and his sons must thus swagger in their service and be set out in such a holy manner for glory and for beauty with his Pontificalibâ— and most holy sumptuous superstitious attire this holinesse of the holy Priest-hood that then was and its holy pertinances that holy people and holy seed you stile very fitly and I agree with you in the term for 't was indeed the holiness of that Covenant that then was while the first tabernacle and its worldly Sanctuary was yet standing a federall holiness nevertheless though you call it by no name but what I freely allow of yet I call it by one or two names which though they be as true and properly due to it as the other and Epithites given ordinarily by your selves to the holinesse of almost every thing else under that Covenant yet least it pluck you up by the roots as touching your opinion in this point of infant-holinesse and baptism I much fear you will hardly allow of them as to the parents and the seed if you can handsomely evade them by secundum quid or some such like cleanly distinction these are first a ceremoniall holiness the rise of which denomination and reason why given are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quasi ad tempus durans for a time onely its non-continuance to the end or its non-conveyance down-wards from the Church of the Jews to the times and Churches of the Gospel Secondly a typical holinesse as being but a shew shadow or figure of some more excellent holinesse to come for the law and first Covenant had but the shadow of things to come and not the very image of the things Heb. 10.1 I say a typicall and therefore but a temporall holiness which stood and was seated onely in divers outward bodily rites sacrifices actions observations ordinances offices officers places gestures vestures ornaments meats drinks and a certain fleshly birth-right and title to certain earthly preheminences dignities priviledgeâ— liberties inheritances a kingdome and all this for the time then being onely and to point out a true more speciall â—eall spiritual and eternal excellency and glory under the Gospell in order to the manifestation of which all the other was but a pageant for as the Map of that Ierusalem that then was delineates to our capacities the beauty of that earthly fabrick yet is far inferious to the City it self therein deciphered so the old Ierusalem with all her holy things were but a shadowy representation and patern of the New Ierusalem and the true heavenly things themselves which the other is as far inferiour to in worth and real felicity as any Mapp of it upon the wall is to the City that is set out and darkly described by it Thus did their High-priests in all their holiness yea and kings too King Solomon specially in all his glory and their prophets also in all their materially holy unctions to those severall holy functions type out that one spiritually anointed one of the father our Lord Iesus though a single person to his tripple office of King Priest and Prophet over his Church so their carnally holy meats drinks and abstinencies our spiritual meat and drink which they are said to eat of in a figure And our abstinencies from fleshly lusts and morall pollutions so their holy washings the washing of Regeneration and renewings by the spirit their holy sacrifices blood of sprinkling which as all the rest could not make perfect as pertaining to the conscience but sanctified onely to the purifying of the flesh i. e. the delivery of them from that outward imputation of impurity and uncleanness that would else have lain upon them the blood of Christ purging the conscience from iniquities and dead works wherewith it s defiled to serve the living God in true holiness and righteousnesse all the daies of our life so Circumcision of their fleshly seed which was outward and in the flesh tipified not Baptism as is simply supposed from Col. 2. but the Circumcision of the spiritual seed i. e. believers new-born babes begotten to Christ by the word with the Circumcision made without hands i. e. sanctification and cutting of the filthy lusts of the flesh so their outwardly royall Priest-hood the spiritual royal Priest-hood i. e. the true Saints who are truly as the other ceremonially and tipically a kindome of Priests made Kings and Priests to the Lamb and shall once reign on the earth 1 Pet. 2.9 Rev. 5.10 So the outward holiness of their nation tipified not the same kind of outward hoâ—inesse of any one Nation taken collectively in the lump as the whole Nation of England Scotland c. and all their seed as you ignorantly imagine but the inward holinesse of the holy Nation of true believers themselves whether parents to wicked children or children of wicked parents scattered through all Nations under heaven these Peter writes to and calls the chosen generation now i. e. the Regenaration themselves not the natural generation of these also a Royall Priest-hood an holy Nation a peculiar people to God in a spiritual sense as Israel was in a certain carnal and outward sense before 1 Pet. 1.1 2.9 so their holy land our inheritance incorruptible reserved in heaven the heavenly country which we look for with Abraham Isaac and Iacob with whom we are heirs by faith of the same promise their holy City our holy City which hath foundations whose builder and maker is God Heb. 11. Rev. 12. Heb. 13. their holy Temple Gods Evangelically holy Temple where he will dwell which Temple ye are saith Paul to the Church 1 Cor. 3. Their carnal freedome our spiritual freedom from sin which who ere commits is but a servant for all the other though born of Abraham Iohn 8. Their passeover Christ our passeover that was sacrificed for us 1 Cor. 5. Their Rock our Rock of refreshment Christ their cloud Christ overshadowing by day and enlightning by night his people 1 Cor. 10. Their Manna Christ our bread that came down from heaven Iohn 6. their delivery out of Egypt the worlds Redemption by Christ and as sundry other things of which I cannot now speake particularly so lastly to draw yet a little neerer to the point in hand their holy seed issue infancy tipified not as both corruptly and carnally you conceive the fleshly seed of believing or in-churched Gentiles for these are in no wise the Antitype to the circumcised infancy of Israel but as I hinted before the truly and spiritual holy seed it self i. e. believers themselves or if the seed of believers not their natural seed but their seed in a spirituall sense i. e. that are begotten by them by their words unto the faith for believers as men beget men onely and no more in that way of bodily propagagation but as believers they may beget believers by way of spiritual influx by comunication of the gospel to their consciences thus Paul was the father of the Corinthians in Christ Iesus begetting them all by the
being half afraid that you had been Anabaptists when God wot you are so far from Rebaptization that you neither do baptize nor ever were so much as once truly baptized your selves cries out against you who were in truth the men that first began to digrade and divest all those holy trinkets of that denomination of holiness wherewith they had invested them and that with a most hideous out-cry saying pa. 181. of his book thus What evil their disciples mingled with the Brownists have done in the Sanctuaries of God in England and Ireland though I should hold my peace the timber out of the beams and the Chalices out of the vestry and the Marble and brass out of the Monuments of the dead would proclaim it to the Everlasting infamy of this prophane sect You then being together by the ears so much among your selves about this question viz. whether Temples Vestments Altars Fonts and Monuments and other Steeple house stuff and Temple trumpery which was in the Bishops times be holy yea or no with that Relative holiness as D Featley calls it wherwith the holy places and Temple furniture of the Jewes was holy I might safely slink away here and leave you Presbyters to tugg it out with your Fathers the Bishops who have indeed already drawn that controversy so neer to an end as to determine all the holy things and well nigh all the holiness they had out of doors Yet that you may know I own and honor you so far as freely to side with you so far as you are willing to reform indeed and renounce Rome and her Religion but Alas Sirs that is not fully yet for notwithstanding the covenants whereby you have sworn both me and your selves to extirpate to your power all popery superstition Idolatry and meer mens inventions yet Oh what Remnants of Romish rubbish viz. national Churches popish parochial postures popish payments and profits old tricks of trotting after tythes more then truth and seeking to benefice your selves well rather then to benefit the people do yet abide unabolished among you yet so far I say as you do reform I am willing to go along with you and therefore will lend you my hand so farr as to sling one stone after all that Canaanitish holiness wherewith the Pope and his Clergy hath consecrated and christened not only all the babes born in Christendome but also the very bells and other bawbles belonging to the several sanctuaries with the name of HOLINES to the Lord as far as t is possible to keep it out from creeping into England any more and that shall be an Argument from the meer typicallness of all that Dedicative holiness that was once resident in the Iewish Church and every thing almost that pertained thereunto the like to which Dâ— Featley feigns to be now in the Christian nations and thus I frame it All that holiness which was but typical was but temporal or ceremoniall and so to be abolished under the Gospel But all that holiness whereby the Iewes land City Temple Altar Priesthood people first fruits profits and all the appertenance of that first Tabernacle were denominated holy was but meerly typicall and figurative of a future holiness that was to come in more fully under the new Covenant second tabernacle or Church under the Gospel Ergo all that holyness wherewith the Iewes land City Temple i. was holy was but temporal or ceremonial and so to be abolished under the Gospel The first Proposition needs no proof for your selves deny not but that all things under the law that were but types of things to come were terminated and taken clean away when the truth or things typified thereby did come in under Christ. The Minor is no less cleer then the other for the Law had but the shadow of things to come not the very Image of the things Heb 10.1 it had but the patterns of holy things in the heavens not the holy or heavenly things themselves those holy places made with hands and all the holy furniture thereunto pertaining were but figures of the true holy place i. e. heaven it self into which our high-priest is gone there to appear in the presence God for us Heb. 9.23.24 yea read through the 8th 9th 10th chapters to the Hebrews and you shall find that all things under the law did but serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things and were but as it it were a figure for the time then being imposed on the Iewes untill the time of Reformation i. e. till Christ came Now as to the Minor in the Prosyllogism which is this viz. that the holinesse which fanctified the Jews seed was the same and no other then that which sanctified all the other appertenances of that Covenant t is but a folly for me to offer to prove it sith Mr. Blake himself the man that most earnestly pleads the present being of that same holinesse in believers seed as in the Iews seed of old doth little less then clearly confess it in the 3 and 4 page of his birth-priviledge where he writes thus viz. common things dedicated for holy service and use are holy a people by nature sinners dedicated to the Lord are for holy use and service of the Lord when others are for the service of Idols therefore Ierusalem a City none of the holiest for any transcendent holiness of the Inhabitants thereof is yet called by the Evangelist the holy City by reason of the Temple and worship there that were holy and from thence saith he this observation follows A people that enjoy Gods ordinances convey to their issue a priviledge to be reputed of a society that is holy to be numbered amongst not unclean but holy persons in proof of which observation among other things he saies thus viz. The land of their habitation where they dwelt and injoyed this peculiar priviledge is ordinarily stiled the Holy Land being the land of Emanuel and the language there spoke the holy language being a mark to discern the people of God the distinguishing and discrimminating Epithite given to them was still holy even all of this root who were branches of Abraham Isaac Iacob all of this lump whereof Abraham Isaac Iacob were the first fruits they peculiarly had this honor to receive c. and that in infancy c. distinction from all others All which words of his collectively considered must needs bear such a sense as this viz. That as the things that were else wise common were holy things and in such sort as the City Ierusalem was a holy City their Temple a holy place their service which we know stood mainly in offering of gifts and sacrifices meats drinks divers washings and carnal ordinances for that time onely a holy service their land of Canaan it self a holy land their language a holy language and in a manner every thing of theirs was discriminated by the term holy from what ever was then counted common and unclean among the Gentiles in
the thing signified by the understanding and that at the same time when the sign appears to the senses or else the sign is a meer Nullity and of no use and benefit as a sign at all for though infants may have the sense of the thing so as to see and feel if they were dipt in infancy yet have they then no understanding of its meaning and though when they come to years they are capable to gather the meaning of things or from an appearing sign to conceive what is signified thereby yet then the sign it self is fled out of sight and so far out of the reach of their remembrance that as ther 's nothing now presented so neither ever was there any thing for ought they can conjecture any more then by meer human hearsay objected to their senses at all when the Jewes required a sign of Christ they required something that might be seen what sign shewest thou that we may see and believe A sign then must be some memorandum some object obvious to the senses of that person to whom t is a sign properly taken either continually or at sometime or other even then which the understanding drinks in the thing signified else if there neither is nor ever was any such sight or sense of the sign as from the then or now present appearance of it while the understanding of the party whose sign it is is lively acted on the thing then to that person the sign unlesse improperly and improper signes the sacraments are not can possibly be no sign at all this Pareus teacheth us to the life p. 35.7 where deâ—ining baptism and the supper to be signa in oculos incurrentia hoc est visibilia signs that are or once were to be seen by him whose signes they are even at that time while he is to learn something by them he further backs it as I have set down in his own words in the margent and for the use of the unlearned Englished thus viz. for they ought to be such that they may signifie things invisible for if they ought to be helps to our faith they must be perceived by the external sense whereby the internal sense is moved for what thouseest not is no sign to thee he that makes an invisible signimplies a contradiction and makes the sign not a sign at all they are invisible things not signes otherwise also the signes could not so much as signifie the things much lesse confirm them because an uncertain thing would be confirmed by a thing as uncertain as it self hence the antients define a Sacrament thus a sacrament is a visible sign of some invisible grace So then we see that according to your selves a sign is no sign at all to him that is never seen all by him who is to observe it and that too at sometimâ— or other after he comes to observe what is meant by it whereupon I testifie that what was done to us in infancy had it been the true sign of Christs own institution viz. baptism as t was rather a sign of meer mans institution viz. the sign Rantism and the sign of the crosse neither was nor is nor ever will be any sign at all to you or me if at any time it be a sign to vs it must be either while we are infants or when grown to years but not while infants for then we apprehend not the thing signed nor when at years for then we apprehend not the sign How mighty your memories and how exquisite your apprehensive powers are to bring these two I mean the sign and thing signified together in your thoughts I know not but I plainly acknowledge notwithstanding Dr Channels councel to the Auditory at the Dispute at Petworth Ian. 5. 1651 to remember and call to mind what was signified to them in their infant baptism that as in infancy I perceived not to what purpose I was signed so now save what I have by hearsay I perceive not nor ever did of my self to my best remembrance that I was then so signed at all As for that true baptism which I have since submitted to some 4 or 5 years ago as it then preached so far as a sign may be said to preach most precious things to my understanding so it lively appeared to my senses and left such impression upon them and such an Idea thereof in my mind that me thinks I both see and remember it still and so shall I hope have good cause to do whilest I live I conclude then that to signifie things to infants by baptism in infancy is a meer blank and utter nullity a silly cypher that stands for nothing and is of no use to them at all Yea as it would be thought no better then meer mockery or witless wisdom for any Priest to stand talking and making signs over one a sleep while he is understandingly sensible of nothing and then after he is awake and as little a ware of any thing as before begin to make the application and will him to divine both what was done to him by whom and why and to take cognizance and clearer evidence of such and such things by the same token that they were told him and signified to him by what was done while he was asleep by certain signs which he never saw yet nor never shall so is it to me to baptize meer infants or as it were no better than flat folly for any father in a serious and not lusory way to shew the form of the City Ierusalem to his infant 〈◊〉 infancy by the figure and draught of it in a Map saying look here child this stands for the Temple this signifies and sets forth the manner of Mount Sion and and all this is shewed thee now that thou maiest remember it another time that Ierusalem is thus and thus scituated and then when he comes to age without any more resemblance of it to him in the map to indoctrinate him in what was done in his iâ—fancy and bid him reflect back and call to mind what was shewn him in that map in which it was manifested to him what manner of city Ierusalem was and other such like ridiculous stuff and prate of the things so long since done that they are now flown both out of sight and mind even such and no better is it yea such piteous poor and meer painted piety is it for persons whether Priests or parents to stand prating to and ore poor ignorant infants and signing them at a Font or Bason whilest if they be not a sleep as my own silly experience teaches me they have been many a time while I have been sprinkling them in the midwives or the mothers armes yet they are at best no better then asleep because as heedless of what 's done saying to them very seriously by name as if they would have them mind what is said Thomas Anne c. I baptize thee in the name of the Father c. in token of remission
believing things as beasts which are meerly sensitive have not flowing naturally from the rationall soul in man But if by faith you mean restrictively that faith in special whose adequate object is the word of God preached in the promise and precept of it which onely makes us subjects of salvation and baptism dare you say that t is of equal necessitie and certainty that faith in such a sense is in infants as the faculty of Reaâ—on and understanding is so that by the same Reason that we deny one of these to be in them it may be therefore denied that they have the other and that their non knowledge of good or evill will as much prove them to be habitually no reasonable creatures as it proves them to be habitually no true believers of the Gospel For shame Sirs blot out and abjure this absurdity for you cannot but know that the faculty of understanding in man is Habitus a naturâ innatus a habit ingendred in them in very nature yea in all mankind necessarily qua id ipsum but your selves say faith in the sense in which we speak of it is but Habitus infusus a habit infused and that into some only for all say you have it not and I say t is Habitus acquisitus rather an acquired habit which comes if not without the gift of God to persons therein yet also in that way of hearing the word which on our parts is first done in order to its being begotten in us whereby we come to know good and evil first i. e. to be convinced of sin and guilt in our selves and righteousness and mercy in God through Jesus Christ and then to have faith in him to justification in this therefore Reason remains unrefuted and rather routs you then is routed by you Review 2. Their dislike at baptism testifyed by their crying if they had faith they could endure it with much patience The same reason might be brought against circumcision children when they felt the pain it is likely cried as much Besides we must denie faith to be in the best of Gods children if their sense under the cross and their complaing of it be an argumâ—nt to conclude against it against the weaknesse of faith it may not against the being Re-Review Had circumcision bin administred on perswasion that the subjects to whom it was set were believers as baptism is to be Acts 8. this same reason might have been brough also against infants circumcision though I must confesse it to be the least among an 100 that in reason may be brought to disprove infants believing and therefore possibly you whom I observe sometimes to set up a man of straw of least strength to annoy you and then to shew your skill in fencing at him have singled out this easie opposite to encounter with and yet so far as I see you do not as the proverb is give him as he brings neither but circumcision as is weâ—l known well-nigh to every body but your selves was dispensed to persons upon a far different account from this viz. meerly on their being males of a Jewish houshold and sometimes one a more slender acquaintance with Abrahams family then so witness the whole City of the Shechemites whose males were all all circumcised on meer hopes of their princes mariage with Iacobs daughter but t was not dispensed as you senselessly suppose it was on supposition of its subjects having faith for as there was not present evidence to any body that any of those infants that were signed had faith so for all your childish conclusion p. 4. that the children of the Jewes had faith witness their circumcision therefore the children of believing parents have now by â—uture experience t was evident to every body that they had it not how else came they to be complained on in general when at years as a body of wicked ones and unbâ—lievers unlesse you will say they lost and fell from their faith as I am sure you dare not and for my part I cannot say they did except I could see more clearly then yet I do see or you can ever make me see that at first they had it As for your further following flim-flam wherein you tell us that we must deny faith to be in the best of Gods children as well as in little children if their sense under the cross and their complaining of it be an Argument to conclude against their faith I give you to understand Sirs that its an ignorant inconsequence and so you will your selves discern it to be by then you have weighed what a difference there is between that voluntary submission which by the power of faith in the Saints is acted and yielded to the cross and yoak of Christ in either circumcision or baptism or any other difficult duty or dispensation service or suffering they are called to for Christs sake and that forced and not more unpleasant then unwelcome imposition of it that is made when that cross or yoak viz. the affliction or pain of circumcision or baptism is put upon the necks of infants for the one freely choses it when they have the liberty to refuse and decline it if they please and therefore though they have some sense out to the flesh no affliction being joyous but grievous yet are so far from complaining of it that they rather comply with it of their own accord as counting it better then to be without it witnesse Moses who by faith chose rather affliction and reproach with Christ as deeming these better then the pleasures and treasures of Egypt which were at his choice as well as these but the other i. e. infants are so far from offering themselves to either dutie or difficulty for Christ as by faith esteeming it better so to do then to escape that they rather are solely sensible of the smart so as to gainsay refuse and avoid it what they can but onely that will they nill they men make them bear it and cross them whether they will or no neither can infants by faith choose well-come or delight in either the disease that is by dipping or the sore that seconds circumcision but suffer both full sore against their wills and whereas you say the sense of the cross may conclude against the weaknesse of faith not against the being that clause reasons Reasonlesly against Reason indeed for it hath neither good sense nor reason in it to your own purpose or ours either the best I can make on it for your turn is to suppose it a meer mistake and that 's the least a man so concerned to meddle with it as I am can well say of it for surely Sirs if I read it right you write it wrong and set down your mind in words the sense whereof is just contrary to your meaning for certainly you would or at least should have said Against the strength or greatness of faith and you say Against the weakness of it if this were but
the putting on of garments after baptism when yet sometimes there had been all reason for the mention of it as in the case of Paul of whom after he was baptized it is said he received meat and was strengthned but not that apparell was put on him nor dry and warm clothes applied to him which we should sure have heard of if he had bin dipt over head in water Baptist. If by putting off of clothes Mr. Blake mean as it appears he doth by his talk of naked dipping in the same place such a putting them off as is in order to putting on others fit for such a purpose in their stead I know not onely no necessity but no modesty also in such a divestment nor yet does Mr. Tombes I dare say though in his expressions viz. that in former dayes it was thought no immodesty and that there is no necessity that persons be dipt naked Mr. Baxter is so abominably uningenuous as to wrest his words into such base and sinister senses and to abuse him to the world as if he had meant it was no immodesty in old time to be dipt naked and as if he held it lawfull to be dipt naked though not necessary when ingenuity of judgement and such love as he pretends to Mr. Tombes would have construed his meaning to be this viz. that it was counted no immodesty in former times though it be now by Mr. Baxter to be dipt in that way wherein we are dipt which is not naked as Mr. Baxter bruits it and that it is not necessary to be dipt naked as Mr. Blake Mr. Baxter and Mr. Cook think it is if persons be baptized by a totall dipping and as for the Scriptures mentioning of the putting off and on of their clothes in their addresses to and dresses after baptism there was not onely no necessity but at all no expediency in the mention of such a matter yea both reason and nature it self suggesting how needful that was to be done it would have been very vain and superfluous to have talked on it as for the double mention that is made viz. by Luke Acts 7.58 of the witnesses that stoned Stephen laying aside their garments at the feet of a young man whose name was Saul who is said Acts 8.1 to be consenting to his death and also by Paul himself Act. the 22.20 confessing to God his persecutions and how when the blood of the Martyr Stephen was shed he was standing by and consenting to his death and kept the raiment of them that shew him Mr. Blake cannot be so silly as to think that that clause concerning those mens clothes was put in as a piece remarkable or worth recording of it self or in any other respect in the world save for this end onely as it was an expression of the malice that Saul who was afterward converted and called Paul did at that time bear against the truth for surely had there not been that good reason wherefore the laying aside of their clothes had not been worth our notice nor should it ever have been mentioned simply for it self sake but now there was no such weighty end as this nor any end or purpose at all in order to which it was needfull to mention the circumstance of their clothing and unclothing about the administration of baptism it is enough that we have recorded of the thing in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. that and how and why it was done but it would have been frustraneous and even every way endlesse to have minded us of such impertinent appertenances to baptism as the dressing and undressing of the disciples if any one tell me a story that such and such infants were sprinkled at such places is not that relation sufficient and compleat unlesse he tell me how the infants were drest in their blankets and what a fiâ—ling was made by the midwife and the minister about the unpinning and turning up of their face clothes is not the story of Naamans washing himself seven times in Iordan full enough to our use because there is no mention of his putting off and on Christ washt his disciples feet and wiped them it may well be supposed they put off their shoes first and put them on again yet there is no mention of that Mr. Blake thinks that among all the multitudes that were baptized there must have been some words about their unclothings and clothings and specially that there was reason that we should have heard that Paul had dry and warm clothes put on him after his baptism as well as mention of meat given him if he had been baptized by immersion because he had been weak but what crude conceits are all these it was related that he was weak through fasting three daies and that was but proper and answering to the other to tell how after he eat his meat and gathered strength but the other must have come in for ought I see without either sense or reason and sith he stranges that among so many baptized no mention should be made of their preparations viz. the seponing and resuming their garments I wonder what mention he finds of the accommodations that those multitudes had that were circumcised in Abrahams family in one day and in the City of the Shechemits and those thousands in the wildernesse after the long cessation both before and after circumcision and yet that was such a tedious bloody sore and painfull piece of service as required no question ten times more attendance with clothes and other accomplishments till it was whole then this of baptism even in that so troublesome way to you wherein we dispense it Rantist But pray give me leave a little Now we talk of their Cloaths I remember that no sooner was Christ come out of the water but immediately the spirit drove him into the wilderness the spirit of the Lord caught away Philip and the Eunuch went on his way rejoicing Act. 8. whence I argue thus viz. if they put off their Cloathes they did not stay to put them on but went away naked if they had them on then being as you say dipped over head and ears they must have worn them wet but the first had been unseemly the later prejudiciall to their health Baptist. Well argued Mr. Simpson again as sure as can be you have got his Arguments by root of heart for these also are Mr. Simpsons very words in that letter of his above mentioned Rantist Whose Argument this is it matters not I suppose it is past your answer and here is reason enough in it to disprove Christ and the Eunuchs total dipping as a meer groundlesse and reasonlesse conjecture and crotchet of your own coming or if you have any thing to say to it I pray let us have it out of hand Baptist. Reason say you it were well if there were so much as common sense in it for my part I suppose it a senselesse fancy but I am sure there is