Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	church_n	rome_n	separation_n	2,835	5	10.7415	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19033	The plea for infants and elder people, concerning their baptisme, or, A processe of the passages between M. Iohn Smyth and Richard Clyfton wherein, first is proved, that the baptising of infants of beleevers, is an ordinance of God, secondly, that the rebaptising of such, as have been formerly baptised in the apostate churches of Christians, is utterly unlawful, also, the reasons and objects to the contrarie, answered : divided into two principal heads, I. Of the first position, concerning the baptising of infants, II. Of the second position, concerning the rebaptising of elder people.	Clyfton, Richard, d. 1616.	1610 (1610)	STC 5450; ESTC S1572	214,939	244

then I hope it cannot be denyed but so it is lawfull to do for other ordinances also Touching the error of the Incarnation of Christ which also Mr. Smyth desyreth may not be imputed vnto them It is wel knowne that many of theire company holding that error about the incarnation are separated from the rest And Mr. Smyth him selfe as some amongst them have reported maketh a question about the first matter of Christs humane nature as if it were not a poynt of fayth to beleeve that it was of the virgin though it be to be beleeved that the second matter was nourished in her womb Whether his hearers do wrong him in such reports or how he resteth satisfied it is best knowen to himselfe And be it that he stand cleere of this error yet is be taynted with the errors of general redemption and free wil els why hath he given forth these Positions 1. Christs Redemption strecheth to all men 2. Man hath not lost the facultie of willing any good thing that is shewed him And with all added therevnto his Reasons in defence thereof Now let the Reader judge what cause he had to desire that these things should not be imputed vnto them Lastly Mr. Smyth taketh upon him to advertise our Church saying Let the Separation be advertised that whereas they do so cōfidently through theire selfe-love self conceat fil their mouthes with heresie and hereticks as therby they would feare Babes that therein they tread in the steps of all the Antichristians their predecessors c. For this his advertisment if any have spoken otherwise then is meete I am no Patrone of any such speeches but if it was lawful for Iohn to call the Phariseis Generatiō of vipers And Paul to say to Elimas Oh ful of subtilty all mischeiffe c. then is it not simply vnlawfull to vse such speeches so it be for reproofe and not for reproche Therefore to call them hereticks and their opinions heresies it being true and spoken in detestation of their errors not of their persons I see no evil in so saying see these places Io. 8. 44. 2. Pet. 2. 1. 2. 1. Io. 2. 18. Act. 13. 10. Gal. 3. 1. Rev. 2. 6. 15. And if this be a fault in vs why doth Mr. Smyth fil his mouth with Antichristian errors so calling those truthes which we hold Hath he a dispensation so to speake agaynst the truth and yet to blame vs for calling their false doctrynes heresy I should rather have thought that he ought to have advertised himselfe for these reprochful sclanderous speaches that he hath vttered agaynst our Church the Teachers thereof calling them † Char●● Epistle the Re● Rabbies of the Separation The greatest Rabbies And thus speaking to the Church Be it knowen to the Separation that we account them in respect of their constitution as very an harlot as eyther her mother England or her Grandmother Rome We protest agaynst her as wel for her false constitution as for her false Ministery worship and Goverment I could wish as the Tyrant wished Concerning the people of Rome that all their heads were joyned into one We desire the Separation they wil not in craftines withdrawe from the Combate We require them nay we charge them yea we chalendg them to the defence of their errors We protest agaynst them to be a false Church They treade in the steps of all the Antichristians their Predecessors Let them take heed that notwithstanding their Syrenes songs they prove not Cages full of most vgly and deformed Antichristian Hereticks All these reprochfull speeches if not more hath he published in lesse then a sheete of paper besydes what are contayned in his Book And yet notwithstanding all these speaches have thus passed from him he takes vpon him to advertise vs for that we can justifie against his doctrines against themselves for their obstinate defending of their errors But where he chargeth vs to call them Heretikes their doctrines heresie through self love and self conceatednes c. If he had applyed self love and conceipt to him self I take it he might more justly have done it if we may judge by his words As for selfe love and selfe cōceipt we condemne in whomsoever And howsoever we have our infirmities I trust he shalnot be able to tax any of vs iustly of these imputations And as Mr. Smyth wisheth us not to be wyse in our owne eies through pryde c. we hope the Lord wil so teach vs. And we pray the Lord to geve him a sight of his damnable heresies whereinto he is fallen openly sinning in the publishing thereof to the great dishonor of God and greiffe of al the godly and that the almighty may preserve all that are his chosen from being poysoned with the same Richard Clyfton THE PROCESSE OF THE PASSAGES between Mr Iohn Smyth and Richard Clifton Mr Smyth CERTAINE REASONS PROPOVNDED To Mr Rich. Clifton concerning the two Propositions following 1. That infants are not to be baptised 1. Because there is neither precept nor example in the new Testament of any infants that were baptised by Iohn or Christs Disciples Only they that did confesse their sinnes and confesse their Faith were baptized Marc. 1. 4. 5. Act. 8. 37. 2. Bicause Christ commaundeth to make Disciples by teaching them and then to baptize thē Mat. 28 19. Ioh. 4. 1. but infants cannot by doctryne become Christs Disciples and so cannot by the rule of Christ be baptized 3. Bicause if infants be baptized the carnal seed is baptized and so the seale of the covenant is administred to them vnto whom the covenant apperteyneth not Rom 9. 8. which is a profanation 2. That Antichristians converted are to be admited into the true Church by Baptisme 1. Bicause Churches are so to be constituted now after the defection of Antichrist as they were first erected by the Apostles But in the constitution of Churches the Apostles received in the members by baptisme go So must wee doe now 2. Bicause true baptisme is but one but the baptisme of Antichrist is not true baptisme and so not that one baptisme of Christ but all members of Christ must have true baptisme 3. Because as the false Church is rejected and the true erected the false Ministery forsaken and the true received So false worship and by consequent baptisme must ●e renounced and the true baptisme assumed Richard Clifton AN ANSVVER TO TVVO ANABAPTISTICALL OPINIONS vid videlicet 1. That Infants are not to be baptized 2. That Antichristians converted are to be admitted into the true Church by baptisme ALthough with great sorrow I am forced to vndertake this busynes against him that was deere vnto me yet being therevnto provoked by the sending to me these two Positions with certayne reasons annexed vnder the Authours owne hand I thought it my part although the vnablest of many to contend for the maintenance of the faith which was once given to the Saints Iud. 3. And by the

to Baptisme by reason of the fayth Repl. of some of their Auncestors that were faythful then are they the true matter of the visible church c. We do not say that the Infants of the church of Rome have tytle to An. Baptisme by reason of their Ancestors fayth but do afferme that in respect of that Apostatical standing neither infants nor their parents have right to any of Gods ordinances neither is it inough that people be elected and thereby to have right to Gods covenant c. before God but to be members of the visible church and partakers of the holy things there must be a * Rev. 18. 4 visible going out of Babylon “ 2 Cor. 6. ●6 f●r what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols the vessels of the Lord must be caried out to Ierusalem then are they in their due place and shal have their true vse which in their Romish standing they could not have albeit in Babylon they were the vessels of the Lord. And herein are you deceived that if any of the ordinances of God be reteyned in the hands of Autichristians these ordinances must eyther make them a true visible Church or be none of his and when they are brought out thence have no vse These thing may also answer that which followes For upon this that we deny Baptisme administred in Poperie to be iterated you would conclude these absurdities to follow viz. That infants of the Church of Rome are a true visible Ch in the cōstitutiō essential Repl. causes therof That the Church in the new testamēt cōmeth by successiō of carnal genealogie through the church of Rome to our dayes That the matter of the church viz. Infants descending of baptised parents is by genealogie the form of the Church viz. baptism vpon those infants is by descent and therefore the Church is by succession I demaund why may not the Ministerie be by succession as wel as the Church and England and Rome true Churches their Ministery true c. To all which particulars I answer thus 1. Infants may be members Ans of a visible Church but that a visible Church can stand of infants onely we deny 2. Neyther Infants nor the elder sort standing in Antichristianism can be the matter of a true visible Church being so looked vpon according to that estate and respect 3. Baptisme which you would have the form hath his true use in the visible Church of Christ and to Gods people 4. let the people of God in Babylon and the Baptisme that there they receive be compared with Gods people in the apostate Church of Israel with their circumcision And it will appeare that the infants of the Church of Rome are not a true visible Church in the essential causes therof any more or otherwise then as they were in Israel Cōcerning the Churches successiō by carnal genealogie I answer that as the covenāt was made with Abrahā and his seed so vnder the Gospell doth the promise belong to the parents their childrē And that God had “ Apoc. 14. 4. his people in all the tymes of Popery that were within his covenant Neyther is this to hold succession of visible Churches but to vse your terme a succession of true beleevers in all ages though not alwayes known in publick it being the lot of the † Rev. 1. 13. 14. Church to be persequuted by the Dragon and driven to flee into the wildernes for a time times half a time And therefore seing the matter of the visible Church is not alwayes nor otherwise seen to descend from baptised persos by genealogie then as it did from parents circumcised in Israel there can be no other succession visible of the Church or Ministerie then is incident to such estate but as in Israel there was * a breaking off of both so hath King 12 33. ●ev 11. 7. 12. 14. ● 13. 7. 8. it fallen out under the new Testament a † surceasing of succession of true visible Churches and of the true Ministerie in the apostasie of Antichrist And this may satisfie you why we may not returne back againe to churches continuing in Apostasie But where you say you hear some are mynded to take up their former ministerie and returne back againe into England You should have done wel eyther to have forewarned such if you knew in them a purpose to sinne els not so easily to have received the report thereof to make it publike and so to cause suspition to arise against any brother undeservedly For myne own part I know none of the church to have any such thoughts If any that have left the fayth as you have done and departed from the church or for their sinne justly cast out so do purpose what is that to us look to it your selves And truly for my part I hold it as lawful to retayne the church and Ministerie of England as to retayne the baptisme and when I shal yeeld to the truth of the baptisme of England I wil yeeld to the truth of the Church Ministerie of England c. It may be you speak truer of your estate then you think But whatsoever Ans your perswasion is I mynd a difference to be put between baptisme administred in churches standing in Apostasie and the constitution and ministerie of these churches For baptisme being the ordinance of God may not be repeated as before is proved but those Assemblies that consist of confused multitudes and are not set in the wayes of God that have a false Ministerie and worship we have a speciall commandement * to separate Rev. 18. 4 Cor. 6. 17. from as we have from al corruptions of Gods ordinances but in no scripture to reject the ordinances themselves for any pollution that is upon them Now it is further to be remembred that we in retayning baptisme do not retayn the corruptions wherewith it was administred but that which is of God therein Neyther do we hold it lawful for them that are come out of Babylon to returne thither to fetch Baptisme And to make this difference to appeare more playnly Let be considered the example of those Israelites that returned to Ierusalem who cast not of theire circumcision yet might they not iustify for true that apostate Church or Ministery from which they did separate or continue in the cōmunion thereof without sinne But because I know the Ministerie and Church of England is false therefore it must needs be that Baptisme which is the forme of the Church essentially c. Repl. For the Ministerie of the Church of England whether it be true or false Ans is not the thing controverted between you and me but that baptisme in an apostate Church is false essentially I deny and your self confesseth * Char● pag. 35. that if it be administred by Antichrist to such as confesse their faith and sinnes it were true and not to be repeated which

your nevv devysed baptisme have rejected the seal of GODS Covenant and consequently the covenaunt it self and so the Author of it And as IEROBOAM † forged the eight moneth out of his owne hart for to keep a feast unto ●in 12. the Lord so have you forged a church of your own invention and the receiving in of members into it And that which you would impute unto ●v 22. ● us is fallen upon your selves even that * woe for adding to the word Secondly I affirme that as the holy Ghost sayth the Antichristians are in condition equal to Pagans not called Israelites or Samaritanes but Babylonians Aegyptians Sodomites Gentiles But the holy Ghost knoweth what and how to speak And therefore as the Babylonians Aegyptians Sodomites and Gentiles washings were nothing no more is the Baptisme of Antichristians any thing c. I have Answered to this before pag. 150. 151. And shewed that the Iewes which were called the people of “ Gomorah and their Rulers the Princes of Sodome should then stand in the same estate with Pagans and 〈◊〉 10. in condition be equal unto them and their circumcision voyd if the holy Ghost in so terming them did mynd as you doe This is a strange kind of reasoning that because the Antichristians resemble the Gentiles in some filthie practises for the which the spirit calls them Sodomites c. therefore their condition in al respects is as theirs Christ called Peter Sathan shal we thereupon conclude that therefore Peter was as Sathan in al respects because in his counseling his master to favour himself he was like him Of Iudah it is sayd that she was more † corrupt in al her wayes then Samaria and Sodome shal we say because the Lord thus speaketh that Iudah was now to be recircumcised If the holy Ghost calling the Antichristians Sodomites c. should teach us thereby that he esteemeth no otherwise of the church and Baptisme then of the Synagogues of Babylon the washings of Aegypt then of the worship of Sodome and the Pagans as you say then must he needs teach us the like to esteeme of the churches of the Iewes and of the circumcision when he calls them the people of Gomorrah and more corrupt in her wayes then Sodome as before I have observed For your comparison of the Gentiles washings with the baptisme of Antichristians affirming that as the former were nothing no more is the other This is not to compare things alike for the washings of the Gentiles were of mans invention and baptisme is the ordinance of Christ And therefore it wil not follow that because mens devises are nothing when any of thē turne to God that baptisme also God ordinance prophaned in Popery is therefore nothing when any such Apostates repent and returne to Sion No more is this a good reason to prove that the Holy Ghost did fore see that the Antichristians would abolish true baptisme by baptising Infants because he calleth persons Apostating Babylonians Sodomites Gentiles Thirdly whereas you say that repayring the Church now after the Apostasie of R●pl Antichrist is a fitter speech then constituting herein do you both tax your selves of the vse of that word constitution and playnly signifie that you incline to maintain the Churches of England or Rome to be true churches wherein whether you do not forsake your first fayth and turn with the dogge to the vomite look you unto it c. If it had pleased you to have taken my whole answer you had neither Ans cause to have excepted against the word repayring nor yet have gathered thereby any inclination in us to maintayn any thing that is corrupt eyther in the churches of England or Rome much lesse as you say to forsake our first fayth and turne with the dogge to the vomite But you that thus speak it were good to take heed you be not the dogge that vomits out your blaspemous errors to the dishonour of God and offence of his people If the word of repayring had been so faulty you had done better to have manifested the untrunes thereof then to have bewrayed your evill thoughts in the unjust censuring of others But concerning repayring or reforming let the indifferent Reader judge if it be not more proper to us then to constitute or plant for who knoweth not that there is but one constitution or planting of the church under the Gospel which is founded by the Apostles And other forme or frame can no earthly power devyse then that which the Apostles have left us And seing at the first they did constitute churches in divers partes of the world and those churches ruinated by Antichrist shal not the restoring of them to the first patterne of the Apostles be properly called a repairing seing they did not cease utterly to be no churches but are churches in corruption or ruine But I wil not contend about words for that which I strive for is to have the church in that forme as the word prescribeth both for people worship goverment and what els appertaynes thereunto Fourthly I say that the Iewes that were converted to the sayth new Testament Rep. of Christ by Christ Iohn and the Apostles in your account were in a farre better estate then Antichristians for they as you say were of the same body with the church of the new Testament and their circumcision was a seal of the new Testament as you say and they were in Christ Iesus as you say and were washed I doubt not many of them into the Messiah c. and why might not they by Iohn Christ or his Apostles be admitted into the church without baptisme If therefore Christ Iohn and the Apostles would needs baptise them and so by baptisme constitute them into the new Testament that had al these prerogatives in your iudgment much more wil they have us to constitute Antichristians converted into the true church by baptisme This your reason is alike the rest nothing good for albeit that the Ch. ●ns of the Iewes was a true church yet had it not Christ exhibited in the flesh afore this tyme wherefore it was meet seing the Priesthood and ceremonial administration of that Church was changed and the † old was to cease ●eb 8. 13 that the Iewes as wel as the Gentiles should be partakers thereof alike that therby they might acknowledge Christ their Messiah to be come whō they looked for And as it was required of the mēbers of the old Church that they should * beleeve in the Messiah to come So was fayth “ required ●en 15. 6 ●m 4. 11. ●k 2. 25. ●or 10. 3. of them that should be admitted into the church of the Gospell wherein both Iewes Gentiles should be alike received baptissd into his name As for the Apostate church of Antichrist it is such a one as acknowledgeth Iesus Christ to be come professeth the Gospel though corruptly And baptisme received in the Apostate church hath

his use unto such as Acts. 8. 37. 2. ●1 44. Cor. 10. 3 repenting turne to the true church of Christ because baptisme is an ordinance of the new Testament appointed by the Lord himself And though the beleeving Iewes were in Christ members of his mysticall body and their circumcision a seal of the righteousnes of their fayth yet was their fayth in † Christ to come and circumcision did seal up unto them Christ to come And therefore al this being but by fayth in the Messiah to come it was necessarie that they should also receive him now being come and be baptised into his name if they would continue members in his body And so this may answer you why Iohn Christ and his disciples did not admit the Iewes as members of the church of the Gospell with out confession of fayth in CHRIST now come and Baptisme in his name And yet we may receive into our Church them that have been baptised in the Apostate Churches without iterating of baptisme upon the confession of their fayth and repentance Neyther is this to offer indignitie to the LORDS ordinances in the old TESTAMENT as you do seeme to charge us for wee honour them in their place and right use as the Lord then appointed them and your self I suppose wil not say that you offer indignitie to those ordinances of the Lord although you acknowledg that baptisme received in Popery is not be to repeated being administred to such as are of yeares upon their owne profession of fayth Agayne c. I deny that ever the English nation or any one of our predecessors were of Re. the fayth of Christ shew it if you can but we came of a Pagan race til Rome the mother came and put vpon vs her false baptism And therefore though the Romanes might plead this yet England cannot plead it and so your dissimilitude cannot hold in that thing and our case simply Paeganisme If al this were graunted that you say yet is the state of England in as Ans good case as Rome seing she by your own confession hath Rome for her mother † Ezech 44. and as the mother so is her Daughter If England partake with Rome in her Apostacy and whoredomes she must nedes be a member of her But I pray you Sir wil you admit of that baptisme in Rome without new baptising of such as shal come from thence if you do you overthrow your owne position viz That Antichristians converted are to be admitted into the true Church by baptisme And if you doe not why put you this dissimilitude betwene England and Rome which serves not to the question in hand But you desyre me to shew if I can that the Englishe nation or any one of our predecessors were of the fayth of Christ it may be I cannot shew that any of them were Anabaptists before you which you falsly call the fayth of Christ but I can shew to them that wil heare that our English nation receaved the fayth before Rome fel into this Apostacy First Gildas affirmeth * Act. Monu● Book 2. p. 95. Gildas li● de vict Aurelij Ambros● that Britayne receaved the Gospel in the tyme of Tiberius the Emperour vnder whome Christ suffered And then was not Rome “ Rom 1. apostate And further he sayth That Ioseph of Aremathea after the dispersion of the Iewes was sent of Philippe the Apostle from France to Britayne about the yeare of our Lord 63. And remayned in Britayne all his time who with his fellowes layed the first foundation of Christian faith among the Britayne people 2 † Tertul. con Indeos Tertullian testifyeth how the Gospell was dispersed abroad by the sound of the Apostles there reconeth up the Medes Persians Parthians and dwellers in Mesopotamia Iury Cappadocia Pontus Asia Phrygia Egypt Pamphilia with many more at length commeth to the coast of the Morianes and all the borders of Spaine with divers nations of France And there amongest 〈◊〉 other reciteth all the parts of Britayne and reporteth the same to be subiect to Christ And also reckoneth vp the places of Sarmatia of the Danes the Gerrmanes Schythians with many other Provinces and Isles in all which places sayth he reigneth the name of Christ which now beginneth to be common 3. † Origine sayth that Britayne did consent to Christian religion 4. * Nicephorus saith That Symon Origin ● 4. in ●…ch ●icep li. ● ●●0 Zelotes did spread the gospel of Christ to the west Ocean and brought the same into the Isles of Britayne 5. In the time of the Abbot of Cluniake the Scots did celebrate their Easter not after the Romane maner but after the Greeks as he testifieth to Barnard Which argueth that they had received the faith and not from Rome 6. Also it appeareth by a letter of Elutherius Bishop of Rome written to Lucius King of Britayne anno 169. that Lucius had received the faith of Christ in his Land before he sent to Elutherius for the Romane lawes for so do the words of the letter purport which are these Ye have receiued of late through Gods mercie in the Realme of Britayne the law and faith of Christ you have with you within the Realme both the partes of the scriptures out of them by Gods grace take ye a law and by that law through Gods sufferance rule your kingdome of Britayne c. And thus was fulfilled in Britayne as wel as in Isa 42. 4 other lands the words of the Prophet who sayth “ he shall not fayle nor be discouraged speaking of Christ til he hath set iudgement in the earth and the Iles shall waite for his law And it is also further written of this King Lucius that he did not cōpel the heathen but imbraced such as by the word were converted Which is to be observed concerning the constitution of the Churches then For it is sayd that he founded many Churches and gave great ritches and liberties to the same And because of this imbracing of the faith it caused those great troubles that fel out between the Britaynes which were Christians professing the faith and the infidels who brought in the Romanes which exercised much crueltie amongest the Christians In Dioclesians tyme the Churches of Britayne were greviously persecuted many sufferred for the faith of Christ as Albanus Iulius Aaron Amphibulus many more And thus if it please you to take notice from these writters you may see that this English nation were of such as professed the faith of Christ and and not of a Pagan race til Rome came and put vppon vs false baptisme as as you say neyther that our case is simply paganisme if these things be thus as is aforesayd Next whereas I sayd that repentance of such as were baptised in Apostate Churches was sufficient without rebaptization for their admittance into the church c. You answer That the Churches of Antichrist were false and Rep. the churche

from a false Church except he also do separate from the baptisme of Engl. c. Wherevnto he may be answered that it wil not follow that they which separate from a Church standing in apostasie or sinne must separate from the baptism therein receaved or yet from any other of Gods ordinances there retayned We are commaunded to forsake the whordomes of Babylon Apoc. 18. 4. but not to seperate from any ordinance of Christ that is found therein save onely from the polutions thereof Yea Mr. Smyth cannot deny that a Church standing in Apostasy is to be separated from when the baptism therein received if it be of such as confesse their fayth and sins is still to be retayned for such baptism sayth he i● true Baptism though administred by Antichristians Character p. 51. 2. Those Israelits that separated from Ieroboams Church which stood in Apostasy went to Ierusalē 2. Cor. 30. 11. did not separate frō their circumcisiō therin receaved No more are we from our baptisme as afterward is proved As for his Reason That the baptism of England cannot be true and to be reteayned and the Church of England false and to be rejected c. It is but as if he should say the circumcision of Israell cannot be true and to be reteyned and the Church of Israell false and to be rejected I speake of Israell being in Apostacy And therefore thus I answere vnto it that baptism retayned in Rome and so in all Apostate Churches is baptism and is not to be repeated as in the latter part of this Treatise is proved And seing Mr. Smyth holdeth there Character ●ag 51. may be † true baptism in an Apostate Church if they confesse their fayth doth not he crosse himself here to say neyther can the Church of England possibly be false except the baptism be false Now if true baptism may be in an apostate Church as he affirmeth then a Church may be false that is apostate not baptism by his owne reasoning Yet this man chargeth vs with contradiction vz. to say England hath a false constitution Engl. hath a true baptism We hold baptism so to be true in an apostate church as circumcisiō was in the 〈…〉 ate Church of Israel otherwise we do not affirm Now concerning 〈…〉 ptising of infants Mr. Sm. thus proceedeth saying It seemeth to vs th● vnreasonable heresy of all Antichristianism for considering what baptism is An 〈◊〉 is no more capable of baptism then is any vnreasonable or insensible creature ●d then addeth 3. Reasons agaynst it 1. from his owne description baptism saying baptism is not the washing with water but it is the baptism of 〈…〉 it the confession of the mouth and washing with water c. These blasphemous speeches against the ordinance of Christ bewrayeth ●f what spirit this man is Gods ordinance is a most vnreasonable heresie with ●im yea the most vnreasonable of all Antichristianisme Thus iustifying all the ●dolatries of the Papists and their detestable heresies in comparison of ba●tising of infants Besides his odious and blasphemous comparison af●rming Infants no more capable of baptisme then the vnreasonable and insensible 〈…〉 ures So that in his judgement a horse yea a block may aswell be ●aptised as the children of the Church whom the Lord of his free grace 〈…〉 ceiveth together with their parents to be his by an everlasting covenant Gen. 17. 7. and therefore are holy and capable of the blessing of Christ 1 Cor. 7. 14. Ier. 1. 5. Luk. 1. 15. Mark 10. 16. as hereafter is sufficiently 〈…〉 ved And therefore to compare these infants with vnreasonable and insensible creatures as touching the participation of Baptisme argueth the authour of such comparisons to be void of spiritual sense and reason and more to follow the corruption of his own hart in hatred against the truth then to mind what he affirmeth Concerning his description of Baptisme and those Scriptures which he quoteth for proof thereof see them answered hereafter pag. 94. where I have shewed 1. that the baptisme of the Spirit is no part of that outward Ceremonie of baptisme that is administred by man but is the inward work of the spirit in the elect of God 2. That the confession of faith of sinns is no part of the Sacrament of Baptisme seing the confession of sinns is so often to be repeated as we transgresse against the Lord likewise of faith as we have occasion administred vnto us And therefore baptisme which is given to be the seale of Gods covenant to his Church is the baptising of the faithful and their seed with water into the name of the father and of the sonne and of the holy Ghost Mat. 3. 11. with Mat. 28. 19. of this infants are capable neyther is their baptisme folly as Mr Smyth sayth but it wil prove his fully to make mans confession a part of the Sacrament which oftentymes ● hypocrical as it was in S. Magus to shut out of Gods covenant who● the Lord hath accepted And it wil prove his folly to denye baptisme to infants because they cānot performe such actions as in other respects are required of the elder sort that are to be baptised who also not having trāsgressed in like manner therefore need not so to confesse And it wil prove his folly to deny that an infant can be baptised with the spirit for so to say is to deny that an infant can be saved But of these things hereafter His 2. Reason is taken from Iohns baptisme framed thus Iohns baptisme was the baptisme of repentance Infants have not Repentance and therefore can not have the baptisme of Repentance To this Argument I answer thus 1. That repentance is required of such as have actually transgressed not as the proper cause of baptisme but as a necessarie fruit of fayth condition of the Gospel required of them that being of yeares are to be received into the church whether before or since Christs coming But of the infants of the faythful whether of those that are newly received into the church or of beleevers borne in the church it is not so Ergo c. 2. Repentance was not required of the infants of the Iewes before they were circumcised no more is it to be required of our infants before baptisme these two Sacraments being the same in use 3. If Baptisme of repentance be understood onely of the tyme past not of the tyme to come then is that a false exposition of Iohns baptisme For as he taught that those that came to be baptised should repent so also his baptisme did preach a continual dying to sinne or practise of repentance al our life long Rom. 6. 4. And therefore though children cannot repent of actual sinne which they are not to do they having not committed the same yet is their baptisme the baptisme of repentance seeing it preacheth continual mortification repentance to the receivers thereof which is one true use of baptisme His third