those that are suspected of Heresie had said such words what should we make of them Doth all Passive or Objective power Natural Violent or Neutral come into act Doubtless no man that hath one thought of these things will say so if he do he must say that God can do no more then he doth nor any creature do more then it doth But if there be such a power or Capacity of a thing that shall not exist then it is sad to hear God charged with making all such powers or Capacities in vain He knows why he doth many things which he tells us not the reason of but here there is reason enough apparent to cause us to give God better words I ask't whether Preachers be not bound to endeavour the saving conversion of whole Nations He answereth I think they are to bring them if Heathen to a visible Profession and as many as they can to thorow-conversion Repl. 1. This is no answer to my question unless it import a concession of what was denyed Must men endeavour to convert a whole Nation or not 2. If we must endeavour to convert no more than we can convert then we must know the success before we endeavour which cannot be and must endeavour to convert no more then will be converted which is worse then false 3. I will not endeavour to perswade any man to Profess to be what he is not or to have what he hath not or to do what he doth not He next noteth it as a remarkable contradiction in adjecto that I say Vocation uneffectual is common to Pagans saying that Calling in Scripture Phrase is not a barâ— tender but accompanyed with a professed answer Repl. This is like much of the rest Let these Texts be judge Prov. 1.24 Because I have called and ye refused I have stretched out my hand and no man regarded but ye have set at nought all my counsel c. so Isa. 65.12 When I called ye did not answer when I spake ye did not hear c. so Isa. 50 2. 66.4 and Jer. 7.13 35.17 Mat. 22.3 5. He sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden c. But they made light of it c. I shall recite no more It hath not been thought a contradiction by Protestants or Papists that I know of till now to talk of uneffectual calling So much of Mat. 28.19 To what I said from Mar. 16.16 litle that needs a Reply is answered He saith If I will contend for an exact order then he must say that faith always preceds and never follows after Baptism Repl. In reason we must distinguish between a precedency of prescribed duty and of event and not seek to blind the Reader as you speak by confusion There is constantly this order in the prescribed duty that no man should seek Baptism but a true believer for himself and his seed and no man should baptize any but those that profess this true belief and their seed This is the fixed order of duty But what then will it follow that eventually faith never followeth baptism nor baptism never goeth before faith Yes when you can prove that man never sinneth by omitting his duty and that God never recovereth a sinner by his Grace You add And then he may preach in England to build up converts but not to convert Repl. True if there be none in England that neglected that faith which God commanded before nor received baptism in a case which is unmeet for it nor any that were baptized in infancy when they were uncapable of believing As to your frequent objection of the Nullity of such baptism I shall Null it anon in its proper place His concession in terms from 1 Pet. 3.21 he retracteth by an exposition of his words as spoken Rhetorically and thinks that ony one that ever read Rhetorick may know his sense when there is such a Wood of Tropes and Schems that such Novices may sooner be lost in them then hunt on t the sense of every Rhetorician The proper sense he takes to be an egregious peice of affected non-sense for then it were true that justifying faith is a promise Repl. It only follows that justifying faith is not only an Assent but the wills consent to the covenant of grace or that Christ be ours and we his and this is heart-covenanting and that the external verbal promising or covenanting with God is the profession of this faith And it is not my fault if I be put to tell you that as long as you are such a stranger to the nature of justifying faith as many such dark though confident passages in your books do import your Arguings will want salt if not sense I know this is like to displease But what remedy To the Text. Act. 8.37 he answereth pag. 176 that indeed he never met with any thing either in Scripture or Reason produced thâ—t carries with him so much as any color for it this excepted Repl. This is not my first Observation that confidence is not alwaies a sign of a true judgement and the seeing of no difficulties before us proves us not to know more than other men His particular answers are 1. Philip. may call for that de bene esse when the Eunuch was to be admitted which was not yet essential to his admittance Repl. 1. It s strange that when we are disputing what is of a necessity to a just admittance that we must turn to dispute of the Essentials of an admittance I never thought that any thing but admittance was essential to admittance but there are many things siâ—c quibus non licet 2. Philip is determining a question and giveth this in as the decision If thou believe with all thy heart thou mayest And to say that this is but de bene esse meaning that it includeth not the Negative otherwise thou mayest not is to make Philip to have deluded and not decided or resolved Use the like liberty in expounding all other Scripture and you 'l make it what you please The second Answer is that Dogmatical faith is truly a Divine faith Repl. But not the Christian Faith nor anywhere alone denominateth men Believers in Scripture I remember but one Text John 12.42 where it is called Believing on Christ and but few more where it is simply called Believing but none where such are called Believers Disciples or Christians or any thing that intimateth them admitted into the visible Church without the Profession of saving faith added to this Assent The rest which he here addeth we shall take in when we come purposely to speak of that subject I conclude That all examples of baptism in Scripture do mention only the administration of it to the Professors of saving faith and the precepts give us no other direction And I provoke Mr. Blake as far as is seemly for me to do to name one precept or example for baptizing any other and make it good if he can Argum. 17. is
two sorts of Teaching are confounded which Christ distinguisheth Mat. 28.19 20. That teaching which draweth men to Christ and maketh them Disciples and that which instructeth them when they are his Disciples that which perswadeth them to receive Christ Jesus the Lord and that which perswadeth them accordingly to walk in him For they take him for a Disciple that is but learning to be a Disciple meerly because he submitteth to learn and hath learned before some preparatory truths though yet he be not made a Disciple indeed nor profess so to be Mr. Blake is deeply offended with me for saying that Hypocrites that seem not only to be found Believers and profess a Justifying faith when they have it not are only equivocally or analogically Christians or members of the Church c. But I shall say somewhat more concerning those Believers that are described by him who do not so much as profess a saving faith viz. that they are no members of the Church at all if notorious and are not so much as to be named Christians nor to be admitted into the visible Church No man can prove that ever one man was admitted a Church-member in all the New Testament upon the Profession of any lower kind of faith than that which is the condition of Justification Otherwise we should have two distinct Churches specifically different or two sorts of Christianity and Christians differing totâ specie because the faith which is here made their qualification doth specifically differ by a moral specification When the Jaylor Act. 16 30 31 32 33 34. was admitted into the Church by Baptism with his houshold it was upon the Professing of such a believing by which both he and his houshold might be saved as is before shewed And so of all others in those times Argum. 19. If we once admit men to baptism or the Lords Supper upon the Profession of any other than Justifying faith we shall be utterly confounded and not be able to give any satisfactory Description of that Faith and so never be able to Practise our Doctrine as being utterly uncertain whom to baptize That I may the better manifest this I shall examine all the considerable Descriptions of that faith which I can meet with The Papists themselves are not agreed in this business sometime they speak as if a bare Assent would serve the turn but commonly they add that there is a Necessity also of consent 1. To be subject to the Church 2. To live under the Ordinances And if they take the Intention of the party or Parents or their Godfathers and Godmothers to be necessary as they do the Intention of the Priest then a bare Profession with them will not serve nor can they tell when any one is baptized Mr. Blake doth speak so much and purposely of this Point that one would think we may expect an exact Description of this faith from him if from any man especially in his last Book when I had so earnestly Intreated him before to do it because of the omission of it in his former Book And yet even in this hath he done nothing but involve and obscure his meaning more than before though I had purposely urged him to a plain discovery of his sense even somewhat beyond the bounds of modesty as it is esteemed of in common cases For I perceived that the stress of our differences did rest much in this because no wise man will leave his grounds till he see where he may have better unless he mean to be for nothing or of no Religion there 's no reason a man should upon every opposed difficulty relinquish that he hath And here that I may do Mr. Blake no wrong I shall cite his mind in his own words and gather as many of his disclosures of it as I can find For what he hath said in his Book of the Covenants I have spoken to it already in my Apologie And I write nor for those lazy Readers that had rather err than be at the pains of reading what is already written I shall therefore suppose that and gather what he saith in his Treatise of the Sacraments Pag. 109. he saith I confess as much of Repentance in them as was required in any to the acceptation of Baptism namely A Renunciation of their false way and a professed Acceptation of the tender of the Gospel And after to renounce his way of Paganism Judaism and to profess and engage to a Christian faith conversation Here I understand not Mr. Blake's english if he do not plainly renounce his cause and say the same that I do and so make vain his industrious opposition The tender of the Gospel is the tender of Christ and pardon and life to all true Acceptors of it If the professed Accepâ—aâ—ion of this tender be not professed saving faith beyond all common faith I must despair of knowing what faith is and consequently being sure that I have it and that I may be saved by it And if professing a true Christian faith and conversation and engaging thereto be not a professing of that which is proper to the sanctified I mean in the special sense then Mr. Blake hath made a new Christian Faith and Conversation which Scripture never prescribed nor described Pag. 172. He gives another but the most express answer which is likest to be his mind For a direct answer I say it it not profession to say we have this faith but a profession of our assent to the necessity of it with engagement to it that gives this little so P. 173. I say do profess of those that have those secret reservations wrapt up in their breasts not yet from under the power of lusts yet convinced of their duty and acknowledging the Necessity that it is the mind of God that they should be Baptized and have admission to Ordinances in order to bring them more sincerely and unreservedly to God And this being the will of God as you seem to yield when you say we are bound to Baptize them I say they have right in the sight of God to Baptism I shall begin my Reply with his last passage and I must needs say that Mr. Blake doth unworthily abuse me and my words in saying that I seem to yield that we are bound to baptize them Them What them My own words which he citeth to prove this by me are these Vocation which is effectual only to bring men to an outward Profession of saving faith is larger then Election that makes men such whom we are bound to baptize Forsooth in these words I contradict my self I seem to give Mr. Blake the cause I cannot but say that it is pity the Church should be troubled with such an undigested undistinguishing management of controversies for men to write so learnedly and industriously before they observe what they say Is the outward Profession of a saving faith which I say makes men such as we are bound to baptize the same thing with the
Congregations which the Countrey knoweth to be such as you have done pag. 142 143. upon the credit of your false reporters If I have deserved such dealing from you the Christian Assemblies of Worcestershire have not Restrain your indignation to me and abuse not your Brethren that meddle not with you And what is it that is denyed unanimously by other Congregations Surely not the necessity of professing a faith that 's more than Dogmatical at least I know no such Congregations and I hope I shall never know such For all your frequent and confident intimations that yours is the common opinion of Divines and mine is singular If paper could blush abundance of such passages would confute themselves and prevent the delusion of your credulous reader who will believe you to save the labor of a tryal Pag. 185. The words of mine that are cited as against my self are these Vocation which is effectual only to bring men to an outward profession of faith is larger then Election and makes men such whom we are bound to baptize true How unhappy am I that must contradict my opinion in the very words which contain it But still will you perswade men that an outward professing of true saving faith is all one with another kind of faith no man I think knows what which you are busily promoting to be the Title to Sacraments I shall not stand to search Mr. Blake's book for more of my self-contradictions or trouble the Reader with a further vindication For in thus much he may see the face of the rest and discern the judiciousness and equity of the Charge But as Mr. Blake dealeth by me so doth he by the Authors whom he alledgeth for his opinions as pag. 152.153 154 155. and elswhere He sticks not to cite them as owning his cause who in the very words recited by him do condemn it For in those words they make the Church as visible to consist of professors as distinct from true believers and know no members but true Christians and Hypocrites who therefore pretend to that Faith which they have not or else how are they Hypocrites And what 's this to Mr. Blake's new visible members that profess only some other kind of faith or how will this warrant his new kind of Baptism which must be administred upon the Profession of another sort of Faith The Lord illuminate us and pardon all the wrong we have done to his Church and Truth through our darkness and self-conceitedness The third Disputation Quest. Whether the Infants of Notoriously-ungodly baptized Parents have Right to be Baptized Tertullian Apologet. cap. 16. Sed dices Etiam de nostris excedere quosdam à Regulâ Disciplinae Desunt tum Christiani haberi penès nos Philosophi verò illi cum talibus factis in nomine honore sapientiae perseverant Thes. Salmuriens Vol. 3. Pag. 59. Thes. 39. Sacramenta non conferuntur nisi iis qui vel fidem habent vel saltem eam prae se ferunt adeò ut nullis certis argumentis compertum esse possit eam esse ementitam Aaron's Rod Blossoming pag. 514. I believe No conscientious Minister would adventure to baptize one who hath manifest and infallible signs of Unregeneration Sure we cannot be answerable to God if we should minister Baptism to a man whose works and words do manifestly declare him to be an unregenerated unconverted person And if we may not Initiate such a one how shall we bring him to the Lords Table Rutherford Due Right of Presbyteries pag. 231. n. 2. But saith Robinson most of England are ignorant of the first Rudiments and Foundation of Religion and therefore cannot be a Church Answ. Such are materially not the visible Church and have not a Profession and are to be taught and if they wilfully remain in that darkness are to be cast out The third Disputation Quest. Whether the Infants of Notoriously ungodly Baptized Parents have Right to be Baptized THE Question is of the greater moment because about Matter of Practice and that in a Point wherein the Honor of God on one side and the Rights of mens Souls on the other are so much concerned It supposeth first that Baptism is Gods Ordinance of continued Use and that some are to be Baptized Secondly that it is a Benefit or else we could not in the sense now used be said to have Right to it Thirdly It supposeth that some Infants have Right to be Baptized This Question therefore is not to be disputed with the Anabaptists who deny the presupposed And they that are so indifferent in the former as to take it for an inconsiderable matter Whether Infants be baptized or not must needs judge this Question of the Infants of the Ungodly to be much more inconsiderable Fourthly Yet doth it not suppose that the Infants of any ungodly persons have this Right as if it were only the Right of Notorious ones that were disputable but the word Notorious is added to limit our present Dispute to that sort for several Reasons at this time passing by the other but not taking it for granted Fifthly Nor doth the Addition of the term Baptized to Parents take it for granted that no children of unbaptized Parents have such Right But it limits the Question to that sort only as fitter in several respects for our Dispute For the explication of the terms 1. By Infant we mean Children not yet come to the use of Reason so that as they are not sui Juris but at anothers dispose so they are uncapable naturally in any Contract to dispose of themselves being unfit to give consent through a natural defect of that understanding which is pre-requisite By a natural Defect I mean of nature in it self considered and not as corrupted by sin nor as neglected sinfully by our selves or others So that I see not but that Ideots are in the same condition as Infant children But of that let every one think as they see cause In Law homo primae aetatis is an Infant even after he can speak though as to the Etymologie he be called an Infant quia fari nescit i. e. loqui non potest ut Isidor lib. 11.2 2. By Parents we mean principally Natural Parents those who begat those Infants but secondarily also as I suppose those that have Adopted them or bought them or received them as given or delivered to them so that they any way become Their Own and they have the dispose of them and are enabled to enter them into Covenant so as to oblige them on the highest terms Though I know it is not properly that these are called Parents The word Parent is primarily applicable to the Mother only as not being à Parendo but à Pariendo and thence to the Father also because of the Relation between Gigno Pario and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sometime used for Genero And though the word Parens be not usually applied to those that Adopt yet Pater is And not unfitly
enquiry Which is the Church that hath this Infallibility Unless we say that all have it that call themselves the Church against which many Councils have Judged when they required the rebaptizing of all that were baptized by the Paulianists c. In a word all the Arguments which we use against the Papal Infallibility might be here taken up and Voluminously managed against this And if Mr. Blake disown this Infallibility there is no way left but either to say that God hath no Judgement of this Case but what is fallible which I hope he will not or that God hath one Judgement of it and the Church another and then we have that we seek If he say that God hath no immediate Judgement at all of it but only the Churches which is mediately his I answer 1. The Churches is not mediately his when it is sinfully erroneous 2. If God have a knowledge and observance of it then he hath a Judgement of it But to deny Gods knowledge or observance of it is intolerable therefore 3. And I must say that since I have observed in Scripture both the use that God makes of good Angels and of evil about the sons of men and what appearances they make before him Job 1. and how the faithful have their Angels beholding Gods face how they have charge of us and bear us up and are ministring spirits for our good and how the Excommunicate are delivered up to Satan with much more of the like I easily believe that God may well be said to have a forum and pass his sentences on the sons of men before his Angels were it but by committing his will to Execution by them For so far as they are Executioners they must have a Commission for Execution which containeth or implieth the sentence And so there is a Justification and a Condemnation now before them Argum. 2. If God have no other Judgement about Right to Ordinances but the Churches Judgement then Hypocrites have equal Right before God and before the Church or Judice Deo Judice Ecclesia yea it is the same Right which is more than equal Right But the Consequent is false therefore so is the Antecedent A Jew that would make a jest of Christ and Baptism by a feigned Profession hath such a Right Ecclesia Judice as that the Church cannot contradict it But God can contradict it The Church cannot find any imperfection in it but God can Ecclesia Judice his Right is as good as the soundest Believers but God will not say so He may charge the Church with doing him wrong if they deny him the Sacrament but so he cannot charge God if he hinder or prohibit it Surely God will acknowledge a further Title to Sacraments in the Saints than such a Jew or Pagan hath Argum. 3. Where there are different Executions there are different Judgements But God hath an Execution different from the Churches in this Case as is apparent 1 Cor. 11. For this cause many are sick and weak c. If we would judge our selves we should not be judged c. Therefore God hath a Judgement differing from the Churches Argum. 4. If about all humane acts God have a Judgement differing from mans then about the present Case But the Antecedent is so evident and so momentous that I hope few Christians will question it Instead of arguing such a Cause any further I shall lament the case of the Church among us that any should be found among its Reverend Pious Guides that shall so confidently publish or so easily entertain as some seem to do so strange a point as this which we oppose For how far may they yet be led that can so easily be led to this Compassion of the Church of Christ doth urge me to speak thus though I know to the guilty its like to be offensive But yet we may thank God that there be so few of such conceits sure I am it is ordinary with Protestants and Papists in such cases to distinguish between forum Dei Ecclesiae Gods Judgement and the Churches Instead of citing many I shall now take up with one only whose Cause against the Separatists did lead him so much to have entertaâ—ned the helps that lie on that side that if he had thought this notion of Mr. Blakes sound he was very like to have received it Rutherford in his due Right of Presb. Cap. 9. § 9. p. 242. Dist. 1. Any who blamelesly professeth Christ is Ecclesiastically in foro Ecclesiae a true and valid member of the Church visible having Ecclesiastical power valid for that effect but except he be a sincere believer he is not morally and in foro Dei a living member of the invisible Church Dist. 3. The Invisible Church Catholick is the principal prime and native subject of all the Priviledges of Christians the Covenant Promises Title of Spouse Bride Redeemed Temple of the holy Spirit c. And the Church Visible as she is such is no waies such a subject the non-consideration whereof we take to be the ground of many Errors in our Reverend Brethren in this matter which also deceived Papists as our Divines demonstrate Dist. 4. A seen Profession is the ground of members admission to the Visible Church Hence there is a satisfaction of the Conscience of the Church in admitting of members either in the Judgement of Charity or in the Judgement of Verity Dist. 5. There is a satisfaction in the Judgement of Charity Positive when we see signs which positively assure us that such an one is Regenerate and there is a satisfaction Negative when we know nothing on the contrary which hath a latitude for I have a Negative satisfaction of the Regeneration of some whose persons and behaviour I know neither by sight or report This is not sufficient for the accepting of a Church-membership therefore somewhat more is required pag. 244. Concl. 2. The Invisible and not the Visible Church is the principal prime and only proper subject with whom the Covenant of Grace is made to whom all the Promises do belong and to whom all Titles Styles Properties and Priviledges of special note in the Mediator do belong If our Reverend Brethren would be pleased to see this they would forsake their doctrine of a visible constituted Church c. 1. The Church to whom the Covenant and the Promises of the Covenant are made is a Church and a seed which shall endure as the daies of heaven Psal. 89.35 36. and such as can no more fall away from being Gods people in an eternal Covenant with him then their God can alter what he hath spoken or lie Psal. 89.33 34 35. They can no more cease from being in Gods favour or be cast off of God than the Ordinances of Heaven can depart from before God c. Jer. 31.35 36 37. Isa. 54.10 or then God can retract his Oath and Promises Heb. 6.18 19 20. But the Visible Church of this or that Parish c. Pag.
Church For we are Members of his Body and of his flesh and of his bones See also Ephes. 4 12 13 14 15 16. 1 Cor. 12.12 13 26 27. For as the Body is One and hath many members and all the members of that one Body being many are one Body so also is Christ. For by One spirit we are all baptized into one Body And whether one member suffer all the members suffer with it or one member be honoured all the members necessary to say somewhat to the point which I shall do with as much brevity as I can without injury to the Cause Because here are several Titles commonly given to unsound Professors which the Question doth take in and we cannot speak to them all at once I shall begin at the first and then the rest may easily be dispatcht yea the most that needs to be said concerning them will fall in in order to the handling of the first But what shall we do for a Judge or Rule for the determining of our Controversie Custom is the Master of Language and if any one will pretend to so much reason as to tell the signification of words from the bare Etymologie contrary to Customs interpretation the world will but laugh at him For how well soever he plaies his part he will but tell us how such words should be used and not how they are used and therefore he will help us to the right understanding of no mans words or writings thereby It s Custom therefore and not Etymologie that we must be judged by But Custom is here double-tongued The world is not agreed of the sense of Analoga nor well of aequivocals and univocals I must crave of the Reader that he will suppose here what I have already written about these terms to Dr. Kendall that I need not to repeat what is there The Controversie though but nominal is old between the Papists and the Protestants and the Protestants have commonly maintained all along since the Reformation that Hypocrites or meer Professors are but Aequivocally called Members of the Church The Papists have resisted them in this and yet been forced in the opposition to cut the throat of their own Cause Though it be the Defence of the old Protestant Cause here that is finally my Business yet it is the late opposition made against it by two Protestant Divines that is the occasion of my undertaking to wit Mr. Blake and since him Mr. Humphrey And yet with them I need not have much ado For if we are not agreed we know not well the state of our difference and therefore have happily made our selves uncapable of following it far by Controversie as being in the dark In my writing to Mr. Blake I use to say that such men are Church-members Christians Saints c. but Equivocally or Analogically as being willing to avoid all needless Controversie about words but sometime supposing that Assertion I use the common language of the Protestants and mention equivocally only I do not remember that Mr. Blake doth affirm that such men and true Believers are univocally called Church-members Covenanters Christians c. nor yet that he denieth it so that I know not what he is for but what he is against I partly know For the term Equivocal here he tells us that he abhors But he would take it as tolerable if I had used the term Analogical And if that might reconcile us it is but his more heedfull reading of my words and he will finde that I do ordinarily use it As pag. 62. lin 4 5. It is an imperfect Consent Analogically or Equivocally called Covenanting c. And after at the bottom of the page and therefore such are said as to the Faith Consent and Covenant so required but Equivocally or Analogically to Consent Covenant or Believe c. And pag. 64. lin 6 7. these men in proper strict sense are no true Christians but Analogically only And pag. 65. As he is Equivocally or Analogically a Beleiver or Christian so I yeild he is a Member of the visible Church c. These and other such places may satisfie Mr. Blake if the term Analogical will satisfie him Well! but yet the term Equivocal he abhors If so then he must either judge that they are Univocally called Church-members Saints c. or else that there is a third between Univocal and Equivocal The former he speaks not out the later I suppose he knoweth is denied by many Philosophers with so much reason as that it deserveth his pains for a better proof It s like he hath read it inter leges Aequivocorum in the Logicks commonly read in the Schools that Omne Analogum est Aequivocum as Fascic Log. pag. 21. alii It s agreed on that Vnivoca vel Synonyma are sometimes taken so strictly for Paronyma and sometime so largely as to comprehend the paronyma si careant homonymia and thus it is that we have to do with the term Burgersdicius divideth Genus in synonymum sive univocum homonymum sive aequivocum and makes all that is spoken inequaliter de speciebus suis to be Genus aequivocum But then he meaneth not by inaequaliter that meer inequality in the Degree of Excellency in the several species on which some Scotists affirm that Animal is Genus Analogum quoad hominem brutum because man is prastantius animal but cùm una species ab alterâ pendet and so the Genus doth magis uni alteri minus convenire aut uni mediatè alteri per alterum And so he concludeth that Ens si genus sit aequivocum genus est quia substantia magis est Ens quam Accidens imò Accidens non est Ens nisi quia quatenas pendet a substantia Yet this which is by the Schoolmen called Analogum attributionis is as like to belong to Univocals as any Analogum is as the same Author saith pag. 155. Omnium longissimè à synonymis absunt homonyma a casu quaeque causam homonymiae habent in nobis propiùs ad synonymorum naturam accedunt tropica ac imprimis analoga at omnium proximè quae ambigua sunt ob inaequalem attributionem And yet these doth he there again reckon among the homonyma or aquivoca dividing homonymie into that which is á Casu and that which is à Consilio and into that whole Reason is in nobis and whose Reason is in rebus among which this inaequalis attributionis is the highest which the School-men call Anologie For which Burgensdicius Keckerman and other of our Logicians with some contempt reject the School-mens doctrine of Analogae Scotus maintaineth that inter Vnivocat Aequivoca non datur medium in 1 Dist. 8. q. 2. For 1 Denominatives as divers of the Scotists shew at large and its past doubt are not media between them Nam licet non praedicentur univocè de suis subjectis quia de illis non praedicantur essentialiter sed denominative tamen sunt
as to their more profitable use of Ordinances but make no other conditions of their Right then God hath made 4. It is onely a Profession that 's serious voluntrary not contradicted prevalently by word or life which you must take as is before described And do you take it to be so unreasonable a matter to believe a man fide humana who speak's of his own heart which another cannot see when you can bring no evidence to disprove his words If you know any thing by his life that certainly proves his Profession false admonish him of it in the order that Christ hath directed you to till he either hear the Church or be rejected by the Church or at least by not hearing the Church do give you cause to take him as a Heathen or Publican but be not so much against the Scripture and 2. All discipline that ever the Church hath used And against common justice and reason as to do this by men on your own private judgement without evidence and a just tryal and once hearing them speak for themselves and many do that will unchurch a whole Parish and gather a new one on supposition of the invalidity of a bare Profession and on supposition that most are ignorant and ungodly before they have ever once accused them particularly or dealt with or excluded any of them in the way that Christ appointeth If I certainly knew that in this Parish there were 4000 unregenerate Persons and not 400 or 100 truly regenerate and yet knew not particularly which the unregenerate Persons were I ought not to cast out one man from the Church upon any such account Object But with what comfort can the Godly have communion with the societies that are so mixt with multitudes of the ungodly Answ. If they do not their duty in admoishing the offenders and labouring to heal the diseased members and to reform the Church in Christs appointed way Mat. 18.17 Then you may well ask With what comfort can such Professors live in the sinful neglect of their own duty But if they faithfully do their own part how should the sins of others â—e their burden unless by way of common compassion And how have Gods servant in all ages of the Church to this day received comfort in such mixt Communion These Objectors shew that they seek more of their comfort in men then is meet or that they discomfort themselves with their own fancies when they have no cause of discomfort given them from without but what must be born to the end of the world by al that wil walk in the waies of Christ. Object But it is the Communion of Saints that we believe and must endeavour Answ. True internal spiritual Communion with hearty Saints and External communion with professed Saints For real Saints in heart are unknown to us Ob. But the greater part do not so much as Profess to be Saints Answ. They that profess to believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and to renounce the world the Flesh and the Devil do profess to be Saints so do they that profess to repent of all sin and to be willing to live according to the word of God But I meet but with very few that will not profess all this Object They will say these words indeed but in the mean time they will scorn at godliness or disclaim it by their lives Answ. Those that do so must be dealt with in Christs way as Church-members till either they hear the Church or be rejected for their impenitency but you must not dare upon this account to unchurch whole Parishes nor ordinarily any one Person that hath not been dealt with in the order that Christ hath appointed To conclude this Disputation I find that the two things before mentioned are great occasions of the proneness of many godly people to schism The one is because they do not understand that Christ hath so contrived in it the Gospel that every man shall be either the Introducter of himself by Profession or the Excluder of himself by the rejection of Christianity And so that all Church admissions or rejections shall be but the consequents of his own choice that the chief comfort or the blame may be upon himself And this is partly from the admirable freedom and extensiveness of Gospel Grace which the sons of Grace should glorifie and rejoyce in and not murmur at and dishonour and partly from the wise dispensations of our Legislator that he may deal with men on clear grounds in their absolution or condemnation before all the world 2. The other cause of the schismatical inclination of some godly people is the great mistake of too many in confining all the fruits of Christs death and the mercies or graces of God to the Elect and so not considering the difference that there ever was and will be between the visible Church of Professors and the invisible Church of true Believers Alas Brethren in the name of Christ let me speak it to your hearts do you grudge a few common Priviledges to common Professors when you have the best and choysest part your selves you have Christ himself and do you grudg them the name of Christians or the bare symbole or signs of his body and blood You have sincerity of faith and Repentance and answerably you have true Remission and Reconciliation They have the profession of Faith and Repentance and do you grudg them the empty signs of a Remission which they have lost by their hypocrisie and Unbelief You have Inward communion with Christ in the Spirit as you have Inward faith Do you grudg an Externâ—l communion with the Church to them that have the External profession of Faith O Remember that the Net of the Gospel bringeth good and bad to the shore and the tares must grow with the wheat till harvest and then is the time that you shall have your desire The second Disputation Quest. Whether Ministers must or may Baptize the Children of those that Profess not saving faith upon the Profession of any other faith that comes short of it IT may seem strange that after 1625. years use of Christian Baptism the Ministers of the Gospel should be yet unresolved to whom it doth belong yet so it is And I observe that it is a Question that they are now very solicitous about And I cannot blame them it being not only about a matter of Divine appointment but a practical of such concernment to the Church I shall upon this present occasion give you my thoughts of it as briefly as I can which contain nothing that I know of which is new or singular but the Explication and Vindication of the commonly received truth We here suppose that Baptism is still a needfull Ordinance of Christ and that Infants are to be Baptized and that Ministers are the persons that should Baptize them so that it is none of our work at this time either to defend the Ordinance it self against the Seekers nor the
sequitur pontificem malum non esse câ—put ecclesiae alios episcopos si mâ—li sunt non esse capita suarum ecclesiarum Caput enim non est humor aut pilus sed membrum quidem praecipuum This put him on distinguishing and yet at last he could bring it but to this Dico episcopum malum presbyterum malum Doctorem malum esse meÌ„bra mortua perinde non vera corporis Christi quantuÌ„ attinet ad rationem meÌ„bri ut est pars quaedam vivi corporis tamen esse verissima membra in ratione instrumenti id est papâ—m episcopos esse vera capita c. ratio est quia membra viva constituuntur per charitateÌ„ qua impâ—i carent at instrumenta operativa constituuntur per potestatem sive ordinis sive jurisdictionis And what is this more then the wooden leg or silver teeth which our Divines compare them to But the new Papists since Bellarmine do see a necessity of a further distinguishing the Church as a visible political society from the Church as truly sanctified But that which we and all the ancients do make to be but the Profession distinct from the thing professed the body distinct from the soul the chaff distinct from the wheat the shell distinct from the kernel they make to be as the lower order which is the way to a higher as the Alphabet or lower Rudiments which are the way to Grammar as an apprentiship to a trade I mean as a state of preparation to a state of infallible salvation And because it favoureth their main design they seem to draw near to the same conceit which they were wont falsly to fasten on the Protestants viz. that there are two â—hurches one Political and visible the other regenerate Invisible And Bellarmine confesseth that some of them were of this mind in his time And all this stir is that they may advance their visible Church in the estimation of men thereby the more easily keep the rule in their own hands and exalt themselves above Scripture and draw as many as may be into their society and therefore they drive the poor ignorant Americans by hundreds to be baptized as we drive our beasts to watering or our sheep to be washed and in stead of staying till they make Profession of a saving faith with any seeming seriousness they make Baptism an entrance into the state of the Catechumeni which was wont to be the passage thence into the state of Christians that per fas aut nefas they may engage people to themselves under pretence of engaging them to Christ therefore it is that they so over extoll the visible Political state of the Church as Dr. Prideaux saith Lect. de visibil eccles pag. 128. Experti demum perciperunt externam ecclesiae pompam speciosos titulos apud instabiles plus lucrari quam non lectam vel saltem non intellectam scripturae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hinc ecclesiam ad ravint usque crepant Catholicam quam admissam statim restringunt ad Romae synagogam suco quidem veteratorio sed conspicuo satis ridiculo ut ex conficta ecclesia formeiur doctrina non ex veritate doctrinae reformetur firmetur ecclesia The chief adversaries therefore we have here to deal with are the Papists who over-magnifie the visible face of the Church make the faith of men unjustified to be true faith though not formatacharitate and make Hypocrites and and wicked Professors to be truly and properly fideles and members of the Church whom the Protestants affirm to be but secundum quid materially analogically yea equivocally called members or fideles and therefore they make Baptism to be an appointed means to admit men into this visible Political Church as into the ordinary way and passage to the state of saving grace or justification but not ordinarily into the present possession of it And therefore in conformity to all this they maintain that we must admit persons to Baptism upon the bare Profession of faith that is Assent with consent to be under the Government of the Church and the use of ordinances in order to be a better state For saith Bellarmine it is not Charity but Faith which makes a Christian which our divines admit as true in our sense of the word Faith which includeth the will and is proper to the truly regenerate but they deny it in his sense of it who maketh faith to be the only Assent of the intellect Against this adversary therefore I shall principally bend the force of my Arguments though to my great trouble I must be forced to deal also with a Reverend Brother of our own especially in answering his many fallacious arguments which he hath lately heaped up for that part which I must oppose 4. Before I can positively answer the question in hand I must premise these few necessary Distinctions 1. We must distinguish between a Profession of faith according to the Ministers sense of the words and a Profession according to the speakers sense 2. Between the Children of those that profess not saving faith as theirs and claiming Baptism on the account of some lower Profession and the same Children as owned by some other that do profess saving faith 3. Between the unlawfulness of Baptizing and the Nullity of the Baptism Those distinctions that are necessary for the answering of the objections will come in their places Upon these few I answer the question negatively explained in the following Propositions 1. It is not a Profession of saving Faith in the real intention of the Professor that we affiâ—m necessary but in the Apprehension of the Minister judging of the words according to their common use and acception For we know not the heart of the Professor and therefore know not certainly whether he intend those words as a Profession or not I do not mean whether he be sincere in his Profession and intend the thing Professed for that 's no part of the Profession it self but I mean whether he use the words which he speaks in the sense which they seem to us to import and which they are used in by those that best understand their common signification For example a Papist presenteth a Child to be Baptized Professing to believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost I know that these words according to the Scripture use of them signifie a true saving faâ—th but I am not sure whether the speaker do understand any more by them then a lower faith of meer Assent If I knew he meant no more I would require him to express a saving faith before I would Baptize his Child on his account but if I know it not nor have just reason to question it I must take the words as they are commonly used and seem to be intended by him and so if it appear to me to be a Profession of saving faith though I err and my errour be innocent it is my duty
his house and was baptized that same hour of the night or straight way It is here evident that he professed the same faith which Paul required or else the equivocation would make the text not intelligible And that which was required was a saving faith Acts 18 8. Crispus the chief ruler of the Synagouge believed on the Lord with all his house and many of the Corinthians hearing believed and were baptized Here we have two proofs that it is saving faith that is mentioned One in that it is called a believing on the Lord which expresseth saving faith Another in that it is the faith which related to the doctrine preached to them as is expressed in the word Hearing that which they heard they believed but they heard the promise as well as the History of the Gospel and they heard of the Goodness as well as the Truth and they heard Christ offered to them as their only Saviour for Paul never preached Christ but in this manner and to these ends even as might tend to their Justification and Salvation and it was a saving faith that he still exhorted men to Those in Acts 19.5 were baptized as Believers in Jesus Christ which is saving faith whether it were by John's Baptism or by Paul or others I now enquire not And what all the Churches were supposed to be to whom the Apostles wrote I have shewed before In a word I know of no one word in Scripture that giveth us the least intimation that ever man was baptized without the Profession of a saving faith or that giveth the least encouragement to baptize any upon another faith But before we proceed Mr. Blake's exceptions against some of these â—rguments from the forecited texts must come under consideration how little soever they deserve it pag. 166. To what I said from Mat. 28.29 I am very sory to hear the constitution of visible Churches to suffer the brand of making of counterfeit and half Christians Answ. For all that I will not be moved with pity to err because you are sorry to hear the truth 1. Church constitutions make not Christians of one sort or other but contain them when made 2. And my arguing was to prove that every faithful Pastor must intend the making of sincere Christians and not only counterfeit or half-Christians This is a truth that so good a man should not have been sorry to hear 3. If you mean that visible Churches contain not counterfeit and half-Christians you might have been sorry long before this to hear both Protestants and Papists say the contrary You add Its well known whose language it is that all charging duty on unregenerate persons is only to bring them to hypocrisie Answ. And if the end of that duty were no higher than to bring men to be counterfeit Christians they had not said amiss When we hear that charge it is for perswading men to hear pray c. for sincere faith But if I perswade men to become Christians and mean only the Professors of faith without the thing professed or the believing with another sort of faith then I might well be charged with perswading some to hypocrisie and the other to be half-Christians 2. You have not yet proved that Baptizing the Professors of a lower faith is the appointed means to bring them to saving faith You say In order to make men sincere Disciples they must be made visible professing Disciples Answ. If there be not a palpable equivocation you must mean that it is the same Discipleship which some have sincerely and others but visibly by profession and then it must be the same faith And then you say to this effect that in order to make men sincere they must profess seem to be so before they are so that is a lie is the appointed means to make the thing spoken become true But if according to the current of your doctrine you mean in the later branch of your distinction those only that profess another sort of faith and so equivocate in the word Disciples then I answ 1. Your Disciples are no Disciples nor so called once in Scripture 2. Nor is that any thing to baptism till you have proved that baptism also annexed to your Discipleship is a means appointed to bring them to a higher saving faith You tell us that men may be half Christians in order to be whole Christians Answ. But not baptized to that end nor must the Preacher intend the making of any half-Christians and no more What you mention out of Ames of taking stones out of the quarry to polish c. is nothing to the purpose Baptizing them is not polishing them that is preparing them for conversion according to the Institution but it s the placing polished stones in the building To polish them for the building is to make them true Disciples and not Professors of another kind of faith Pâ—g 168. When I say that to be Christs Disciples is to be one that unfeignedly takes him for his Master c. You answer that This is true as to the inheritance of Heaven but not as to the ininheritance of Ordinances The Jew outwardly was not thus qualified Repl. 1. Our question is what is a Disciple and what 's your answer to that unless you distinguish of two sorts and mean that another sort there are that inherite Ordinances 2. And then I say further some Ordinances are without the Church and those may have them that are no Disciples and fâ—r those proper to the Church none have right to them but who at least profess the foresaid Discipleship I wonder what your three sorts of Disciples will prove that do not profess to take Christ for their Master Next where Mr. Blake would have proved the Text not to be meant of sound Believers because they are such Disciples as a whole Nation is capable to be I answered that whole Nations are capable of saving faith and proved it to which he mentioneth the capacity of stones to be made Children As if men had no more then stones And as if God could not make all in a Nation believers by the same means us he makes some such He turns to the question what a Nation is capable of to what may be expected â—nd argueth as if they were capable of no more than we may eventually expect and saith this that is a doctrine so clear that proof needs not Where there never shal be any futurity we may well and safely speak of an incapacity Ans. As if omne possibâ—le esset futurum and men should have every thing good or bad which they are capable of A sad world when among learned Divines such sayings are Truths that need no proofs as if the contradictories of our Principles were become Principles It s added Capacity is vain when it is known coâ—fest that existence shall never follow Answ. Hath such an assertion bin usually heard among the worshippers of the Creator the admirers of his works If one of
not renounce the world flesh and the Dâ—vil oâ— that declareth certainly that he will not renounce thâ—m at that time But such are all notorious ungodly men Therefore the Church hath ever required this in Baptism Arg. 7. We may not baptize those whom we notoriously know to be at present uncapable of receiving remission of sins for that is the use of the Ordinance according to Gods institution But such are all the notoriously ungodly Therefore I need not here I suppose with those I deal with answâ—r the Antinomian's Objection from Rom. 4. of justifying the ungodly I have said enough to that against Lud. Colvinus and others Arg. 8. Men that be notoriously unfit for Marriage with Christ to be solemnized are unfit by us to be baptized or any for them But such are all the notoriously ungodly Ergo c. Arg. 9. We may not baptize those that we know do notoriously dissemble in making the Baptismal Covenant But such are all notoriously ungodly Ergo c. Arg. 10. We may not give him the Seal of the righteousness of Faith who notoriously declareth that he hath not that Righteousness But such are all notoriously ungodly Ergo c. Arg. 11. From Matth. 28.19 20. Before we baptize men or any for their sakes we must see in probability that they are made Disciple But so are not the notoriously ungodly Ergo c. Arg. 12. Those that we must Baptize or any for their sakes must seem to believe with all their hearts Acts 8.37 And to receive the word gladly Acts 2.38.39 41. And to believe with a saving faith Mark 16.15 16. Acts 16.31 â—2 33. But so do not any that are notoriously ungodly Ergo. These Texts and many such like are our Directory whom to Baptize Arg. 13. From 1 Cor. 7.14 Else were your children unclean If one of the immediate Parents be not a Believer their children are unclean and consequently not to be baptized But notorious ungodly ones are not Believers Ergo As they must be Believers that they may have Right and be Holy so must they seem Believers that they may seem to have Right and so be baptized by us warrantably But such seem not to have Faith who are notorioâ—sly Ungodly It is Objected that this Text determineth of one way of Covenant-Right to Infants but doth not thereby deny all other Answ. 1. It is peremptory in the Negative Else were your children unclean as well as in the Affirmative but now are they Holy 2. It therefore excludeth expresly all other wayes of interest in the Covenant by Birth-Priviledge Else how could that Negative be true But I confess it doth not exclude all means else of an after acquisition or reception of Covenant-Right For he that is born unclean may become by purchase or contract the child of a Believer or at age may believe himself And then he ceaseth to be unclean 3. At least it seems yielded by thâ—m that if both Parents be unbelievers the child can have no Right Aâ— theirs or on theâ—r account It s Objected that this was true of the Corinthians whose Ancestors â—ere Infidels and themsâ—lves the first Converts their children were unclean if one of them were not a believer but it holdeth not of them that had pious Ancestors Answ. 1. This yieldeth the point which is now in question that is that On their Parents account such children have no right 2. It contradicteth the Apostle's express Affirmation who saith that they are unclean which can extend to no less than the denyal of Holiness by Bâ—rth-Priviledge 3. Noah was the Progenitor remote of those Corinthians and he was not unclean Yet that makes not them Holy Else no man shoul'd be unholy Arg. 14. Rom. 11. The Israelites and their children with them are broken off because of Unbelief Therefore Notorious Unbelievers and their children are to be judged as no Church-members nor to be baptized And that all Notorious Ungodly ones are Notorious Unbelievers I have proved and may yet refute the ordinary Objections to the contrary Arg. 15. We may not lawfully baptize those children for their Parents sake whose Parents are ipso jure Excommunicated from the society of Christians as such or are justly to be pronounced No Members of the Universal Church Visible or Invisible But all Notoriously Ungodly are in one of these ranks Ergo. To explain my meaning in this Argument Observe 1. that I take not the common doctrine for true that a particular Political or Organized Church or incorporated Society of Christians is a meer Homogeneal part of the universal Visible Church All the Universal Church doth not consist of such Societies no more than all this Common-wealth doth consist of Corporations For a particular Church is as a particular Body-Corporate and all the Members of the Universal are not so Though all ought to be so that can attain it yet all cannot attain it and all do not what they ought Even in an Army a Souldier may be lifted by a General Officer into the Army in general long before he is placed in any Regiment or Troop yea there are some that are Messengers and for other employments that are not to be of any Regiment So sometime a man is baptized as the Eunuch before he be entred into any particular Church perhaps long And some were of Churches which are dissolved and stay long before they can joyn themselves to others And some live as Merchants in a moveable travelling condition And some are bound for the good of the Common-wealth to be Embassadors or Agents or Factors c. resident among Infidels where is no Church And some may be called to preach up and down among Infidels for their conversion as the Apostles did and fix themselves to no particular Church And some may be too ignorant or neglective of their duty in incorporating with any And some upon infirmity and scrupulosity hold off So that its apparent that all the Visible Church is not thus Incorporated into particular Churches 2. I do firmly believe that Baptism as Baptism doth list enter or admit us only into the Universal Church directly and not into any particular Church but yet consequentially it oft doth both And as the Parent is so is it supposed that the Infant is If the Parent live an itinerant life and bring his child to Baptism that child is entered into the Universal Church only except he leave the child resident in any particular Church and desire it may be a member of it But if the Parent be a member of a particular Church when we Baptize his child we receive it first into the universal Church and then into that particular as an imperfect member For we justly suppose it is the Parents desire which is it that determineth this Case 3. I firmly believe that the common opinion is an Error that All that are cast out of a particular Church are cast out of the universal 4. Yea or that he that is put out of one particular
because he is baptized and professeth Regeneration and is entered extrinsecally into a new society And the lower sort of Believers is said to be regenerate but only because he hath some common work of another species so that Regeneration is equivocally spoken of these 5. So also is Justification It s clear that it is not the same thing that is called Justification in the one sort and in the other as I suppose will be confessed 6. The same also I may say of Adoption as is undeniable 7. And the same I may say of being in Covenant with God For 1. ex parte Dei with the Regenerate God is actually in Covenant that is as it were obliged to them but to the rest it is but conditionally which will induce no actual Obligation or Debitum till the Condition be performed 2. And on their own part the regenerate are said to Covenant with God principally because they consent to his terms and heartily Accept his Covenant as it is which Scripture calleth sometime their Believing If thou believe in thy heart c. and sometime their Willing whosoever will let him drink of the waters of Life freely so that the Regenerate mans Covenating is alwaies with the Heart and comprehendeth all the Essentials and sometime with the Mouth also But the bare Professors Covenanting is but with the mouth alone and the lower Believers is wanting in the internal Essentials so that it is plain that it is not the same thing that is called Covenanting in them and therefore the word is equivocal And then by this it is put out of doubt that they are equivocally called Church members Because the things forementioned that constitute their Church-membership are not the same If any Papist should here set in and with Bellarmine plead that it is Profession and Engagement to Church Politie that constituteth all Members and that the Church in its first notion signifieth only the visible Body and that Faith and Holiness or any thing intrinsick is not necessary to make a Member but only to maâ—e a living Member 1. I shouâ—d desire such to be at the pains to see what our Dâ—vines Amesius Whitaker and abundance more have said already to shew the vanity of this yea and its self-contradiction 2. Were it not done by so many already I would shew such from many Scriptures and Fathers that the word Church in our Christian sense doth principally signifie the number that are cordially congregate unto Christ and united to him 3. But whomsoever the word is first applyed to it is certain if it be applyed to both that it is equivocal unless you will say that it signifieth some Generical nature in common to both which cannot be as is aforesaid and if it were granted 1. It would exclude the spiritual aggregation to Christ to be the Ratio nominis contrary to Scripture and 2. It would exclude all Saints that have not the opportunity of a visible profession and conjunction with the Visible Body from being of the Church and so from Salvation Or 3. It would make two Churches specifically distinct which both Papists and Protestants do so vehemently disavow Having thus given my Reasons from the common description of Equivocals and the nature of the things why I say that meer Professors and consequently visible Members as such are but equivocally called Believers Christians Saints Members c. I shall next come to Authority and enquire what is the Custom of Divines in this case seeing that Custom is so much the master of Speech and it is only Protestant Divines that I shall alledge because it is for the sake of Protestants that I write to disswade them from siding with the Papists in this point For between them and us it is so antient and well known a Controversie that with men that are exercised in such Writings my allegations will be needless but for the sake of some confident men that have derided the common â—ssertions of Protestant against Papists as if they were singularly mine I shall annex some of the words of our most esteemed Writers by which these men may discern the minds of the rest wishing that such men would rather have been at the pains to have read the Authors themselves than to suffer their passions and tongues to over-run their understandings 1. Calvin in 1 Cor. 12. His interea duobus ep thâ—tis declarat quinam habendi sint inter vera Ecclesiae membra quâ— ad ejus Communionem pr priè pertineant Nisi enim vitae sanctimoniâ Christianum te ostendas delitescere quidem in Ecclesiâ poteris sed ex eá tamen nâ—n eris Sanctificari ergò in Christo oâ—ortet omnes qui in populo Dei censeri volunt Porrò â—anctificationis verbum sâ—gregation in signâ—ficat ea sit in nobis quum per spiritum in vitae novitatem regeneramur ut serviamus Deo non Mundo Unà cum omnibus invoc Et hoc commune est piorum omnium Epitheton Quod exponunt quidam de solâ Professione mihi frigâ—dum videtur ab usu Scripturae alienum est Idem Institut lib. 4 cap. 1. sect 7 De Ecclâ—siâ visibili qué sub cognitionem nostram cadit quale judicium facere conveniat ex superioribus â—am lâ—quere existimo Diximus enim bifariam de Ecclesiâ Sacras Literas loqui Interdum quum Ecclesiam nominant tam intelligunt quae reverâ est coram Deo in quam nulli recipiuntur nâ—si qui Adoptionis gratiâ filii Dei sunt spiricûs sanctificatione vera Christi membra Saepe autem Ecclesiae nomine universam hominum multitudinem in orbe diffusam designat quae unum se Deum Christum colere profitetur In hâc autem plurimi sunt permixti hypocritae qui nihil Christi habent praeter titulum speciem plurimi ambitiosi avari invidi maledici aliqui impurioris vitae qui ad tempus tolerantur vel quia legitimo judicio convinci nequeunt vel quia non semper ea viget disciplinae veritas quae debebat 2. Beza in Confess Christ. fid p. 34. c. 5. sect 8. De veris Ecclesiae membris Vera sunt Ecclesia membra qui characterem illum habent Christianorum proprium id est fidem Fidelis autem aliquis ex eo agnoscitur quòd unicum Servatorem Jesum Christum agnoscit fugit peccatum studet Justitiae Ãdque ex praescripto Verbi Dei. Nam quod ad rel quos homines attinet cujuscunque tandem sint statû◠vel conditionis non sunt numerandi inter Ecclesiae membra etiam si ut ità loquar Apostolatu fungereÌ„tur Sed hîc cavâ—ndum est nè vel ulteriùs progrediamur quà m par sit vel temerè judicemus expectandum enim est Dei judicium in detegendis hypocritis falsi fratibus Et pag. 32. sect 2. he shews unam duntaxat esse veram Ecclesiam and therefore he speaks here of that one Church 3. Junius
Certain Disputations Of Right to SACRAMENTS and the true nature of Visible Christianity Defending them against several sorts of Opponents especially against the second assault of that Pious Reverend and Dear Brother Mr. Thomas Blake By RICHARD BAXTER Teacher of the Church in KEDERMINSTER The Second Edition corrected and amended Mark 16.16 He that Believeth and is Baptized shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned Luke 14.33 Whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath he cannot be my Disciple Acts 3.23 Every soul which will not hear that Prophet shall be destroyed from among the People LONDON Printed by R. W. for Nevil Simmons Book seller in Kederminster and are to be sold by him there and by Nathaniel Ekins at the Gun in Pauls Church-Yard 1658. Disput. 1. Whether Ministers may admit persons into the Church of Christ by Baptism upon the bare verbal Profession of the true Christian saving faith without staying for or requiring any further Evidences of sincerity Disput. 2. Whether Ministers must or may Baptize the Children of those that profess not saving Faith upon the profession of any other Faith that comes short of it Disput. 3. Whether the Infants of Notoriusly-ungodly baptized Parents have Right to be Baptized Disput. 4. Whether any besides Regenerate Believers have a Right to the Sacraments given them by God and may thereupon require them and receive them Disput. 5. De Nomine Whether Hypocrites and other Vnregenerate persons be called Church-members Christians Believers Saints Adopted Iustified c. Vnivocally Analogically or Equivocally Some Reasons fetcht from the rest of M â— Blake's Assaults and from Doctor Owen's and M â— Robertson's Writings against me which acquit me from returning them a more particular answer To the faithful servants of Christ the Associated Ministers of Worcestershire Reverend and dear Brethren AS I ow you an account of my Doctrine when you require it so do I also in some regards when it is accused by others which accordingly I here give you and with you to the rest of the Church of God I take my self also to have a Right to your Brotherly admonitions which I earnestly crave of you when you see me go aside And that I may begin to you in the exercise of that faithfulness which I crave from you I humbly exhort you that in the study and practice of such points as are here disputed yea and of all the Doctrine of Christ you would still most carefully watch against Self and suffer it not once to come in and plead its Interest lest it entice you to be Man-pleasers when it hath first made you Self-pleasers and so no longer the servants of Christ. You are deservedly honored for your Agreements and Undertakings but it is a faithful Performance that must prepare you for the Reward and prevent the Doom of the slothfull and unfaithful Mat. 25.23 26. But this will not be done if you consult with Flesh and Blood Self-denial and the Love of God in Christ do constitute the New-man The exercise of these must be the daily work of your Hearts and Lives and the preaching of these the summ of your Doctrine Where Love doth constrain you and Self-denial clense your way you will finde alacrity and delight in those works which to the carnal seem thorny and grievous and not to be attempted This will make you to be up and doing when others are loytering and wishing and pleasing the flesh and contenting themselves with plausible Sermons and the repute of being able pious men If these two Graces be but living in your hearts they will run through your thoughts and words and waies and give them a spirituall and heavenly tincture They will appear in your Sermons and exemplary lives and give you a special fertility in good works They will have so fruitful an influence upon all your flock that none of them shall pass into another world and take possession of their everlasting State till you have done your best for their Conversion and salvation and therefore that we may daily live in the Love of God in Self-denial and Christian unity is the summ of the praiers of Your unworthy Brother Richard Baxter Kederminster Jan. 17. 1656. The Preface IT is not long ago since it was exceeding far from my thoughts that ever I should have been so much imployed in Controversies with dear and Reverend Brethren as since that time I have been I repent of any temerity unskilfulness or other sin of my own which might occasion it and I am much grieved that it hath occasioned offense to some of the Brethren whom I contradict But yet I foresee that some light is like to arise by this collision and the Church will receive more good then hurt by it We are united in Christ and in hearty Love to one another which as my soul is certainly conscious of so I have not the least doubt of it in most of my Brethren with whom I have these Debates we are so far agreed that we do without scruple profess our selves of the same faith and Church and where the Consequences of our Differences may seem to import any great distance which we are fain to manifest in our Disputes we lay that more upon the opinion then the persons as knowing that they discern not and own not such Consequences And if any salt be mingled in our Writings which is usual in Disputes that are not lifeless or it is intended rather to season then to fret or to bite that which each one takes to be an error rather then the man that holdeth it If there be two or three toothed contenders that have more to do with persons then with doctrines that 's nothing to the rest And thus on both sides those that erre and those that have the truth do shew that Error is the thing which they detest and would disclaim it if they saw it and that Truth is it which they love and are zealous for it so far as they know it And doubtless the comparing of our several Evidences will be some help to the unprejudiced to the attainment of a clearer discovery of the Truth The greatest thing that troubleth me is to hear that there are some men yea which is the wonder some Orthodox Godly Ministers though I hope but few that fetch an Argument from our Disputes against the motions to Peace and Unity and unquestionable Duties which on other occasions are made to them and if any Arguments of mine be used to move them they presently reply If he would promote peace he should not break it by dissenting from or writing against his Brethren But what if I were as bad as you can imagine will you therefore refuse any Evidence that shall be brought you or neglect any duty that God shall call you to Will my unpeaceableness excuse yours But stay Brethren do you build the Churches Peace on such terms as these Will you have Union and Communion with none but
to be of those that are sincerely Christians or 2. That they profess themselves willing to be under Church Rulers and Ordinances as Bellarmine speaks or 3. That they will take part with Christians in pleading defending c. If the first be your meaning then they profess themselves true Christians and so to have saving faith For there is but two sorts of Christians Those that are really so having saving faith and those that are Analogically Christians professing saving faith when they have it not 2. If you mean the second with the Papists then consider that it is not into the Pope nor Church Rulers nor Ordinances that we are baptized but into the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost And suppose that a man truly understand on what terms Christ is offered in the Gospel that man may say I am content to be in the Church under teaching and to receive the Sacraments and to accompany Christians and fight for them but yet I will not yet be a Christian my self For I am not willing that Christ should sanctifie me and save me from my sins And who that dependeth on the mouth of Christ would baptize this man It is no more than belongeth to a Seeker or a Catechumne to be willing to hear And God never made it a Title to Sacraments meerly to bee willing to receive them Else all may receive them that will At least I must profess that I can hardly believe but that all that will receive them must profess that they receive them to the ends which they are appointed to And that no man can do that doth not eodem actu profess himself a true believer If the third be your sense then no doubt but many Christians in the Indies have had Moors and Indian servaâ—ts who were willing to associate with Christians and loved them and would live and die with them that yet were no Christians themselves But the fullest declaration of Mr. Blake's mind I find pag. 147. upon my earnest provocation of him to describe that faith which entitleth to Baptism The words are these Seeing Mr. Baxter calls upon me to declare my self further in this thing I do believe and profess to hold that he that upon hearing the Gospel preacht and the truth of it published and opened shall professedly abjure all other opposite wayes whatsoever and choose the Christian way for salvation promising to follow the Rules of it is to be baptized and his seed c. To which I reply If this be not a profession of saving faith I despair of ever being saved 1. No man but a sanctified man can truly desire salvation it self as it is indeed consisting in the blessed fruition of God in Intuition Love Praise and there is no other salvation No man but the Regenerate can truly renounce all opposite wayes One opposite way is the way of the flesh and carnal reason and the way of worldliness c. No man can live out of action nor out of moral action which tendeth to an end and that end is his own felicity He therefore that renounceth all other ways must turn to Christ the only way or else cut his own throat or some way murther himself that he may cease action or else must attain to a perfect desperation 3. No man but the Regenerate doth heartily choose the Christian way for salvation For what is that but to choose Christ for salvation and what is that but supposing assent the true description of saving faith 4. No man but the Regenerate can sincerely follow or resolve and promise to follow the Rules of that way For what is that but to follow the rules of Christ and Scripture And what is that but sincerely to obey So that he that professeth these four Points or any one of them doth profess that which is proper to the regenerate So that if Mr. Blake do not here give up his Cause and say as I do understand English that can for me If Mr. Blake dare adjudge all those to damnation that go not further than this faith which he here describeth to be professed as he must if he suppose this to be the profession of a faith short of saving he shall never have my vote in approbation of his censure If those who perform that which is here said to be professed be not saved I know not who will Therefore I doubt not but it is the profession of a saving faith But what need we make any further enquiry or dispute against a man that professedly yields the cause Hear his foregoing words pag. 147. His two first Arguments drawn from authority the first of the Assembly of Divines and others of a number of Fathers are brought to prove that the profession of a justâ—fying faith is required to Baptism And what is that to me who never denied it but in plain words have often affirmed it It sufficiently implyed where I require a Dogmatical faith to Baptism A Dogmatical faith assents to that of Apollo's Jesus is the Christ and when I say that this entitles I cannot mean concealed or denyed but openly professed Reader canst thou tell what to make of this is not here a plain concession that a profession of justifying faith is requisite to Baptism and doth he not averr that he never denied it Perhaps we have disputed all this while without an adversary as to Mr. Blake let it be so and let us see the truth prevail and I shall not be industrious to prove to Mr. Blake that he hath said the contrary But yet me thinks its a marvellous thing that a man should so frequently express his mind against the necessity of the presence profession of a justifying faith as to Baptism and for the sufficiency of a faith short of justifying and the profession thereof as a title to that Ordinance and now say that he never denyed the Profession of a justifying faith to Baptism but in plain words hath oft affirmed it Read the words that I before cited out of him read both his books and see how much of the scope of them is this way And let the Reader when he hath done tell us if he can what Mr. Blake talk't for By the words an English man would think that he had at large argued for the sufficiency of a faith short of justifying in re professione as to entitle to Baptism But here he seems most expresly to deny it I say he seems for I must profess that I dare not presume that I understand him here neither For the rest of his book which I thought I understood seemed as plain as this I began once of think that a fraud lay under these words and that it is here necessity of Precept only which he means when he saith that a Profession of saving faith is necessary to Baptism and not a necessity to means or that it is sine qua non But though I know no other way to reconcile him here to his books yet
which Justifies have right in the sight of God to be thus received This Argument me thinks might be of force with Mr. Baxter When he had urged it for proof that infants are servants and ought to be baptized he addâ— pag. 18. is not here direction enough to help us to judge of the mind of God whether infants are his Disciples and Servants or no Doth not God call them his servants himself What more should a man expect to warrant him to do so Men call for plain Scripture and when they have it they will not receive it so hard is it to inform a forestalled mind If God took such care upon that account that they should not be held in bondage under any of his People he takes like care that they should not be kept from the Society of his People ANSWER 1. The Major is true 1. distinguishing of Right as before 2. and of Servants and taking the word Servants in a peculiar sense as Lev. 25.41 doth The Minor also and the Conclusion is thus granted But Mr. Blake's Conclusions have a common unhappiness to be strangers to the question Doth it follow because I must baptize those that profess sincere Covenanting or Faiâ—h though they have but a faith of another sort that therefore I must baptize them on the account of that other faith By such an Argument I may as well prove that Infidelity or Heathenism gives right to Baptism thus Many Infidels or Heathens have right to baptism that is those that in heart are such have such a Right as yours pleaded for upon the account of an external Profession of Christianity Therefore infidelity or Heathenism gives them right If this Consequence must be denyed so must yours ARGUMENT VI. Mr. Blake Those that bring forth Children to God have a right in the sight of God to be of his houshold and to be taken into it This is plain especially to those that know the Law of servants in families that all the Children in right were the Masters and had their relation to him But those that are short of Justifying faith bring forth Children to God Ezek. 16.20 21. ANSWER This Argument is sick of the common disease of the rest the Conclusion is a stranger to the question Quâ tales they bring not forth Children to God in any Church sense ARGUMENT VII Mr. Blake Children of the Kingdom of God or those that are Subjects of his Kingdom have right in the sight of God to be received into his Kingdom This Proposition Mr. Baxter hath proved pag. 21. therefore I may save my pains But those that are short of faith that Justifies are Children or Subjects of this Kingdom Mat. 8.12 The Children of the Kingdom shall be cast into outer darkness Those therefore that are short of Justifying faith have right in the sight of God to be thus received ANSWER This Argument also hath the same distemper It s nothing to the Queâ—â—ion They are Children of the Kingdom visibly in regard of the profession of a saving faith and not of any common faith thaâ— is short of it Prove that or you say nothing ARGUMENT VIII Mr. Blake The Children of the Covenant have right in the sight of God to the Seal of the Covenant This is evident the seal is an affix to the Covenant Where a Covenant is made and a seal appointed there it is not of right to be denied But those that are short of faith that Justifies are the children of the Covenant Act. 3 25. The Apostle speaking to the People of the Jews saith Ye are the Children of the Prophets and of the Covenant which God made with our Fathers ANSWER Still the Question is wanting in the conclusion The same Answer serves to all It s a sad case that the Church of God should be thus used by its Friends to have such gross mistakes presented to the unskilfull which to use your own phrase to me pa. 145. do serve only to blind the Reader ARGUMENT IX Mr. Blake Disciples of Christ have right in the sight of God to Baptism as appears in Christs commissiion Mat. 28.19 But many are Disciples of Christ that are short of a Faith that justifies therefore those that are short of a Faith that justifies have right in the sight of God to Baptism If all that I have said pa. 208. of the Treatise of the Covenant to prove this assumption be too weak as I think it is not Mr. Baxters proof pag. 21. of his Treatise hath sure strength sufficient there he proves that Infants are Disciples because they are subjects of Christs Kingdom and what Kingdom he means he there explains himself I speak not here saith he of his Kingdom in the largest sense as it containeth all the world nor yet in the strictest as it containeth only his Elect but in the middle sense as it containeth the Church visible as it is most commonly used And therefore by the way not equivocally used Those then of this middle posture non-elect are Disciples ANSWER Still the same Error None are Disciples upon the account of your other faith but of either saving faith or the profession of it And as this and all the rest do look to the Other Controversies the foresaid distinction of Right applyed as is often done before is all that need to be said in answer to them ARGUMENT X. Mr. Blake Christians have right in the sight of God to Baptism This is Mr. Baxter's Proposition in the page before quoted and in reason is plain Christians must not be kept out of Christian fellowship This is Mr. Baxter's likewise in the place quoted he makes Disciples Christians and subjects of Christs visible Kingdom to be one and the same Therefore those that are short of Justifying faith have Right c. ANSWER Still the same disease You should have concluded that your lower faith gives Right None are Christians on the account of your lower kind of faith but only of saving faith or the profession of it ARGUMENT XI Mr. Blake All that ought to be admitted visible Church-mâ—mbers ought to be admitted in the sight of God to baptism This none can question unless they charge it as Tautological and it is Mr. Baxter's pa. 2.3 and the medium of that Argument which he makes the chief of all he useth But those that are short of Justifying faith are members of the Church visible Therefore those that are short of justifying faith are to be admitted to baptism The assumption is his likewise where he distinguisheth the visible Kingdom from the Elect and no man can deny it that grants the distinction of a Church into visible and invisible ANSWER The same disease still None short of saving faith ought to be admitted member but on the Profession of it What if I distinguish the visible Kingdom from the Elect Once for all I let you know that I take saving faith to be the constitutive or necessary qualification of a real or mystical member and Profession of
proclaims it with his name and doubtless both the Threatning and the Promise is such that it cannot be that the same persons are under both at once being certainly therefore under the Threatning they are from under the Promise Argum 4. The Threatning to the third and fourth generation is necessary to be understood on supposition that there be an uninterrupted succession of wicked Progenitors therefore by proportion so must the Promise be understood as to a necessary succession of faithful Progenitors Argum. 5. The natural Interest that Ancestors have in such Posterity is not immediate but mediante Parente proximo therefore so is the Covenant-Interest because it proceedeth on supposition of the Natural We receive nothing from a Grandfather but by a Father but what dependeth on his free will an intercision therefore preventeth our Priviledges It is here objected that it is harsh to affirm that the immediate Parents sin depriveth Posterity of the Benefit though the Ancestors were never so godly for so the children should suffer for the Parents sin Ans. 1. the children never had right therefore never lost it 2. It s just that they suffer for the Parents sin when Parents have lost their right they cannot convey it to others Object Paul saith of the Jews They are beloved for the Fathers sake Answ. So far beloved as that God will reclaim them in after-ages and now convert a remnant but not so far beloved as that any child of an unbelieving Jew had right to Baptism for Abraham or any Ancestors sake and that Love was from a part of the Covenant proper to Abrahams seed Object Thâ—re could not be a higher evidence of Apâ—stacy than to giâ—e their children to a false God yet this did the children of Israel and yet their Posterity had right to Circumcision Answ. I will reserve the answer of this to the end where we shall have further reason to consider it and next proceed to the fourth pretended Title of such Infants The fourth part of this Question is Whether the Infants of notorious ungodly parents may not have right to Baptism on the account of some Vndertakers Answ. If this be so it s nothing against our Negative determination of the main Question viz. Whether they have right for their Parents sake 2. We distinguish of Undertakers some are such as will undertake that another man shall bring up his child well 2. Some will undertake to do it themselves yet not to educate it as their own but as another mans and at his disposal neither of these undertakings can give any right 3. But if the child do either by the total resignation of the Parent or by adoption or the death of the Parents or by purchase or any other just means become his Own that undertakes for him so that the child is ejus juris as his own children are and at his dispose then the Question is much harder And for my part I encline to judge that such a child hath Right upon that mans account 1. Because that in a Law-sense this man is his Father 2. Because all that God requireth in the free universal Covenant of Grace to our participation of his Benefits is our consent and children do consent bo those whose they are For they that owe them or whose they are have the disposal of them and so of their Wills interpretatively and may among men make any Covenant for them which is for their good at least and oblige them to the performance of conditions 3. Because God so determined it with Abraham when he called him so solemnly to renew his Covenant and so to the Israeliets after Of which for brevity see what I have said in my book of Baptism chap. 29. pag. 101 102. which I need not here recite Let every man see with his own eyes but for my part I resolve till I see better reasons for the contrary to admit no child to baptism uâ—on the undertaking of any other susceptors such as our Godfathers and Godmothers were without a better Title then their susception but if any will say This child is mine and at my disposal though not mine by natural generation I will not dare to refuse to Baptize it if the person that presenteth it and devoteth it to God be capable of so doing as being himself a Believer And I think that it is a considerable work of Charity to get the children of Infidels or such among us are nominal Christians and Infidels indeed that they may have that benefit by you which they cannot have from their natural parents The 5th Title that is commonly pleaded for the Right of the children of notoriously ungodly Parents to baptism is upon the account of the Churches faith and the Magistrates Authority over them For this it is pleaded 1. That the Magistrate or soveraign Ruler hath power to dispose of his Subjects and therefore to make Covenants for them and in their names as much as a Parent hath for the power of a Magistrate is greater than of a Parent in that the Magâ—strate may put children to death and so may not a Parent Answ. 1. The Soveraign hath a Governing power above a Parent but it is not on that the great contract or right is grounded But the Parent hath a greater propriety in the child than the Governor and so hath more Right to dispose of him in this case The Soveraigns power is in order to the Good of the Common-wealth the Parents is for the Good of the Child directly 2. Bodin and some others think that the Roman Custom was good that Parents should have power of Life and Death as to their Children though few approve his Judgement or reasons 3. I doubt not but a Soveraign may use his Authority to procure the baptizing of Children by the Parents dedication of them to God But still it must be modiante parente vel proparente by procuring their consent who have the nearest Interest in the child and greater than the Magistrate can have though not greater ruling power Obje But there are some Rulers that are Domini as well as Rectores and the people and all that they have are theirs so that there is no proprietary in the Nation but themselves and in such a case it seems that they may dispose of the consent of their subjects An. 1. yeâ— It s lis sub judice whether this be not meer unlawfull Tyranny or Usurpation and so the Title Null because against the Law of God in nature 2. Or if any think that the example of Joseph or of the Israelites buying children will prove the contrary yet 1. It can be but to their Civils as Goods Lands c. their Right wherein is adventitious and accidental and not to the fruit of their bodies where their right is so natural that none can take it by violence from them I say therefore that here it cannot be without the Parents voluntary Alienation and Resignation of their Children to the Soveraign which they
many Proselites which in David's and Solomon's days joyned themselves in the presence of private persons and the Judges of the great Synedron had aâ— care of them they drove them not away after they were Baptized out of any place neither took they them neer unto them until their after-fruits appeared Ob. 2. If none but the Regenerate or sincere Believers have Title to Baptism and the Lords Supper then none can seek or receive them till they have Assurance of their sincerity which would exclude abundance of upright Christians Answ. 1. God layeth his commands upon us conjunctly and our casting off one will not authorize us to cast off another Upright Christians are obliged both to judge themselves to be what they are and to receive the Seals of the Covenant And if they judge themselves not to be upright when they are or question their integrity as a thing to be doubted of this is their sin and cannot be done inculpably And this sin will not justifie them in forbearing the Sacraments For one sin will not excuse another The thing therefore that such are bound to is first to use right means to know themselves and then to judge of themselves as they are and then to seek and receive the Sacraments And if he say I have tried and yet I cannot discern or I fear I am unfound yet that will not free him from the blame of mis-judging nor from the obligation of judging more justly of himself 2. There is a true discerning of a man 's own faith and repentance which is far below a strict Assurance and he that truly discerneth that he repenteth and believeth hath a clear ground to profess it though he have much doubting and fear of the contrary The judgement of few or none is in aequilibrio but it swayeth and determineth either to judge that they are sincere or that they are not If it judge that they are not when they are their duty is to rectifie that judgement out of hand If they judge that they are sincere though they attain not a full Certainty they have reason to act according to that judgement Mans heart is a dark piece and much unacquainted with it self and if Mr Blake or any of his opinion will prove that a man must suspend all his Actions which are not guided by a certain assured judgement he will evacuate most of Gods service in the Church I doubt not but he will confess that it is only the penitent that should profess themselves penitent in that Condition and only they that truly desire Christ and Grace that should say they desire them and only they that have received saving grace that should give God thanks for it as a received benefit And yet if no one should confess sin with profession of penitence but they that have full assurance that they are truly penitent if no one should beg grace with profession that he desireth it till he have full assurance of the truth of those desires and if no one should give thanks to God for Redemption in the special sense and effectual Vocation and Conversion and Justification Adoption Reconciliation Sanctification c. but those that have a full assurance that they have received these I doubt God would have little Confession Prayer or Thanksgiving of this sort from his people Is it unlawfull to say Lord I believe as long as we have any Vnbelief to be removed When Peter knew not but that he might shortly deny Christ with cursing and swearing yet might he lawfully confess his belief in him A man may warrantably speak and profess the Truth which he is not fully certain of as long as he doth it bona fide and really meaneth what he speaketh and uttereth his very heart so far as he knoweth it 2. And as long as he is not negligent in his endeavors to know it but faithfully labors to be acquainted with it All such ordinary Professions do imply this limitation This is the truth so far as I know my own heart And if it were not lawful to go on this ground I must give up almost all my duties For I finde so great darkness in my own heart and strangeness to my self that it is few things that I say of my own heart which I can speak with such assurance as this When Christ commanded me Matth. 5.24 to Leave my gift before the Altar and go my way and first be reconciled to my Brother and then come and offer my gift as I am uncertain when my Brother's minde is reconciled to me so if I should never offer my gift till I had full assurance that my own minde is sincerely reconciled to him perhaps I might sometime be put upon a long forberance For many a one that can say I know nothing by my self is yet so conscious of the falsness of his heart that he is forced to add yet am I not thereby justified and I judge not my own self c. Christ hath told us that God will not forgive us unless we truly repent and believe and from our heart forgive one another If none may thank God for remitting their sins till they have undoubting assurance of all this God would have little thanks for forgiveness Then the scruples of those that reject singing Psalms would turn off almost all Who durst say or sing Psal 116.1 I love the Lord c. Psal. 119.10 with my whole heart have I sought thee c. Psal. 138.1 91. 111.1 I will praise thee O Lord with my whole heart c. unless so few as would make but small melody Many particulars might be instanced in to shew that this ground would evacuate most duties 3. As Mr. Blake is uncertain of every one of his hearers that seeketh Sacraments whether he have indeed a Dogmatical faith or not so I doubt he would Baptize but few Children in comparison of what he doth if none should seek it but those Parents which are undoubtingly certain that they do truly Believe with that Dogmatical faith 1. Certain I am upon much sad tryal that a great number of the Parishioners that have long been our constant hearers and have presented many Children to Baptism have not a Dogmatical faith it self as to the essentials of the Christian Religion For many tell me that they Believe not that the Son or the Holy Ghost is God or that any one hath suffered for us or made satisfaction for our sins and that they trust only in Gods mercy and their praying and amendment for Pardon 2. I meet with the most humble Godly learned and judicious men of my acquaintance who manifest more doubtfulness about the Dogmatical part or Assenting Act of their faith then any other or at least their doubt of the rest is most here grounded because they doubt of their truth in this And though they are comforted in this consideration that even Assent is imperfect in the Saints on earth and mixt with doubtings and that they lament their
for my learning what advantage or profit a dead corps is in capacity to enjoy I think none at all but these have much every way Ans. Thus you argue or you say nothing If unregenerate Saints Church-members c have much advantage and a corps have no advantage then they are not Equivocally called Saints Church-members c. as a corps is called a man But c. The consequence is not only false but too gross Advantage or disadvantage are nothing to the nature of Equivocals 2. In its kinde a Corps may have advantage It may be stuck with flowers perfumed emblamed and kept from stinking as ungodly men are by their common Gifts for the sake of those with whom they do converse 3. An Ape is capable of advantage and yet if you call him a man it is a more Catachresticall Equivocation than to call a corps so An embryo or rude beginings of a mans body before it receive the soul it is capable of advanatage in order to Manhood and yet is but Equivocally called a man Mr. Blake If such Equivocation be found in the word Saint then the like is to be affirmed of the word Believer and Believers having their denomination from their faith that is equivocall in like manner and so the common Division of faith into Dogmatical or Historical temporary miraculous and justifying is but a Division of an Aequivocum in sua Aequivocata which I should think no man should affirm much less Mr. Baxter who makes common and special grace to differ only gradually and then as cold in a remiss degree may grow to that which is intense so one Aequivocatum may rise up to the Nature of another animal terrestre may become Sydus Coeleste Ans. 1. It s no good consequence because the word Saint is Equivocal therefore the word Believer is so 2. Our dispute is not about the sence of the word Faith or Believer in General but about the Christian Faith in special from whence a man is to be properly called a Christian and upon the profession whereof he is to be baptized for I told you once already that as Faith is taken in General so your lower sort of faith is truly and properly Faith and so is believing in Mahomet To distinguish Faith into Divine and Humane and into Christian and Mahometan c is not aequivoci in sua aequivocata divisio But to distinguish the Christian Faith which entituleth to Baptism into saving Faith and that which is short of it is aequivoci in sua aequivocata 3. If you thought No man had been guilty of this conceit whether that thought do more disparage the said assertion or your self I must not be judge but I take it as if you had said I thought no man had written against Bellarmines definition of the Church 4. As to your No Man much less Mr. Baxter as I know not the reason of your thought unless you indeed take me not only to be No Man but to be somewhat distinct both from a man and no man so I am as little satisfied with the Reason which you alledg For 1. It is a Gross untruth unworthy a Divine and a Brother that I hold common and special Grace to differ only gradually And that this should be deliberately published even after I had given the world in print so full an account of the mistake of this accusation from another once and again this is yet less ingenuous and doth but tell us what we must expect from Brethren when passion is predominant I never affirmed any more than this that there is a Moral specifick difference between special and common Graces founded in a Natural Gradual difference I manifested in print that Dr. Kendall who writeth against me on this occasion doth not only say the same thing but profess that others differ not from me and resolveth his dispute into a reprehension of me for pretending a difference Yet after all these writings my reverend Brother Mr. Blake sticks not to affirm to this and future Ages in print that I hold Only a Gradual difference without any more ado And of such dealing I may say his Book is too full 5. Your reason is no reason I hope you think not either that your Animal terrestâ—e Sydus caeleste differ but Gradually nor yet that there are no Equivocals that differ only in Natural degrees who knows not that in many hundred cases a Degree may vary the species Mr. Blake If Juda's faith was only Equivocal then the unclean spirits were Equivocal likewise Ans. A consequence as well fortified with proof of Reason as much more of your book is Yet I take the boldness to deny it Mr. Blake I shall never believe that an Equivocal faith can cast out a reall devil Answ. 1. You are not able to make good your word for you have not wholly the Command of your own belief I am as confident that you will believe it 2. But if you will not that 's no good argument to us that the thing is false 3. An Equivocal faith is a Real faith why then may it not cast out a Real Devil that is be a Causa sine qua non for no faith doth properly effect it I hope you will believe that the finger of God can cast out a real devil and yet I hope you think that Gods Power is but Equivocally called His finger Mr. Blake The Apostle tells us of Faith to the removal of mountaines void of Charity if this were Equivocal faith those must be Equivocal mountaines Still the like proof you may as well say If it be Equivocally called Gods finger then it must Equivocally be called a devil that is ejected We need better proof Mr. Blake pag. 153. bringeth Du-Plessis Wollebius Gomarrus Hudson Paraeus Ames saying that good and bad are in the visible Church Ans. Have you to do with any man that denyeth it But you know they distinguish between In the Church and Of the Church and 2. that they Judge not of the visible as you do And therefore you do but fraudenly pag. 156. make it my opinion as joyning with Bellarmines unjust charge that the visible Church is no true Church but Equivocally so called and that there are two Churches c. Do but you quit your self of the charge of making two Churches as well as all and we shall do well enough for that And for the other part of your charge our Divines say that there are in the visible Church 1. those that belong to it as Invisible 2 hypocrites and reprobates the former say they are properly members of the Church in its proper sense the latter are only seeming members and the Church visible is called a Church in respect to the former And the visible is denominated but from an Accidental and not the essential form Their words before cited shew this Mr. Blake And whereas Mr. Baxter saith that other Divines generally plead that Hypocrites are not true members of the universal Church