command the whole kind and therefore the holy Apostles baptized whole Families in which we find none excepâ—ed as St. Peter baptized Cornelius and his Family Acts 10. 48. St. Paul baptized the Jaylor and all that belonged unto him Acts 16. 33. Lydda and her houshold Acts 16. 15. The houshold of Stephanus 1 Cor. 1. 16 c. Again whereas our Lord commandeth Mark 10. Suffer little children to come unto me and forbid them not How properly can an Infant come unto Christ but by Baptisme Repent they cannot beleeve they cannot as the Anabaptists affirm But by baptisme they may come where the Minister in Christs stend receiveth them and blesseth them and why all this Of such is the Kingdome of God and therefore saith our Lord Forbid them not St. Peter saith Acts 2. 39. The promise is mad to you and your children and therefore be baptized To whom the promise is made and covenant let no man forbid baptisme which is the seal of the Covenant Again the faith of the Parents may warrant their Infants baptisme yea though they have but an hystoricall faith and not a justifying if they can credere ad baptismum though not adsalutem this faith maketh their children capable of baptisme many in the Apostles time were baptized having onely an historicall faith as Sâ—mon Magus and others Moreover these phrases Teach and baptize Repent and beleeve Beleeve be baptized are meant of such as were of riper years and made profession of the Christian faith or else the estate of Christian infants in the Gospel were much worse then the condition of the Israelitish Infants under the Law which to affirme is an horrible indignity offered unto Christ. Last of all most blasphemously they call baptisme of Christian mens children the mark of the Beast and to come from Antichrist and especially from Pope Innocent the third who lived about the yeare 1213. Learned Mr. Calvin affirmeth the baptisme of children to be a holy institution alwayes observed in Christ Church All the reformed Churches use it and it hath ben the practice of the universall Church The Greek Church who yearly excommunicate the Pope to whom St. Paul preched baptize their Infants as Gregory Nazianzen affirmeth And Origen who lived about the yeare 226 about 1000 yeares before Pope Innocent whom the Anabaptists would make the author of pedobaptisme The Russians who received the faith from St. Andrew the Apostle and account the Pope of Rome an Heretick hold a necessity of baptisme and put to death them that neglect and deride baptisme what would they doe with these men who blaspheme it The Abyssiâ—s or Ethiopians who received Christianity from St. Matthew the Apostle doe baptize their Infants viz. their male children at fourty dayes of age and their females at eighty The Armenian Christians to whom St. Barthoiomew preached the faith baptize their Infants Baronius writeth that these Christians had a thousand Bishops The Iacobites who are a numerous sort of Christians doe the same yea they mark their children with a hot Iron with the signe of the crosse alluding to the words of St. Iohn He shall baptize you with the holy Ghost and with fire The Cophtie or native Christians of Egypt to whom Saint Mark preached baptize their Infants these Christians have no communion with the Pope of Rome The Indians to whom St. Thomas brought the faith do the like The Matacasion Christians in Africa affirme children dying without baptisme to be deprived of eternall beatitude The Melchites one of the greatest fort of Christians in the Orient as Boterus affirmeth do the same The Nestorians under the Patriarch of Muzal who as Cardinall Vitriacus affirmeth are more numerons with the Iacobites then the Christians of the Latin and Greek Church doe the same These account the Pope of Rome a reprobate Bishop The Circassians Mengrellians Georgians Maronites Cephalians with all the orthodox Christians in the Universe baptize their Infants Erasmus wondreth what evill Devill entred them who forbid the baptisme of children used by the holy catholick Church for above 1400. years Also the Britains to whom Simon Zelotes preached have alwayes baptized their children and have honourably esteemed of that Sacrament administred to their children until some of these hereticks fled hither out of Germany where they burnt hanged and drowned men of that Sect till they had suppressed them They came into England about the year 1535. and as they could be found we did the like to them burning some and banishing others but since the yeare of our Lord 1640. they have crept out of their holes lift up their heads chalenge our Divines to publick disputations preach in our Churches publish their blasphemies print their bookes seducing multitudes of people And moreover to speak of the curelty of these Sectaries who depriving Infants of baptisme put them all out of the estate of grace We read of Herod the Tyrant who destroyed all the children in Bethlehem and the coasts thereof is not this a far more cruell sentence to set all infants in no better state then Pagans and Infidels without Christ Aliens from the Common-wealth of Israel as strangers from the convenant of promise having no hope and without God in the world Can any sober Christian but think this to be a barbarous cruelty It is not lawfull to take childrens bread and give it to dogs but these conclude children to be no better then dogs The Propher Elisha wept when he lookâ— upon Hazael fore-seeing that â—e should dash the Infants of Israel against the wall Hazael thought himselfe worthy to be so esteemed if ever he should â—â—e any such things And certainly thus to deprive Infants of baptisme is a more cruell act then to dash their bodies against stones Let these men also consider how much they provoke Christs displeasure against themselves he was greatly displeased with his Disciples for forbidding little children to come to him and one day they shall find him much more displeased with them who with great violence oppose the bringing of children to Christ in this holy Sacrament and with wrong injury and slander prosecute the Ministers of Christ who administer this Sacrament to Infants condemning theâ—â—or Ministers of Antichrist yea condemning all Churches â—or Antichristian who will not cast their children out of â—be covenant of grace The Lord open their eyes that they may see their errour and repent of it To conclude the baptismâ— of children is commanded in holy Scripture the holy Apostle baptized whole families the ancient â—athers testifie the same the holy Catholick Church of God alwayes used it Let not the Devill enter into the heart of any man to belâ—â—ve a fâ—â—acick unlearned mechanick man not an Angel from hâ—aven that teacheth a contrary doctrine What greater mischiefe can the Devill and his Imps do then to make a schisme in the Church and rob Almighty God of all his Lambsâ— and cut off so many millions of
Christian Churches in the world untill the Anabaptists To conclude let the Brownists confesse our Bâ—shops to be but Christians which they cannot deny and the Ordination of our Ministers will be lawfull by their owne rules for if the Ordination of their Ministers by Plâ—beian Artificers be lawfull how much more is the Ordination of our Ministers by Bishops and learned Ministers qualified with learning and wisedome and set apart to doe the same 16. Brownists Ordination BUT let them shew who devised their Ordination of Ministers I dare say not Christ nor his Apostles nor their Successors What Church in the whole world can be produced unlesse in case of necessity whose conspiring multitudes made them Ministers at pleasure What rule of the Church prescribeth it What Reformed Church ever did it or doth practise it What example warrants it where have the inâ—eriours presumed to lay their hands upon their Superiours It is an old policy of the faulty to complain first certainly there was never Popish Legend a more errand device of man then some parts of this Ministery of theirs so much gloried in for sincere correspondency with the first Institution 17. For their Singing FOR their singing of Psalmes it is almost left among them for in Master Iohnsons Assembly they had new râ—ymes but in so harsh and hard a phrase that the people knew not what they meant so that they could not sing with understanding 2. These being in use and the coppies being kept from the people by that means singing of Psalmes was kept from the people and shâ—t out of private houses 3. Againe by reason of the uncouth and strange translation and Meetre used in them the Congregation was made a laughing-stock unto strangers Master Daniel Studley pleaded for the continuance of those rhimes the Congregation complaining of them For saith my Author he had a good veine in making thimes especially filthy and obscene ones which he taught unto little children his Schollers and to Mistris May who used in her house to sing such songs being more fit for a common Bawde then for a person professing the pure separation They object against all the Churches in Amsterdam that they have Organs to modulate their voices in singing Sure I am the Separatists also had need of somewhat as a Bag-pipe or somewhat never used by Antichrist to tune them singing in their Conventicles like hogs against raine Here I might aske some questions viz. why singing set Psalmes doth not confine the spirit we being commanded to sing with the spirit as much as saying set Prayers and why the brethren inspired with the spirit doe not every day sing a new song as make a new Prayer which are set prayers to the People and why the people may not pray together with the Minister as it was the custome of al Christian Churches as sing together And lastly why Lay-men doe not pray in the Church aswel as preach or prophesie in the Church Do they not in forbidding the people to pray with the Minister as the Papists do in depriving the people of the Cup in the Sacrament and that for the honour of the Priest-hood 18. Of their prophecying AS the illuminated Anabaptists are called Preachers so the fanatick Brownists take upon them to be Prophets and to preach the word of God with all authority publikely in their Congregations St Panlasketh how they can preach except they be sent And this standeth to good reason every true Preacher standeth in Gods roome being the Lords Embassador to doe his will who dares doe this unsent These come not from the Schooles of the Prophers but from Mechanick trades set them down in Moses Chaire as Embassadors of Jesus Christ as Heralds of the most high God These take upon them to reveale the secrets of the Almighty to open shut heaven to save soules But to hear these fellowes discourse of the holy Trinity of Gods eternal Decree other deep poynts of Divinity you may hear the Mad-men in Bedlam prare as wisely as they May not Almighty God say to these mad Prophets what hast thou to doe to take my Word in thy mought c. Of their confused preaching or rather prating heare Mr. Simpson complaine and especially of the Prophets in Master Ainsworths Church For our manner saith he of meeting upon the Lords day it is with such a confusion and contradiction with one another that our profession of Separation may be overthrowne by it For example Thomas Cochi in his prophesie witnessing against England their Ministery is Anti-christian and being so cannot beget true faith and where there is no true faith there is no true salvation a fearefull sentence in my judgemnt Again our beloved Mr. de Cluse in his prophesie laboured to prove separation from a true Church for any corruption obstinately stood in this Doctrine was by another in prophecying there shewed to be absolutely contrary to the place Rev. 2. 24. which how unsoundly it was concluded by our Teacher was â—â—en observed by many Also it was since by another delivered in the way aâ— prophesie that even among our selves did reigne in my 〈◊〉 as namely fulnesse of bread pride and idlenesse 〈…〉 in that they were not satisfied with neither temporall nor â—pirituall food pride in that many did strive to goe beyond their calling idlenesse in that many were negligent in their callings If these things be so and be not redressed by the 〈◊〉 of this proâ—hesie we must according to Mr. deâ—Cluse his Doctrine make a new sâ—paration How oft doe the Brâ—threâ— except one against anothers prophecying by which much heart-burning and strife is â—indlâ—d between them Thâ—se thiâ—gs being well considered I pray you well to minde whether this new way of prophecying on the Lords day can be â—or the edification of the Church or not For this new propâ—â—ying of the Lay people read a Treatise newly set forth by 〈◊〉 Apolâ—nij 19. They will use no set Formes of Prayer THey finde fault with set Formes of Prayers and this also they learne of the Anabaptists who having burnt all the Books in Munster and in the Dominions of King Iohn of Zâ—â—on except the Bible were compelled either to pray without book which they call Praying with the spirit or not at all moreover the Anabaptists were so ignorant as Lambertus Hortensiâ—â— reporteth that among the numerous multitude of them 〈◊〉 was not one found as it was credibly reported that could read So they being not able to pray within book but all without book They have with the Brownists invented divers arguments against set Prayers They pretend set Prayers to be a device of man a muzling of the spirit a nurse of idlenesse and a meanes to neglect the graâ—es of God that are in them whereas they pretend extemporary prayers to be the work of the spirit whereas rather thereby they â—â—zzell the spirit of the people being tyed to the ex tempoâ—e and 〈◊〉 prayers of the Ministers
was made easie if so no marvaâ—lâ— so many like of it And this is the very reason besides the novelty of it that this kinde of Doctrine takes so well here in London and other parts of the Kingdome and that you see so many dance after this pipe running after such and such crowding the Churches and filling the doores and windowes even such carnall and vile persons many of them as care not to heare any other godly Ministers but onely their Leaders Oh it pleaseth Nature well to havâ— Heaven and their lusts too How many of these opinions were I will not stand to number but how desparately eroneous they were I shall shew you in naming some of them First that the whole Letter of the Scripture holdeth forth â— Covenant of works contrary to 3 Iohn 16. 1 Tim. 1. 15. 11. Matth. 28. 8. Heb. 10 11 12. Secondly that in the â—aving Conversion of a sinner the faculties of the soule and working thereof are deâ—â—â—oyed and made to cease and the holy Ghost agitates in stead of them contrary to Luke 24 45. Iohn 21 12. 1 Thes. 5. 23. Heb. 9. 14. Iohn 14. 26. Thirdly That God the Father Sonne and holy Ghâ—st may give themselves to the soul◠〈◊〉 that the souâ—e may have true â—mon with Christ true reâ—â—â—ssion of 〈◊〉 true marriage and fellowshipâ— true sanâ—â—iâ—â—cation 〈◊〉 the bloud of Christ and yet â—e an Hypocrite contrary to Eph. 4. 24. Fourthly That there is no 〈◊〉 righteousnesse in the Saints nor any in them but onely in Christ contrary to 2 Timothy 1. 5. â— Pet. 1. 4. 2 Tim. 1. 6. 1 Ioh. 16. Fiftly that the 〈◊〉 doth work in Hypocrites by gifts and graees but in Godâ— children immediately contrary to Heb. 5. 15. 11. Heb. 17. Sixty That a man must take no notice of sin or repentance for it contrary to Psal. 51. Seventâ—ly That it is a â—oule damning error to make Sanctification an evidence oâ— Justification contrary to Romanâ— 8. 1. Iohn 3. 10. Eghtly That the divell and nature may be the cause of good works An unsavory 〈…〉 to 〈◊〉 command Luke 4. 22. You may see a confutation of 82. of these Errors in Master Wells his Book Unsavory Speeches Confuted These that follow were adjudged by the Assembly aforesaid as unsafe Speeches 1. TO say we are justified by Faith is an unsafe speech wee must say we are justified by Christ. Answer 1. False for the coâ—â—ant language of the Scripture is not unsafe but we are justified by faith is the constant language of the Scripture Rom. 1. 5. being justified by faith the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 10 31 32. Righteousnesse by Faith Phil. 3 9 10. 2. The distinct phrase of the Scripture used in distinguishing Legall and Evangelicaâ—l righteousnesse is no unsafe Speech but such is this Rom. 9. 31 32. Israel found not righteousnes because they sought it of the Law not of or by faith So Rom. 10. 5 6. The righteousnesse of faith saith thus c. The Apostle makes these two so directly opposite as membra dividentia or contrary species that there is no danger one should be taken for another but that it 's so safe as that he that affirmes the one denyes the other yea in the most exact expression that ever Paul made to exclude whatsoever might be unsafe towards a mans justification you have this phrase yea twice in the same verse Phil. 3. 5. not having mine owne righteousnesse which is of the Law but that which 〈◊〉 through the faith of Christ And againe The righteousnesse which is of God by faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ergo it is no unsafe speech yea it must be said on the contrary from those grounds that to say a man is justified before faith or without faith is unsafe as contrarie to the language of the Scriptures And for the second part that we must say we are justified by Christ it is true so far as that it cannot be denyed nor is unsound or unsafe at all to speake but if it mean a must of necessity alwayes or only so to speak it as it is here set in opposition to the phrase of being justified by faith then it is utterly false for as much as the Scripture leads us along in the way of other expressions ordinarily the Apostle gives us the truth of Doctrine soundnesse of phrase together Rom. 10. 3. Christ is the end â—o the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth 2. To evidence justification by sanctification or graces favours of Rome Answ Not so 1. Rome acknowledgeth no justification in our common sense Scil by righteousnesse imputed 2. Rome denies evidencing of our justification and peace with God and teacheth Doctrine of doubting and professeth that a man cannot know what God will doe with him for life or death unlesse by speciall Revelation which is not ordinary but if they mean old Rome or Pauls Rome to which he wrote it 's true that it ravours of the Doctrine that they received as appeareth Rom. 8. 28. All things coâ— worke for good the evill of every evill being taken away which is a poynt of justification and this is propounded under the evidence of the love of God to them that love him because Rom. 8. 2. 9. 13 14. the evidencing of our beeing in Christ freedome from condemnation and adoption is prosecuted by arguments from sanctification as by having the Spirit being led by the Spirit walking after the Spirit mortifying the deeds of the flesh by the Spirit and if hereto were added the Doctrine of St. Iohn so abundant this way in his first Epistle whereof I have already made mention I doubt not but it was the faith of the Church of Rome that then was so that the speech is unsavory and casting a foule aspersion on a good thing expressed in the Scripture but as for the poynt it self that is included we referre it to its place to be discussed when it is â—ightly staâ—ed 3. If I be holy I am never the better accâ—pted of God if I be unholyâ— I am never the worse this I am sure of he that hath elected me must save me Answ. These words ravour very ill and relish of a carelesse and ungracious spirit for howsoever we grant that our acceptation 〈◊〉 justification is alwayes in and through Christ the same in Gods account yet this expression imports that though a mans conversation be never so holy and gracious yet be can expect never the more manifestation of Gods kindnesse and love to him contrary to Psal. 50. ult To him that orders his conversation aright I will shew the salvation of God and Iohn 14. 21. It implyes secondly that though a mans conversation be never so vile and sensuall yet he need not fear or expect any further expression of Gods displeasure and anger to breake forth against him or with-drawings of his favour from himâ— contrary to Psal. 51. 8 11 12. where God breaks Davids bones for his â—in and