so ancient as is pretended as now taught is a late Innovation that a great number of those that sought reformation in the thirteenth Century opposed infant-baptisme that the doctrine of Anti-paedobaptisme neither undermines Magistracy Ministery Lords day nor any true interest of the infants of beleevers that the argument from the Covenant to the Seale is either a tautology or invalid without a command that the Covenant made with Abraham Gen. 17. was a mixed Covenant having in it not onely promises of spirituall benefits common to all beleevers but also peculiar promises concerning things temporall that Acts 2. 39. being meant of Christ and saving benefits by him as Master Marshall confesseth cannot serve Master Marshals turn to prove his second conclusion which he denies to be meant of the promise of saving grace as if it were made to beleevers and their naturall seed As for Master Marshals paraphrase which he calls argument pag. 129. 130. of his Defenc● I think it to bee most absurd in that it makes the promise Acts 2. 39. when applyed to the Fathers to be meant of justification when to the children of outward administrations nor so expounded are the words true there being no such promise That Rom. 11. 16. c. proves not that there is the same Church state in the Churches of the Gentiles that was in the Jewes so as that the Infants of Beleevers should by vertue of naturall generation be reckoned as visible members forasmuch as now the Church is not nationall as it was then nor gathered as God did the Jewish Church by taking the whole nation for his people in one day but now the Church of God is gathered by preaching up and down some in one place and some in another in succession of time That 1 Cor. 7. 14. speakes not of federall holinesse but matrimoniall yea if the reason of the lawfulnesse of the living of two persons together in disparity of Religion be taken from the vertue of faith in the one party not from the relation of husband and wife as Mr Marshals exposition makes it the medium of the Apostle to prove the lawfulnesse of the living of a beleeving wife with an unbeleeving husband will as well prove the lawfulnes of the living of a beleeving forni●atrix with an unbeleeving fornicator as may appeare by a syllogisticall analysis of the Apostles argument the major whereof is this according to Mr Marshals exposition That man and wo●an may lawfully dwell together notwithstanding the unbeleefe of the one party whereof one is sanctified by the faith of the other for begetting of a holy seed this is manifestly the force of the Apostles reason after his exposition Nor is it necessary to insert being husband and wife sith the sanctification is not ascribed by him to the relation of husband and wife but to the faith of the one party as the proper cause of it And by Mr Blake Birth priviledge pag. 11. Holinesse in the text is a fruit or result of faith in the parent Now the assumption the unbeleeving form catour is sanctified by the faith of the ●eleeving whore for the begetting a holy seed Master Marshall denies not but salkes only telling me pag. 163 of his Defence he could name Divines who are no whit infer●●ur to my selfe who conceive that a beleever even then when he commits fornication with an infidell doth so remove the barre in the unbeleeving party as that the child is in the beleeving parents right to be r●ckoned to belong to the Covenant of Grace and the Church of God which is in his sense to be sanctified and it must needs be granted for 〈◊〉 causa ponitur effectus if the quality of faith be the cause of that sanctification the sanctification followes in one as well as the other The conclusion then followes from Mr Marshals exposition that the beleeving fornicatrix may still live after conversion with her unbeleeving fornicator for they are still sanctified for the begetting of a holy seed and the children so begotten are federally holy it being Gods rule in this case if Mr Marshall say true partus sequitur meliorem partem But this is so absurd a thing that I beleeve Mr Marshall himselfe will when he understands it quit his chiefe hold and the judicious reader explode the exposition of 1 Cor. 7. 14. of federall holinesse And for the third conclusion of Mr Marshall he hath not yet proved that the rite of Baptisme was appointed by Christ to succeed into the room place and use of circumcision or that a command concerning circumcision should be a command concerning baptisme yea my exposition of Colos 2. 11 12. is

which reason if good it would follow they might have the Lords Supper be ordained Ministers for these are lesse then Chris●s blessing Afore the printing of this Apology I met with and read a book of one Mr William Hussey a man unknown to me saving by a former treatise of his which I have seen and he intitles it satisfaction to Master Tombes his scepticall exercitation and in his Epistle to the Reader he saith and here I will turn sceptique with Master Tombes If I should give him the title of fantasticke in requitall of the title of scepticke he pins upon me I could give better reason for it then he brings for his imposition of that new title on me but it is enough for me to clear my self Gel. l. 11. c. 5. noct Attic. sayes the ●y●honian Philosophers were called Sceptickes that is seekers and considerers because they determined nothing but were alwayes in considering and seeking but Master Marshall thinks me guilty rather of too much selfe-confidence Yea in this point though I did as I conceived befitting me then propound my thoughts in the disputation with my brethren in the ministery and in my Exercitation to the Committee of the Assembly under the term of doubts yet in my Examen I assert them as positions and therefore that authour doth unworthily intitle my Exercitation scepticall or me a scepticke which is in effect if he understood what he sayes to accuse me as adhering to nothing as certain in matters of sense reason or faith But concerning the book though he intitle it satisf●action and the licenser sayes finding it to be in his judgement solid and judicious and I am pretty well acquainted with the humour of men who are ready to cry up any thing as satisfactory which they affect yet I beleive the Assembly will not conceive his book satisfactory nor these passages following to be solid and judicious As that in his Epistle to the Reader he calls Baptisme the seale of the proffer of Grace pag. 3. I answer that was an especiall priviledge of the Iewes that they had their civill lawes from God but what lieth upon a nation as a duty that it may require of all and cuts off them that refuse and this is implyed in the Commission when Nations shall covenant to be Discip●●s which may be done by a part for the whole then are such ● are in commission from Christ commanded to baptize and teach the whole nation such as are in authority may covenant in a nationall 〈◊〉 for the inferiour sort and justly require all externall performances from them such as baptisme and submission to b●e taught 〈◊〉 pag. 4. And what a parent can doe over his child in matter of 〈◊〉 duty ● that may the parents of the country the Magistrates require of the nations God requireth it of them they may put all nations to schoole to Christ Now what if some of them be too young to learne yet if they be under the discipline of the Master they are Schollers as may appeare in many litle children that are set to schoole to keepe them safe and from wantonesse before they be of capacity to learne many have a Hornbooke given more for a play-game then a booke yet are they Schollers because under the discipline and correction of the Master is it not therefore great reason that a Christian should dedicate his child●● to Christ to be partaker of the blessing and discipline of Christ pag. 5. And certainly words could not have been invented that could have required the Ministers to baptize all the World Infants and all willing or unwilling so that any would see they might be taught and submit to the precepts and discipline of Christ then to expresse it by the word nation and d●sciple pag. 12. Abrahams seed must be divided into equivocall and univocall equivocall seed Christ for that he was not like Abraham he was of Abraham but ex parte according to the flesh Rom. 1. 3. He was the promised seed not the seed unto whom the promise did belong as the seed of Abraham pag. 43. That which we argue from receiving of families and from the Apostles commission to baptize nations is that nations may make Lawes for their whole nations to be baptized and if the major part of a nation do according to their duty receive baptisme and undertake for the whole nation to submit themselves to become Schollers of Christ they may justly compell by any penalty to joyne with them in the externall worship of God This therefore is it which is drawn from the commission directed to the Disciples for the baptizing of nations that nations may act as nations and families as families that is that the more organ●all parts must act for the residue the magistrates for the nation the master of the family for the residue the magistrates for the nation the master of the family for the family otherwise it cannot be said to be the act of the nation or of the family though a post factum may be historically related to overspread a nation that is done without a nationall consent to shew the universality of a spreading evill yet where a duty is charged upon a nation it cannot be orderly received without a nation ●ll consent pag. 44. He that keepeth any servant that will not be baptized is not a good Christian it is true all men of discretion ought to consent sent to every duty baptisme 〈…〉 precepts 〈◊〉 it is pactum impositum pag. 40. The parties to be baptized are all nations withoutany restriction 〈…〉 If they that claime their interest in baptisme can undertake for whole nations the commissioner must not refuse them the nation bel●eveth by the magistrate by whose authority the whole nation is put to schoole to Christ pag. 54. Men may require of him that is of years to consent to his baptisme 〈…〉 a sinne and punishing him for it as for adult●ry formation or any other publique offence pag. 59. If any will bring Turkes children and Infidels to baptisme and 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of them in the doctrine of the Gospel I know not but they may and if 〈◊〉 would 〈◊〉 with their children to Christians I thinke it were a very charitable thing so to do For the promise was ●ever so tyed to Abrahams loyns neither for ought I know to any beleevers but to education in the family of Abraham or any other beleeving family pag. 61. They that beleeve and they that beleeve not heare the word and 〈◊〉 is no 〈◊〉 of the work●● Preach it to 〈◊〉 Infidel neither 〈◊〉 it any 〈◊〉 of baptisme to baptize an Infidel pag. 64. And indeed 〈◊〉 were a very strange thing for the Sacrament of baptisme to be tendered to 〈…〉 and approved declared and 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉 it is true it may be tendered to men this professe them faith because man cannot judge them faithfull notwithstanding any profession and therefore baptize them but if they could know and judge them faithfull