profess the pure Religion and make it appear at least to the judgment of man that they are Godly in Christ Iesus this is an inseparable Mark of a true Church as we may see 1 Cor. 14.33 See further Mr Vines in his Treatise of the Sacrament p. 150 151. saith That the Separatists laid the foundation viz. That only Visible Saints are fit Communicants which is true as to the Churches Admission That real Saints only are worthy Communicants which is true too as to the inward Grace or Benefit And 151. There is a great difference between Christs real Members and Guests at this Table and as I may say the Visible Churches Members or Guests If he be a visible Professor of Faith unshipwrakt of capacity to discern the Lords Body of Life without Scandal he is a Guest of the Church And p. 205. Though I should rest in serious Professsion of Faith and Repentance which is not pulled down again by a wicked Life or scandalous Sin yet when a man lieth under the charge of our censure for some scandalous sin the case is otherwise c. Read the rest And p. 324 329. The Covenant of God with us is that all that believe in Christ that died and receive him for their Lord and Saviour shall have remission of sins c. Answerable to this act of God the Believer accepts of and submits to this Covenant and the Conditions of it viz. to believe and to have God for our God and thereof makes a solemn profession in this Sacrament giving up himself to Christ as Lord and Saviour restipulating and striking hands with him to be his and so binds himself and doth as it were seal a Counterpart to God again and not only so but comes into a claim of all the riches and legacies of the Will or Covenant because he hath accepted and here declares his acceptance of the Covenant The Seal is indeed properly of that which is Gods part of the Covenant to perform and give and is no more but offered until we subscribe and set our hands to it and then its compleat and the Benefits may be claimed as the benefit of any conditional promise may be when the condition is performed And lest you should stumble at that word I must let you know that the Will accepting and submitting to the Conditions is the performance of the Conditions required NB. And pag. 249 250 c. Though as to admittance which is the Churches part to the outward Ordinance he make Profession as I do sufficient yet to the question whether the Sacrament be a Converting Ordinance he concludes that It is not an Ordinance appointed for Conversion His Arguments are 1. Because no effect can be ascribed to this Ordinance which fals not under the signification of it c. as Vasquez 2. This Sacrament by the institution of it appears to praesuppose those that reap the sweet and benefit of it to be Converts and in grace namely to have faith in Christ and to be living members and if this be presupposed by this Ordinance then it is not first wrought by it 3. The Word is the only Instrument of God to beget Faith or work Conversion c. And he answereth the Objections of the contrary minded and to them that argue that the Lords Supper is a Converting Ordinance because its possible a man may be then converted he saith they may as well make Ordination or Marriage Converting Ordinances because by the words then uttered a man may be converted He citeth the words of learned Rich. Hooker Eccles. Pol. l. 5. pag. 5â6 The grace which we have by it doth not begin but continue grace or life no man therefore receives this Sacrament before Baptism because no dead thing is capable of nourishment that which groweth must of necessity first live And for further Authority he addeth And to this purpose all our Learned Divines have given their suffrage And the Papists though they differ from us in denying remission of sins in this Sacrament in favour to their Sacrament of Penance yet they hold it to be an Ordinance of Nutrition and so do all their Schoolmen and so doth the Church of England The strengthening and refreshing of our souls c I need not number Authors or Churches It is so plain a case that I wonder they that have stood up in defence of it as a converting Ordinance have not taken notice of it There is an Army to a man against them and the antient Christian Churches are so clear in it So far Mr Vines Hooker in him Concerning the Distinction of Forum Dei Ecclesiae and its sense see that judicious Agreement of the Associated Ministers of Cumberlanâ and Westmerland pag. 47. where they take notice of Mr. Blakes questioning it Since these Papers were in the Press I was told by a Reverend Brother that Mr Blake professeth to hold the Necessity of the Profession of a saving Faith as well as I and by one of his special acquaintance in the Ministry who heard me express my mind that Mr Blake's was the same I durst not omit the mention of this lest it should be injurious to him And yet how far the reporters are in the right and understand his meaning I am no further able to tell you but that they are credible persons For my part I defended my own Doctrine against the charge which in two Volumes he brought against it And I supposed he would not write so much of two Volumes against a Doctrine which he judged the same with his own And I medled only with his books and not his secret thoughts Whether I have been guilty of feigning an Adversary that took himself for none I am contented to stand to the judgment of any impartial man on earth that will read our books Surely I found it over each page that a Faith short of Iustifying entitleth to Baptism and I never met with any such explication in him as that by A faith short of Iustifying he meant A Profession of Iustifying faith And sure Faith and Profession be not all one nor Iustifying and Short of justifying all one Nor do others that read his books understand him any otherwise then I do so far as I can learn sure the Ministers that were Authors of the Propositions for Reformation of Parish Congregations Printed for the Norwich Bookseller understood him as I do p. 17. where they say thus Obj. 3. But a dogmatical Faith may entitle to Baptism as Mr Blake Treat on Con. speaks though there be no profession of a justifying faith repentance Answ. We cannot think so seeing the faith required to be professed before Baptism is such a Faith as hath salvation annexed to it Mar. 16.16 It is a Faith of the whole heart Acts 8.38 Repentance is also required to Baptism as well as Faith Acts 2.38 and the Church in the usual form of Baptism enjoyned the baptized person not only to profess the doctrine of Faith but
sequitur pontificem malum non esse câput ecclesiae alios episcopos si mâli 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 meÌbra mortua perinde non vera corporis Christi quantuÌ attinet ad rationem meÌbri ut est pars quaedam vivi corporis tamen esse verissima membra in ratione instrumenti id est papâm episcopos esse vera capita c. ratio est quia membra viva constituuntur per charitateÌ qua impâi 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 âhurches 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 affiâm 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 faâth 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
was in them that must judge Angels ver 3. was a special saving sanctification But such did this seem to Paul which he speaketh of as is exprest in the Text therefore there must needs be at least a Profession of this And because Mr. Blake tells me pag. 14â how well I know that he hath proved his assertion I shall peruse all those Texts which he citeth to that end in his Book of the Covenants pâg 207 208. And first we must observe that the persons that he there himself speaketh of are Visible Professors as distinct from the Elect and Regenerate yea from those that are really Saints and shall be for heaven And he calleth them men separate for God and Dedicated to him But this is unedifying slippery dealing to confound two distinct causes toââther He that is professedly Dedicated to God is a Professor of saving Faith He that is really and heartily Dedicated to âod shall certainly be saved Here Mr. Blake pleadeth the cause that I do maintain and not that which he hath undertaken against me and the common truth I confess as well as he that Profession maketh Saints visible or by profession as hearty Dedication to God by faith maketh real or heart-Saints But how angry is he himself afterwards at this distinction of Real and Professed Saints as if that none but the justified were real Saints But what is all this to a Saint-ship consisting in the Profession of a faith short of that which is Justifying I shall take these last to be Mr. Blake's Saints and no Scripture Saints I mean Saints of his denomination till he have better proved that ever Scripture so calleth them The Texts cited by him are these Frst Psal. 16.3 Saints on earth And I yield to him that there are Saints on earth Then 1 Cor. 16.1 Heb. 16.10 where we read of Collections for the Saints and Administration to the Saints By these I doubt not but he may prove that more than the heart-Saints are called Saints but that is because they profess and seem to be heart-Saints These Texts are far from proving that there are any Saints that profess not saving sanctity I shall anon tell Mr. Blake who they were that Calvin and other Protestants do expound the word Saints of in such Passages as these though he hath already told us that he abhorreth the Doctrine which they maintain But this is a Practical case that Mr. Blake hath here put us upon the Communion of Saints doth not only consist in Conjunction in God's Worship but also in mutual relief and free communication of outward things as the Text which he here citeth doth declare Those therefore that are of his mind must communicate as well to the Professors of a common Faith as of a saving Faith But hear who they be that Pareus supposeth Paul to mean in loc Docemur vero ad ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sanctorum quam credimus etiam huc pertinere ut necessitatibus fratrum mutuò tangamur pro virili succurramus prompte fideliter sumus enim unius Corporis membra c. Nam Fidei charitatis unitas omnes in Christo Capite conjungit It is then the Members of Christ united in him and joyned in Faith and Love And those that Profess to be such are so to us Acts 26.10 Acts 9.2 When Paul shut up many of the Saints in prison and did much evil against them he knew no other way of distinction than an outward Profession c. saith Mr Blake Answ. Nor do we know means hearts nor think that Paul knew them But the Question is What they professed Whether saving Sanctity or a common Sanctity and Faith short of it He addeth We read of Churches of the Saints 1 Cor. 14.33 and they were taken in to be Church-Members as soon as they made profession as they ceased to be Jews or Pagans and took them to the way of Christianity as we see Act. 2. Act. 8.12 13 38. Ans. 1. They renounced the way of ungodliness and wickedness in general by a Profession of repentance as well as the way of Paganism and Judaiism in particular There were no Christians that Professed not Repentance towards God from dead works 2. We believe that there were Churches of the Saints and therefore that none should be of the Church that Profess not to be true Saints But prove if you can that there was ever either Church or Church-member called Saints in Scripture that had no either special Sanctity or a Profession of it You say nothing to prove that any were called Saints upon the Profession of a Faith short of saving Faith Emphaticum est saith Calvin in loc quod exprimit sanctorum acsi Ecclesias rite compositas à sinistra nota subduceret Of which see him fully on 1 Cor. 1.2 And as for those Acts 8. you cannot prove that any of them were either called Saints or Baptized without a Profession of a Justifying faith as shall further be shewed afterward M. Blake addeth The Epistles wrote to particular visible Churches are inscribed to Saints among which what some are read both the Epistles to the Corinthians yea what almost all are in some Churches read the Epistle to the Church of Sardis Answ. 1. No man in any of these Churches is called a Saint upon the Profession of any lower kind of faith but only on the presence or profession of saving faith 2. I have not heard a proof that the worst of these Churchâs had many members if any that were impenitent and obstinâte in any error or sin after admonition and so that were visibly destitute of the saving Sanctity which they did Profess 3. If such there were the Churches are commanded to cast them out and then they will be no longer numbred with the Saints 4. The Apostles may well call the whole Society Saints when part are really so in heart and the rest Profess it We commonly tell both Papists and Separatists that the Scripture thus denominateth the whole from the better part as a field is called a Corn-field though theree be more Tares then Corn and yet you will not call the Tares Corn No more will I call the ungodly Saints when I know them though I will call the Church Saints where they are and them while they Profess themselves Saints and I know not but they are so 5. If you can with patience but read what Clavin saith on 1 Cor. 1.2 and Peter Martyr to name no more now you will see that Doctrine which you abhor maintained by the Protestants and in what current it is that your opinion floweth Mr. Blake adds The Apostle tells us of the faith once delivered to the Saints Jude 3. the doctrine of Faith as is agreed on all hands all that profess that Doctrine are Saints Answ. All that cordially entertain that Doctrine are Saints in Heart All that profess so to entertain it are Saints by Profession while that Profession hath any validity But all that barely
of a good conscience is we shall further enquire anon Both the common expositions fully confirm the point which I maintain The Assemblies Annot. recite both thus Hence by the answer of a good conscience we may understand that unfeigned faith whereof they made confession at their Baptism and whereby their consciences were purified and whereby they received the remission of their sins c. Some understand by the Answer of a good Conscience that Covenant whereinto they entered at their Baptism the embracing whereof they testified by their unfeigned confession of their Faith viz. such a Faith as is aforesaid so that I conclude that this Texâ doth plainly shew that Baptm is for the saving of the Baptized as to the instituted use and may not be used meerly to any lower ends then to put them into a present state of Salvation Aâgum 18. No one may be admitted to Baptism who may not be admitted a Member of the Church of Christ. No one may be admitted to be a Member of the Church of Christ without the profession of a saving faith by himself or Parents or Proparents therefore no one may be admitted to Baptism without the profession of a saving faith I speak of such admission to Church-membership as is in the power of the Ministers of Christ who have the Keyes of his Kingdom to open and let in as well as to cast out The Major is past question because Baptism is our solemn entrance into the Church who were before entred by private consent and Accepted by the Covenant of God All the question is of the Minor which I shall therefore prove 1. It is before proved that all the Members of the Church must be such as are visibly solemnly or by profession sanctified from former sin cleansed justified persons of God the Heirs of the Promise c. But this cannot be without the profession of a saving faith Ergo c. 2. This also is before proved where it was shewed that no others are Christians or Disciples 3. In Acts 2.41 42 c. The many thousands were added to the Church were such as received gladly the doctrine of saving Faith and Repentance and continued in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and breaking of bread and Prayer and so far contemned the world as to fell all and make it common And doubtless no man continued in those wayes of doctrine fellowship prayer c. without the profession of saving Faith Repentance for the very use of these is such a profession Of which saith Calvin in Act. 2.42 Quaerimus ergò veram Christi ecclesiam Hìc nobis ad vivum depictum est ejus Imago Ac initium quidem facit à doctrinâ quae veluti ecclesiae anima est not as barely heard but as professed or Received Nec quamlibet doctrinam nominat sed Apostolorum hoc est quam per ipsorum manus filius Dei tradiderat Ergo ubicunque personat pura vox Evangelii ubi in ejus professione manent homines ubi in ordinario ejus auditu ad profectum se exercent illic indubiè est Ecclesia c. Quare non temere haec quatuor receâset Lucas quum describere vult nobis ritè constitutum ecclesiae statum Et nos ad hunc ordinem eniti convenit si cupimus verè censeri Ecclesia coram Deo Angelis non inane tantum ejus nomen apud homines jactare And ver 47. It is said that the Lord added daily to the Church such as should be saved Obj. It saith not that all shall be saved that are added to the Church Answ. But it describeth them that were added to the Church viz. that were such as should be saved or as Beza yielded to another reading and so Grotius and many others such as saved themselves from that untoward Generation quisese quotidie servandos recipiebant in Ecclesiam The Church is the Body of Christ Col. 1.18 24. and none are members of his Body but such as either are united to him and live by him or at least seem to do so The Church is subject to Christ and beloved of Christ and cherished by him we are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones Ephe. 5.24 25 30. And those that are against the General Redemption me thinks should be moved with the consideration that it is the Church that Christ gave himself for even the visible Church which he purchased with his own blood Act. 20.28 Ephe. 5.25 and he is the Saviour of his body ver 23. But so he is not effectively the Saviour of the Professors of a Faith that doth not justifie ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã he is the effective Saviour of those that profess a Justifying faith and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of the sincere but of others neither way Hitherto Divines have gathered from the plain texts of Scripture that there is but One Church One Faith and One Baptism and that those that had this Faith really were to be baptized and were real members of the Church and that those that professed this faith and so seemed to have it when they have it not are visible members of the Church and are so taken because their Profession is sensible to us and by that they seem to have the thing professed But the Opponents are fallen into a new conceit in all these 1. They feign a New Christian faith to themselves viz. A faith that is short of Justifying which Scripture and the Church of God have taken to be but a preparatory to the Christian faith subjectively or but a common part of it objectively considered so that before there was but one Christian faith and now they have made two 2. And so before there was but one sort of real serious or sincere Christians consisting of such as had that real Christian faith and now they have found out another sort of them that hold another sort of faith 3. So have they feigned a new Baptism for the Old Baptism was for Remission of sin and Burial and Resurrection wiâh Jesus Christ and to engraff men into the Church wich is the body of Christ upon the profession of a saving faith but the new feigned ends of Baptism are far different 4. And they have feigned also a new kind of Church For the Church of Christs constitution is but one which is called visible from mens Profession and invisible from the faith professed But they have made a Church which consisteth of a third sort of members that is of men that neither have saving faith nor profess it but only have or profess to have a faith of a lower orb 5. To this end they have confounded the Church and the Porch the Vineyard and the adjacent part of the Wilderness those that heretofore were but Catechumeni or men in preparation for the Church are now brought into it and are annumerated to true Christians before they once profess themselves such and that upon a lower profession 6 And hereby also the
Pelagians and the âouncils that opposed them went all the same way which could not be the Pelagian way 3. It was the constant Doctrine of these Fatherâând the Church then that Faith and Repentance given in ãâã did go first and that Justification Adoption and Sanââiâiâaâion followed after And so hold all the reformed Divineâ that I know of till Mr. Pemble lately contradicted it And so they took this Justifying Faith and true Repentance to be prerequisite to Baptism and therefore note 1. That all the forementioned terms describe only Justification and Sanctification 2. That they never speak a word of Justifying Faith or Repentance infused by Baptism for these are supposed 3. That therefore they ever enquired before hand whether they believed in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and renounced the Flesh the World and the Devil as is aforesaid and caused them to profess this before they would baptized them 4. The Fathers erred not so much as many suppose in their ascribing to Baptism For 1. sometime by Baptism they mean not only the external Ordinance but the whole work therein to be done viz. the Accepting Christ solemnly in Covenant and giving up our selves as a sanctified people to him renouncing the Flesh the World and the Devil and so becoming fully Christians This is baptism with them and not the outward sign alone And what saith Peter less when he saith Baptism saveth us and thus expoundeth himself when he hath done And what say the Fathers more 2. When they speak of these effects of Baptism they suppose a due recipient or subject that is A true Believer or the Seed of such and therefore they oft speak of the inefficacy of the outward Baptism to Hypocrites 3. When they speak of the outward Ordinance only the collation which they ascribe to it and all the great effects are to be understood but by way of obsignation and solemnization and not solely excluding the internal Faith and the Covenant as actual solemnized Marriage gives a woman right to her husband and all that he hath when yet she had a right by secret Covenant and Contract before Now common Reason and the Nature of the thing and many of the Contexts shewing that the Fathers and Councils must be thus expounded according to these Rules I would fain know how they deserve that heavy accusation that we commonly lay upon them for their Judgement in this or what ground the Papists have to plead them generally for their efficay ex opere operato And yet I will not excuse each particular person of them thus Object But it is the Baptism of the Adult that the Church hath generally ascribed so much to and therefore though they took all the Adult for Regenerate and Justified when baptized yet they did not judg so of Infants Answ. I will answer this in Mr. Gatakers words ibid. pag. 64. 1. Quae de Baptâsmo in genere enunciantur etiam paedobaptismo conveniant necesse est quod sub isto comprehendatur 2. Baptismum unum eundemque agnoscere se profitentur veteres adultorum parvulorumque nec diversum in his ab illis effectum ejusdem 3. Etiam parvulorum Baptismi disertè meminerunt aliquoties ubi baptismo ista tribuunt 4. Axioma illud quod ab adversa parte urgetur tantopere de Sacramentorum effectis ubi obex non ponitur adversus ipsos cum primis valer Object But the Fathers sly to the Parents or pro-Parents faith when they speak of Infants right to Baptism therefore its plain that they supposed it not in themselves Answ. True By which you may discern that Faith was presupposed as the Evidence of their right to Baptism and its effects that is to Justification and Sanctification and therefore it was such a Faith as had the promise of these effects viz. Justification and Sanctification and therefore not another kind of faith And this faith was supposed to be in the Parent for himself and his seed because the condition or qualification of the Infant is but this that he be the seed of a Believer But then you must note that though they supposed the condition of Right viz. faith to be in the Parent and not in the Infant himself yet they alway affirmed the consequent fruits viz. Regeneration and Justification and Adoption to be in the Infant himself and not in the Parent for him I may answer this therefore in Mr Gatakers words ibid. pag. 65. Resp. 1. Aliud est fides ipsa aliud Regeneratio seu mentis internae renovatio quae sine fidei actu ullo consistere potest 2. Ad fidem Patres alienam adeò confugiunt ubi de parvulorum salute agunt quia fidei alienae beneficio foedere continentur ab Baptismiritum suscipiendum jus obtinent Vid. Bellarm de Bapt. lib. 1. c. 11. Prop. 5. Object But is it a likely thing that the Fathers and Catholick Church should be so blind as to take all for truly justified and regenerate that are baptized Then either they must take all the members of the Visible Church to be such and so be saved or else they must suppose them to fall away from saving grace Answ. 1. The supposition of falling away was too common with them though a few words on the by have fallen from some few of them that seem inconsistent with it 2. They did not take All Collectively to be justified that were baptized and Church-members but All Distributively or each single person 3. And that was onely by that judgement which is grounded on humane faith because they are bound fide humanâ to believe that he is a true believer that professeth himself so to be as all the baptized at age did 4. But when they came 1. to speak of All collectively 2. or of Hypocrites in general 3 or of any that did after discover themselves to have dissembled in Baptism particularly then they declare the uneffectualness of Baptism to those Hypocrites and that they took not all the Visible Church to consist of justified Ones but that the Hypocrites though baptized were but the chaff and the upright were the Wheat But it is but Hypocrites that they say this of and not men that never by themselves or their Parents or Pro-parents did so much as profess the Christian justifying faith but only a faith of another kind And as it is true of the Ancient Church that they never baptized any without the Profession of saving faith and Repentance so it is true of all the Christian Churches in the world that I can hear of to this day The Papists themselves do use the same words in Baptism as are afore expressed and require a Profession in the Parents or pro-Parents or the person if at age that they believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and that they renounce the Flesh the World and the Devil And though their false Doctrine force them to mis-expound their own words yet custom hinders them from changing them And about
do with the bread and wine whilest they stand untouched upon the Communion Table Câcceius in Sacr. Script potent pag. 337. Quae est validitas Baptismi nisi haec quòd baptismus tum praedicatus tum collatus confirmat omni Credenti Remissionem peccatorum est ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sive firmamentum Interrogationis restipulationis bonae conscientiae ad Deum qui cum professione Nominis Patris Filis Spiritus sancti sine contemptu Sacramenti ad nos venit cum possimus securè ut fratrem foederatum recipere c. Qui baptizatur profitetur se Christi discipulum qui credit à Christo didicit qui veritatem prositetur oftendit se à Christo didicisse gratiae quae baptismo obsignatur participem factum esse Quid igitur illi baptismus in nomine Christi susceptus testatur minù quà m omni Discipulo Christi Vid rel Et in Thesibus de Foedere Thes. 454. sanctitas infantum est 4. Quòd qui illius seminis in infantia moriuntur Circumcisionis foedere initiati à parentibus foedus retinentibus non exscinduntur ex populis suis sed Regnum coelorum adipiscuntur sanctificati per spiritum promissionis sanctum Et Thes. 457. Et in adultis quidem ad foedur accedentibus requirit professionem fidei in Christum Act 8.36 37. in infantibus nihil nisi genitum esse à parente saltem altero fidem professo Ecclâsiâ in Charitate quae omnia sperat judicans illos sincerè professos hos jam verè sanctificatos Thes. 458. Et quidem consilium Gratiae patescit in omnibus fidelium liberis qui in infantiae moriuntur de quibus certam consolationem habent parentes eos non exscindi In iis verò qui adolescunt singulis consolationis conditio subintelligitur si manserint in Fide Charitate sanctificatione cum modestiâ 1 Tim. 2.15 Thes. 428. Nam primo Deus baptismum dans considerandus venit ut is qui per ministrum stipuletur à nobis five nos interroget de veritate sinceriâate resipiscentâae sidei ejus quam supra explicavimus Thes. 426. which is a special faith Et Thes. 492 493 494. Obsignatio Communionis praesupponit sidem exploratam communicantis ut Thes. 209. quae sides se habet ad minimum ut ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã confugientis Heb. 6.18 Inest igitur in oblatione Symboli stipulatio Fidâi quae verbis Hoc facite ad recordationem mei innuitur Quam stipulationem explicat Paulus 1 Cor. 11. 26 27 28 29. additâ comminatione in eos qui indignè comedereni Illis enim incumbit is reatus quem c. Mal. 1.14 c. Et sic corporis sanguinis Christi sive mortis Christi ut blasphemus persecutor latro sit reus 499. Inest fidei stipulatio etiam per consequens in illis Accipite edite Hoc est corpus meum Comeditur autem side qua unum cum ipso fimus 494. Stipulatio fidei per fidei obedientiam attestanti post explorationem bonâ conscientiâ acceptata parit Jus accipiendi Sacramentum sacrae Coânae eo ritu judicandi restipulationem atque interrogationem Dei ut Patris nostri de communione filii ipsius Ità Testamentum in vim effectum Foederis transit Dr. Prideaux Fascicul Controvers de Sacr. Quaest. 1. p. 278. 3. Nulli adulti ad Sacramenta sunt admittendi sine praeviâ Fidei professione pro captu modulo Mat. 28.19 20. Marc. 16.16 Acts 2. 8.37 Ergò hoc non expectandum ex insequente Sacramentorum opere operato It is unquestionable that he here speaks of saving Faith 1. By the Texts cited to prove it 2. Because else it had been nothing to the Question in hand which he was to conclude And pag. 279. speaking of Circumcision and other Sacraments of the Old Testament he saith to the Papists Symbola fuêre Gratiae collatae non Causae conferentes which he repeats pag. 280. sol Q. 3. Dr. Hammond in his Practical Catechism of Baptism pag. 308 309. and so on through divers pages is so full for the point that I refer you to the perusal The Catechism appointed to be used in England was then accounted the doctrine of the Church of England and it speaks full to the point Quest. What is required of persons to be baptized Answ. Repentance whereby they forsake sin and Faith whereby they stedfastly believe the Promises of God made to them in that Sacrament And this they say that Infants themselves perform by their sureties and therefore judge it necessary Bullinger Decad. 5. Serm. 7. 8. is full upon the point and too long to be transcribed He sums up his own doctrine fol. 453. thus Veritas Catholica in Scripturis sanctis nobis tradita simpliciter pronunciat Omnes eos esse baptizandos quos Deus agnoscit pro suo populo particit ésque purgatior is vel sanctificationis remissionisve peccatorum judicat Nam tota hác traltatione de Sacramentis ostendi demonstro Baptismum esse signum populi Dei Symbolum purgationis nostrae per Christum Instituitur quidem disputatio acuta de eo quinam sint populus Dei participes Remissionis peccatorum per Christum Dicimut populum Dei agnosci vel ex confessione hominum vel ex liberalis promissione Dei Ex confessione quidem hominum Nam cos pro filiis Dei agnoscimus qui jam adulti palûm profitentur Deum verum Deum esse suum Jesum Christum Salvatorem esse suum Caeterùm ea confessio vel verè vel ficte fit Vere ut Petrus Eunuchus c. Ficte verò ut cùm Simon Magus in Actis Apost dicit se credere in Jesum Christum sive verò verè sive sicte quis credat quando fidem in Christum palà m confitetur animi penetraliâ solus Deus inspicit c. nostrûm non est rectè consitentem separare vel abjicere à populo Dei Nam Philippus Simonem Magum non repulit sed pro fideli confitentem recepit pro fideli baptizavit licet is re verâ coram Deo esset hypocrita Dr. Whitaker de Sacram. is so oft and plain for this that I need not stand to gather particular words Mr. Gataker against Dr. Ward hath cited enough of them As pag. 75. Requirit fidem ante baptismum in adultis Mar. 16.16 unde constat fidem esse quae servat non baptismum But I will pass many more there cited Mr. Gataker himself hath purposely opposed Dr. Ward in this point which Mr. Blake defendeth And pag. 71. he saith 1. Ego quaenam sit fides illa ac poenitentia initialis non intelligo quâ praeditum ausit quis ad baptismum admittere quem tamen verâ vivà que fide in Mediatorem imbutum nondum credat Philippus certe Aethiopi baptismum poscenti Si credis
a distance about a matter of open fact I must still say that I hoped Dr. Ward would not have found a Second to undertake that Cause But this doth not intimate either that I never read that any was of his minde before or that I expected not that any should be afterward It s one thing to be of that Opinion and another thing as his Second to undertake it But I will now say more than that which you wonder at I must profess that I do not know of any one Protestant Divine reputed Orthodox of that Judgement before Dr. Ward and you though some Papists and Arminians I knew of that minde and since I finde Sir Hen. Vane maintain it and one John Timson in his Defence of M. Humphrey and now newly M. Humphrey in his second Vindication of Free Admission Let all Readers now come and wonder at your wondering and mine or at least the vast disagreement of our Judgements in such a point of fact All that ever open the books of Protestants come and judge betwixt Mr. Blake and me Dr. Ward and he do maitain That a certain kinde of faith which is short of Justifying faith giveth title to Baptism even before God I say that only true Justifying faith is the condition of our Title before God as given by him and warranting our claim but that the bare profession of that Justifying faith but of no lower doth make us such whom the Minister must give the Sacraments to if we claim them and so by it we have a Right to them before the Church and so far before God as he is the approver of the Churches act Mr. Blake saith almost every one of our late Writers appear for him I say I remember none of the Reformed Divines for them Nor do I finde that Mr. Blake himself hath produced any to that end but by meer abusing them Certain I am that the common doctrine of Reformed Divines is that sound believers are members of the mystical Church and that professors of that belief are members of the visible Church to whom we must give Sacraments But as for your third sort who believe with another kinde of faith or profess so to do it is not their use to take these as members of either or such as have right to Sacraments One more Objection I finde much stood upon which I had almost forgot viz The Sacraments are appointed for the visible Church therefore all that are of the visible Church have Right to them Answ. the word appointed is ambiguous If it mean only that Ministers are appointed to deliver it to men upon an outward Profession and Claim this we still grant But if the meaning be that Hypocritical or Unregenerate Professors have any Moral Donation or Promise of them or any command to claim and receive them in their present state this is but a bare affirming of the thing in question and so their Consequent is the same with the Antecedent What Mr. Galespie and Mr. Rutherford and many other Divines have said against it you have seen before as also by what Scripture-Evidence it is destroyed Ob. But t is said of the Jews that to them pertained the Adoption and the Glory and the Covenants and the giving of the Law and the Service of God and the Promises Rom. 9.4 Answ. 1. Yet will it not follow that all these pertain to all the Visible Church and therefore not to the Church as Visible The Glory that is the Ark and other signs of some Glorious Presence and the giving of the Law here mentioned with other Priviledges expressed in the next words were proper to the Jews 2. The Jewish Nation contained some that were truly sanctified and some that were not To the later sort was given the Law Covenants Promises c. providentially and by way of Offer God so ordered it that among them these excellent mercies should abide and to them they should be offered and if they had heartily accepted them they might have had a proper Title to the Benefits of the Covenant it self And it fell out that the seals were actually applied to them upon their pretended acceptance of the offer and upon their claim But to the former belonged the Covenants and Promises as the instruments of Gods Donation whereby he conveyed to them actuall Right to the Benefits But so it did not to the latter unless we speak of some particular promise made to this or that indiviall person or some temporal promises to the Jews as Jews and not as a Visible Church Yet may it well be said that to the Jews in general the Covenants Promises c. belonged not only because the Regenerate were Jews and the whole Nation was denominated from the better part sometime but also which is Pauls sence in that Text because it is not the foresaid proper Right that is here spoken of but the actual sending of this Light among them and the tendering of it to them and continuing it with them together with the success of it so far as that some were sanctified by it and others seemingly consented to it And thus we may say of England now in the general that it enjoyeth the Gospel and Sacraments c. in that they are among us and all men that are truly willing may have a saving title to them and the rest that pretend to be willing and are not do actually partake of the External Ordinance though to their own condemnation through their own default But this is no affirming that the unregenerate have a proper Title given them which may warrant their claim in that estate I mean to the Sacraments which are special Ordinances The Reverend Vindicator of Free Admission layeth down 13 Reasons to prove that the Covenant in the general Grace and external Administration of the Ordinances belongs to the whole Church as Visible and to the several members alike To which I say 1. that it belongs to them is too large a word without distinction to use in a profitable discourse I have elsewhere shewed that Covenant and Seals do belong to them in some sence and in other not and how far such are in Covenant 2. Note on the by that if this were granted it s nothing to Mr. Blake's main cause against me that a Faith short of justifying gives Right For no man was ever a member for a Faith short of justifying but only for a saving faith or the profession of a saving faith 3. Note that the stress of the Controversie is not Whether it belong to them at all but whether as he affirmeth to all alike Enough is said before for the solving of his Arguments More particularly To the first Pag. 6. How the whole Nation of the Jews were in Covenant is before declared more than which is yet unproved and also how little this makes for his End To the Second We easily grant that the Gentiles are graffed into the same Olive and are as much in the Covenant of Grace
Church which is no more for him than for me but only that it is the profession of a Dogmatical Faith and not the Faith it self that is necessary to give this Right But a man would think that if it be not enough for an evidence in our case of an Analogical Right Coram Ecclesiâ that a man subscribe the Covenant of God of which Mr. Blake pag. 143. then it can be no good evidence in his cause of a Right Coram Deo Ecclesiâ that a man subscribe or speak that which he never understood or if his Profession of Dogmatical Faith without the Faith itself be a good Title then the Profession of a justifying Faith without the Faith it self may so far serve turn as to justifie the Baptizing and to prohibite rebaptizing 4. And to Mr. Blakes censure which I will not censure as it deserves of the Major part by far of the Worcestershire combination as he speakes whether it be that he know them better than I which is unlikely when he professeth to conjecture on reports or whether I be more charitable or less rigorous in judging of mens sincerity or what ever else makes the difference of our censures I will be bold to say that I know not one person of all the Worcestershire combination as he calls them whom I know to be an unjustified unsanctified person that I can remember though I confess I have no small doubts and fears of many Nay more I have more hopes than fears I mean I rather think that they are truly Godly than that they are not of the far greatest part of them that I know even of many to one and more comparatively then I will now mention And whereas Mr. Blake doth instead of answering cast aside above twenty of my Arguments as not concerning him and so put them off with a wet finger I say that 's too easie a way of answering to satisfie me how ever it may do by those that are more easily satisfied and with a word I shall restore and reenforce them as with a word he puts them by It is one thing to ask whether the profession of justifying Faith be a duty to all that come to be Baptized Another whether it be so necessary that they ought not to come nor we to admit them without it and a third whether Baptism without it be a Nullity Mr. Blakes general assertion did in the proper sence express the first And thereupon because I took his words as he spoke them he better expoundeth them and confesseth that justifying Faith is a duty prerequisite to Baptism but not such a duty without which Baptism is Null or we may not Baptize and therefore he puts off above twenty Arguments at once and saith that they make nothing against him But I restore them all or most at once though one is enough by telling him that they prove that the profession of a Faith that is justifying must be expected by the Church and found in all that are admitted to Baptism and that none ought to be Baptized upon the profession of any lower Faith This they prove and this is the controversie In conclusion I will add but these two things and I should think such two might serve the turn 1. Consider when the Right that I denyed is a Promise-right whether Mr. Blake after all his pains do not yield up the cause when he expresly saith pag. 124. So that I conceit no promise of these ordinances made to such a faith but an actual investiture of every such believer in them What means this if it yield not the cause and unsay not the rest if no promise then no Right by promise and I seek no more What is the actual investiture but actual Baptizing and Receiving the Lords Supper and he knows that I did not deny that they actually received it 2. Me thinks Mr. Blake and my Reverend Brethren of his minde that marvail at my maintaining of this cause should bear some reverence to Augustine who so diligently defendeth it Besides what he saith in Enchirid. ad Laurent cap. 67 68. he hath a well known treatise purposely on this very subject or on that doth not considerably differ There were some voluptuous persons especially at Rome that kept concubines and yet professed to be Believers and would have been baptized but would not yet put away their concubines whereupon when the Ministers denyed them baptism some lay-men that desired the increase of the Church and misunderstood the doctrine of justification by faith only did plead that because by faith only we are justified and works are to follow as the fruits of faith therefore these persons upon their believing might be baptized and afterward they should be dealt with for the reforming of their lives Whereupon Augustine writes that Treatise de fide operibus to prove the contrary that they cannot be justified or saved by any faith but that which works by love and that they must not be baptized till they actually put away their Concubines and other the like sins and promise also to forsake them for the future so that as it was not any presbyters but lay-men that raised this doubt so both they and Agustine seem agreed that the same faith that is saving is requisite to baptism or as to the Church the Profession of it And therefore Austin thus repeats the occasion in his Retractions lib. 2. cap. 38. pag. Edit Paris Missa sunt mihi nonnulla quae ità distinguerent à bonis operibus Christianorum fidem ut sine hâc non posse sine illis autem perveniri suaderetur ad aeternam vitam Quibus respondens librum scripsi cujus nomen est de Fide Operibus in quo disputavi non solùm quemadmodum vivere debeant gratiâ Dei regenerati verùm etiam quales ad lavacrum regenerationis admitti If I cited but a line or leaf you might say I dismembered it and left behind me the sence but when the whole book is to this very purpose no such thing can be said see especially cap. 21. so that if I err I have no worse a man then Augustine to lead me the way As for Mr. Blak's impotent accusations of my owning the cause of the Papists against the Protestant cause in the matter of Justification because I misliked the by extream opinions of some men as if all had agreed in these opinions or the Protestant difference with the Papists in the matter of Justification did lye either only or principally in these I look upon it as such dealing as must be expected from angry men and as Children of the same Father do sometime use against one another when they fall out It was doubtless my sin that I was no more cancelorâ of provoking him as it is his to be carryed to such injustice by his passions as that and many other passages do contain But I am confident he forgiveth me and I am certain I forgive him and I am perswaded
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
degree as an Antecedent Duty or placed their efficacy in the naked Rite as if ought accrewed to God thereby God would no longer own them for any Ordinance of his nor indeed in that disguize put upon them were they And in The Christ. Sacrif p. 510 511. PSAL. 50. God saith Gather my Saints together unto me which make Covenant with me by Sacrifice But unto the wicked God saith What hast thou to do to declare my Statutes and take my Covenant in thy mouth seeing thou hatest instruction and castest my words behind thee Statutes here are Rites and Ordinances and particularly those of Sacrifice which who so bringeth unto God and thereby supplicates and calls upon his name is said to take the Covenant of God in his mouth Forasmuch as to invocate God with this Rite was to do it by way of commemoration of his Covenant and to say Remember Lord thy Covenant and For thy Covenant's sake Lord hear my prayer The Contents of the first Disputation Quest. 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 Aff. THE Question explained pag. 2 3 What Profession is pag. 4 5 Whether Profession be required for it self or as a sign of the thing professed The later maintained against Mr. Blake p. 6 7 8 What profession it must be that we must take pag. 9 10 11. Objection This will make Ministers Lords of the Church Answered p. 12 What profession in specie we must require pag. 13 Of the Essentials of our faith p. 14 15 16 The Thesis laid down and proved from Scripture and Nature p. 18 c. Mr. Wood's words considered p. 21 Reasons why Profession must be taken as a sign of the thing Professed p. 23 24 More Arguments p. 27 Objections answered p. 30 An Observation for the healing of unjust rigor and scruples herein p. 33 Two causes of mistakes and dividing among some good people p. 38 The Contents of the second Disputation Quest. Whether Ministers must or may Baptize the Children of those that profess saving Faith upon the Profession of any other Faith that come's short of it Neg. THE Question opened pag 42 The Iudgement of some late Romanists p. 45 51 Argument 1. pag. 53 Argument 2. pag. 62 Argument 3. pag. 68 Argument 4. pag. 71 Argument 5. pag. 79 Argument 6. pag. 88 Argument 7. pag. 91 Argument 8. pag. 96 Argument 9. pag. 98 Argument 10. pag. 100 In what sense whole Churches are called Saints Dead with Christ Risen with him Sons by Adoption Abraham's Seed Heirs according to promise Iustified Argument 11. pag. 118 None may be admitted to the Lord's Supper without profession of saving Faith p. 120 Mr. Gilespie's 20 Arguments against unregenerate mens Right to the Lord's Supper defended against Mr. Blake pag. 123 How far that Sacrament is a converting Ordinance p. â38 Mr. Blake's Arguments considered p. 139 Argum. 12 13. pag. 144 145 Argum. 14 15. pag. 147 Argum. 16. from Scripture-example p. 149 Mr Blake's exceptions answered p. 151 Argument 17. pag. 156 Argument 18. pag. 160 Argument 19. pag. 163 Mr Blake leaves us at an utter loss p. 164 Answers to Mr Blake's Arguments whereby he would prove that a Faith short of justifying gives Right to Baptism p. 170 to 191 Argument 20. from the constant practice of the Church p. 195 The judgment of above 60 Protestant Divines in the case p. 204 to 232 Mr Blake's Confessions pag. 232 c. Mr Blake's conceits of my self-contradictions ground less p. 235 The Contents of the third Disputation Quest. Whether the Infants of Notoriously Ungodly Baptized Parents have Right to be Baptized Neg. THe terms explained specially Right p. 251 The Question divided into three p. 253 Quest. 1. Whether such subjects have Right by any Gift or Grant of God to themselves Neg. 1. They have no such Title for their own sake p. 255 2. Nor for the immediate Parents p. 256 3. Nor for their Ancestors p. 261 4. Whether they have any on the account of Vndertakers pag. 264 5. Whether on the Magistrates power to dispose of them p. 265 Whether as they are Members of a Discipled Nation or born in the Church pag. 267 268 Qu. 2. Whether Providence give them Right p. 268 Qu. 3. Whether Ministers ought to Baptize such pag. 269. Negative proved Such are not credible Professors p. 271 274 c. The Notoriously ungodly are ipso jure excommunicated which is explained confirmed and defended p. 280 c. More Arguments pag. 294 295 c. Arguments Answered which would prove that the Infants of the Notoriously ungodly have Right to Baptism p. 303 c. And first that from Circumcision Argum. 9. Of the Nullity of Baptism supposed to follow p. 315 c. Quest. Whom we must take for Notoriously Vngodly p. 326 c. Cautions against the abuse of Answers p. 333 The Positive Answer in ten Characters p. 335 336 Quest. Is it not our duty to refuse the children of more than the Notoriously Vngodly Affirm p. 338 Violenta praesumptio must cause us to forbear proved p. 341 c. Quest. What is such violent presumption or ground to take men for no credible Professors p. 345. shewed in ten Characters The Contents of the fourth Disputation Quest. Whether any besides Regenerate Believers and their seed have a Right to Sacraments given them by God and may thereupon require them and receive them Neg. pag 351. THe terms explained specially Right p. 353 Concessions in six Propositions pag. 355 The Negative proved pag. 356 Mr. Blake's judgement about Investiture p. 360 364 c. Receiving Sacraments as a duty must come after saving faith and God warranteth none to do it before p. 369 370 c. Objections answered p. 370 Whether this confine Sacraments to them that have assurance p. 373 374 c. More Objections answered ad p. 403 The distinction of forum Dei Ecclesiae vindicated against Mr. Blake's opposition p. 403 c. Mr. Rutherford's Iudgement of that and the main cause ad p. 410 Mr. Blake's further assaults repelled p. 410 c. More of his Objections answered to p. 419 An Answer to many Arguments of Mr. J. H. in his second Vindication of free Admission p. 419 to 431 Some sad Considerations about Mr. Prin's counsel for forcing Ministers to deliver the Sacrament pag. 426 432 The Contents of the fifth Disputation Quest. Whether Hypocrites and other Unregerate persons be called Christians Believers Saints Church-members c. Univocally Analogically or Equivocally THe judgement of Philosophers about the terms to pag. 447 That the terms are used equivocally proved by Argument to p. 452 And by Authority Thirty three Protestant Divines cited Mr. Blake's Objections answered to pag. 480 An APPENDIX fetching Reasons out of Doctor Owen Mr. Blake and Mr. Robertson against a particular Answer of them p. 480 The little
Reason for Doctor Owen's Indignation and less for his gross mis-reports and Socinian parallel to pag. 488 The causlesness of Mr. Blake's tears and trembling pag. 489 His untrue reports of my self of the profaneness of the Worcestershire Combinations p. 500 His untrue and dis-ingenuous report of my abusing Mr. Ball p. 500 The complexion of the rest of his Dispute not yet answered p. 501 A brief discussion of his doctrine of the Faith that entituleth to Baptism pag. 502 to 513 The impotency of more of his Accusations pag. 513 514 The substance and quality of Mr. Robertson's Epistolary Disputation pag. 515 516 His implacable kindeness and dreadful Protestation pag. 517 Of Punishment and mental Remisson pag. 518 519 Of a creeping MS. p. 520 Of the triumphing Dream of Dr Owen and Mr Blake of the terrible Conditions which I impose on my Answerers in the Preface of my Confession p. 521 The first Disputation Quest. 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 Aff. IN almost all our controverted Cases the Church still findeth the mischief of Extremes and among the rest in this about the due qualification of those whom we must admit to the Sacraments Some will not look after saving Faith at all but have found out a Faith of another species which they call Dogmatical which they take to be the Title to both the Sacraments Others while they look after saving faith will not take up with that Evidence of it a bare Profession which God in Scripture hath directed them to accept but they must either pretend to search the heart or stay for some better Evidences of Regeneration The confuting of these last shall be the business of this Disputation and the confuting of the former shall be the matter of the rest We here suppose that Baptism is a standing Ordinance of Christ and that the use of it is to be the sign of our Entrance into the Church of Christ not only solemnizing our Covenant with God in which upon our consent we were before secretly entred but also investing us in our Church honours and priviledges For as the Prince doth by a sword conferr the order and honour of Knighthood which he might do before by private Grant or as a man doth by a Key deliver to a Tenant the possession of a House or by a twig and turf the possession of Lands so doth God by Baptism deliver to the true Believer the honorable order of Christianity and power to be a member of Christ and his Church and a son of God and therewith he delivereth him the pardon of his sins and other Priviledges of his people Though to them that come without this saving faith there is only an Offer of the Internal Benefits from God and no Delivery of possession and only a Ministerial delivery of the possession of the external priviledges without that Title which before God will warrant their Claim anh Reception though there be enough in the Ministers Commission to warrant his delivery upon that Claim It is here also supposed that it belongeth to the Ministerial Office to Baptize and by Baptizing to admit persons into the visible Church And this is not the smallest part of their Trust and Duty and Honour nor the least of the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven which is committed to their care Ordinarily none can be admitted into the visible Church or made a visible Christian as thus listed among such but by the Office of the Ministry And therefore the Minister is made the Judge of mens aptitude to this honour for no man must act against or without the conduct of his own Judgement And therefore to whomsoever it belongeth to Baptize ordinarily to them it doth belong to judge who is fit to be baptized It may be thought that it is a very great power that Christ hath herein conferred on his Officers and that it may be easily abused to tyranny while every Minister shall have power to refuse persons their visible Christianity or the badge of it and so to make Christians as they please But first they are tyed up themselves by certain Rules as we are further to shew in this Dispute and secondây if one should tyrannize there are enow more to relieve us thirdly there is no power but may be abused but yet it must be trusted somewhere and into what hands should Christ have fitlier put it than into theirs that are by Gifts and Offices fitted for the trust I have marvelled sometime when I have heard secular Rulers on one side and the People on the other side cry down the Ministerial power of excommunicating or so much as keeping from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper that they did not as much or more contend against their Power of Baptizing and Judging who should be admitted into the Church But I think the reason is because Ministers admitted all so generally that they were not awakened to the observation of their power herein nor to any jealousie of them left they should as they call it tyrannize But undoubtedly they might as fairly say that it belongeth either to the Magistrate or to the Bishop alone or to the Major Vote of the Congregation to Baptize or Judge who shall or shall not be baptized and so admitted into the honour of visible Christianity and Church-membership as to say that it belongeth to the Magistrate or the Bishop alone or the people to excommunicate or to judge who shall be excommunicated For the Power of taking into the Church Universal is as great as that of putting out of a particular Congregation And Christ gave the Keyes conjunctly and not dividedly and therefore he that hath the admitting Key hath the Excluding Key Had our people but well considered what Interest the Ministerial Office hath in their very Baptism and Christianity and that they cannot be New-born into the Kingdom of God without the help of these Midwives at least and Scripture gives them also the Title of Parentage they would then have discerned that by their very Baptism they are engaged to the Ministery subserviently to God the Father Son and Holy Ghost to whom they are principally engaged For as the Liturgie speaks they are Dedicated to God by our Office and Ministery and they have their visible state in the Christian Church and Possession of its Priviledges delivered to them by our Office and Ministery and therefore me thinks they should well bethink themselves before they renounce it and despise it till they dare renounce and despise their Baptism and those that do that I do not much wonder if they renounce our Ministery Furthermore It is here supposed that a Profession is necessary before we may admit men to Baptism and that this must be a profession of the true Christian saving faith and not only of some other sort of faith And we
the best Or is not this a contradiction 3. What kind of holy Ordinance is this wherein neither Charity nor Reason must be put to it when the state of another is presented to our consideration 4. What is the more sure Rule for our proceeding which is here mentioned I must profess that upon my most diligent search with a willingness to discover it I am not yet able to know what Mr. Blakes Rule is sure or not sure I mean what that qualification is which he saith doth entitle to Baptism Though he call it a Dogmatical Faith yet he requireth the will's consent but to what I am not able to discern he doth so vary his Phrase and contradict himself Onle by his Title on the top of the Leaf I know that it is A Faith short of Justifying which he meaneth which telleth me what faith it is not though not what it is 5. Either he will require a Profession of true Faith or not If not then we are not yet fit to dispute about the ends to which that Profession is requisite seeing we are not agreed whether the Profession it self be requisite in those whom we must admit If the Profession it self be acknowledged necessary then either for it self or for another thing Not for it self For 1. There is nothing in the thing 2. Nor in Scripture to intimate any such thing But on the contrary 1. It is signum mentis and therefore is required to signifie what is in the mind 2. Else a false Profession should be requisite and acceptable as well as a true if it were Profession quâ talis and propter se that were requisite If it be not for the signification of what is in the mind then though it signifie not the mind it is acceptable But that cannot be for God hath forbidden lying and never accepteth it nor maketh it a condition of our Title to his benefits as given to us by him 3. It is not any one sign that God tyeth us to Not speaking for then the dumb could not profess Not writing for then none could be Professors that cannot write But it s any thing that may signifie the mind which plainly shews that it is required to this end that it may signifie the mind God never encouraged any to speak the bare words be they true or false but only to speak the truth 6. Suppose it were only another species of Faith which is necessary to be professed in order to Baptism would not Mr. Blake put either his Charity or Reason to it to judge whether the person do in probability mean as he speaks If not 1. Then he will not sanctifie God in his Ordinances but abuse them and wrong his Neighbour by laying by Charity and Reason so much in the administration 2. And then if he knew that they came in scorn or learn the word as a Parrot he would accept them which I will not imagine But if he will put his Charity and Reason to it to judge of the truth of a common Profession let him shew us his warrant and it shall serve us to prove that we must do so also in case of a special Profession What ever the Faith professed be If you say your Profession is required propter se for the matter of the sign and not for the formality and use of signifying it were not only groundless but a reproachful ascribing that to God which we would not ascribe to the silliest man or woman about us that hath the free use of Reason And if the Profession be given and taken and so required not propter se materially but ut signum mentis for the signifying of our minds then sure I need not dig deep into Scripture or Reason to prove that both the Reason and Charity of the minister is here to be Imployed to judge whether indeed it do signifie the mans mind according to his pretences or not It grieveth me for the Churches sake to read Mr. Blake's words of the Ministers he meets with for if they do scarce any of them so much regard the probability of the Parents Regeneration in the administration of that Sacrament then they either Baptize upon an apparent Lye if the Parent profess saving Faith when he hath not the least probability of it or else they take up with the Profession of another species of Faith as Mr. Blake doth And I crave their patient sober enquiry Whether that be not to make another species of Baptism and of visible Christianity and also whether they have yet well discerned and determined what that Faith is that must be profest and whether the world have ever yet seen an exact or satisfactory definition or description of it and where and in what words and also whether they have not the same uncertainty of the sincerity of that lower Faith in the Professors as of true saving Faith and consequently Whether Mr. Blakes doctrine have delivered them from difficulties or ensnared them I crave of all those Reverend Brethren whom Mr. Black meets with and are guilty of what he chargeth them with that they would once more consider the matter 2. Having thus shewed that a Profession is necessary and that in its formal nature and to its proper end as it is a signification of a man's mind and in order to the discovery of the mind and not barely for the very terms or signs of Profession I am next to shew what things are necessary besides the bare words or other signs to the Being of a Profession or what properties or requisites are sine quibus non to the validity of it to its End that it may be indeed taken by us to be signum mentis and not be accounted Null and vain And in General it is necessary that the Profession seem true for a Profession that is notoriously fals is uncapable of the Ends atd use that it is required for for such a one will not signifie a mans mind but the contrary More particularly 1. The Professon which we must take as valid must seem to be made in a competent understanding of the Matter which is Professed It 's a known rule in Law that Consensus non est ignorantis If a Parrot be taugh to repeat the Creed it is not to be called a Profession of Faith The same we may say of any such Ideot or child or persons at age who are notoriously ignorant of the matter which they speak therefore it is the duty of those that require such Professions to endeavor to discern whether the person understand what he professeth before he do it and therefore in the ancient Churches their Catechists or other Teachers did first see to their understanding the sum of the Christian Faith before they baptized any at age and so should the Parents themselves be examined before we baptize their children upon the account of their Profession except it be when we have just cause to presume that the person understandeth the matter professed Yet if
any shall grounldesly so presume and be mistaken this makes not the Profession Null as to the use which the Church makes of it though it be Null as to the real internal Covenant of man with God or to the Benefits of such a Profession by any grant or Gift from God for in in foro Dei it is no Profession or worse 2. We must take nothing for a Profession but that which hath a seeming seriousness For if it be Notoriously or apparently ludicrous or in a scorn or not meant as it is spoken it is then apparently false and we are not to believe apparent falshoods 3. It must seem to be voluntary or free I deny not but some force may stand with a valid Profession but that is only such a force as is supposed to prevail with the Heart it self and not only with the tongue when the heart is against it If any should say to a Jew If thou wilt not Profess thy self a Christian I will presently run thee through with my sword the words that should be forced by this threat are not to be taken for a true Profession when it is apparent that they are meerly forced by fear So that which done in a passion of Anger or the like contrary to the ordinary prevailing bent and resolution of the heart is not to be taken as a voluntary and valid Profession 4. It must be a Profession not prevalently contradicted by word or deed Otherwise still it is an apparent or notorious lie which no man can be bound to believe If a man say in one breath that he believeth in Christ and in the next will say that he doth not believe in him he nulleth his own profession by a revocation and if he revoke it in the direct sense it is all one as if he did it in the same terms As if he say that he believeth in Christ but withall that he believeth him to be but a man or a Prophet or not to have died to ransom us from our sins c. so if he should say I am a Christian but yet I love the world and the flesh more then Christ the same must be said of a Practical contradiction which is effectual to invalidate a Verbal Profession If a man should profess to the Prince that he honoureth him and when he hath done should spurn at him or spit in his face or if a man should profess that he loveth you and desireth your safety and withall shall discharge a Pistol at you or run at you with his sword I leave it to your selves whether he be to be believed Yet some Contradiction there may be which may not nullifie a Profession As when the terms of Contradiction seem not to be understood by him that useth them or not to be meant in the contradicting sense or when he seem's not to discern the contradiction but thinks both may consist and seems to hold the truth practically and so contradicts it speculatively or ignorantly or when the contradiction is more weak and not seemingly prevalent as I believe Lord help my unbelief 5. When a man hath utterly forfeited the credit of his word the Profession of that man must not be meerly verbal but practicall This is all clear in the Laws of Nature When a man may be justly said to have forfeited the credit of his bare word is a matter of consideration The common reason and practice of men is against trusting a perjur'd mans bare word till he give sufficient evidence of his repentance for that perjury And the like may be said of one that hath often violated Promise and given no Evidence of any effectual change upon his heart but that still he hath the same disposition The Novatians thought that those who lapsed hainously after the Baptismal Profession were not again to be absolved and admitted into the communion of the Church but they did not exclude them from Gods pardon as is commonly believed to them Clemens Alexandrinus and others of those ancient Churches do seem to exclude all from pardon of sin after twice or thrice offending but I suppose they meant it only of hainous sin and of pardon in foro Ecclesiae and not of pardon in foro Dei a distinction that was not then detested The truth is the temper and quality of persons and the nature of the fault and many circumstances may so vary the case that it is not the same Number of promise-breakings or sins after promises that will prove the forfeiture of each sinners Credit Ordinarily in case of gross hainous sin if a man have oft broke his promise his bare word is no more to be taken but an actual Reformation must prove the validity of it But there are some cases in which once or twice breach of promise may forfeit credit as to the Church and some cases wherein more then three or four brecahes may not do it But as for an Infidel that newly comes to the Profession of the Faith or a notorious ungodly man that newly comes to the Profession of godliness we must take their first profession though their lives were never so vicious before because though they have oft committed other sins yet not this of Covenant-breaking with God and they seem to be recovered from their former unconscionableness Perhaps some one will say that if all this be to be look'd after before the validity of a Profession can be discerned then this is an uncertain Rule for us to proceed by in administring the Sacraments for Ministers will be uncertain when all these qualifications are found in mens Professions Besides that it puts tyrannizing power into Ministers hands which you tell Mr. âombes of in your book of Infant-Baptism Answ. I have there shewed that the danger is greater in the Anabaptists way of using this power than of ours 2. This objection is as much against them that are for the title of a Dogmatical faith as for us that require the Profession of a saving faith For they cannot be certain of their lower faith it self and therefore must take up with the profession of it and if they will not require all these qualifications forenamed of that Profession then they may as well admit professed Jews and Heathens and they will openly subject Gods ordinances to profanation 3. Because it is a variable case and requireth Judgement in the Administrators therefore hath God made it a considerable part of the office and work of his Ministers to Judge rightly of mens profession that they may discern the meet from the unmeet and therefore hath he required so much prudence and piety in Ministers that they might be meet to judge in such cases To bear these Keyes and wisely and faithfully to discern who are to be admitted and who to be excluded is no small part of their Trust and Power and Work The great necessity of Church Officers and the nature of its Government would be the better understood if this were well considered It is not a
possibility of mens erring in such Cases as are committed to humane determination that will warrant us to condemn that way or to cast about for some more Infallible or easie course such contrivances will have but the Popish success and will lose us the credit of our honest just Authoritative decision while we will needs pretend to an Infallibility that the world may discern that indeed we never had it The common-course of quarrelling with all Government where there is a possibility or danger of any great abuse and evils thereby doth directly conclude in the simple rejection of all Government by man and almost any thing else that man must be the agent in for as long as such vile imperfect wretches are the Governors how can you think the actual administration will be perfect Get Angels to Govern immediately or stay till men be as Angels of God and then you shall have a cure for all these Inconveniences but till then expect not good without evil nor that so bad a creature as Man even the best of men should govern any Society or do any considerable work without leaving upon it the Impression of his sinfulness and many Imperfections 2. Having shewed what this Profession must be in the General and the Nature of the Act I must next shew what it must be Materially and in Specie as it is morally specified from the subject matter And in general the thing to be Professed is that the Professor is a Christian or that he is a true penitent Believer in Christ. Object It is not his own belief qua creditur which he is to make Profession of but the Christian belief quae creditur that is the Doctrine of the Gospel Answ. 1. This is a contradiction He that professeth the Gospel to be true doth eo nomine profess his own belief of the truth of it For will he profess it to be true when he takes it not to be true otherwise he either speaks but the words while he takes it himself to be false which he speaks or else he only meaneth or saith that other men think it to be true though he do not 2. We need not to ask any man for a profession to Evidence the Gospel to be true but only to evidence his own Belief of it The Gospel needs not their testimony much less a testimony which they beleeve not themselves which is as none 3. Infidels are meet to be admitted to Baptism if there be no Profession of their own faith required But I suppose I need not to use more words against this objection More partâcularly as Christianity in sensu famosiori is the saving entertainment of Christ in the soul and faith in sensu famosiori is that which is called Iustifying saving Faith and a Church member in sensu famosiori is such a true Christian so it is true Faith and Christianity whose Profession is thus necessary and if there be but a bare profession without the thing Professed these are called Christians or believers but Analogically or as our Divines commonly tell the Papists Equivocally The Faith thus to be professed must be considered in its Acts and in its Objects The first Act is the understandings assent to the truth of the Revelation upon the credit of the Revealer which Implyeth yea formally containeth a crediting of his Veracity and so an Affiance therein 2. A Consent or Willingness that Christ be ours on the Gospel terms or an Accepting Christ and life as offered which Scripture calleth the Receiving of Christ Jesus the Lord Joh. 1.10 11. Col. 26. which is stil implyed in the Affiance or Recumbency by which the Act of Faith is so oft entitled in Scripture and which must be added As the act of faith must needs be both of the Intellect and the Will so the Object must be answerably the Truth of the Gospel and the goodness of the benefits there revealed and offered The Church is more agreed about the particulars of the Latter then of the Former for as the Papists would make us believe that the Fundamentals and Essentials of the Christian Faith cannot be known as distinct from the rest but that all which the Pope saith is de fide is of necesâity to salvation so among our selves we are not well agreed whether Fundamentals that is Essentials can be enumerated There is no doubt but we may easily enumerate them in General terms and so our whole Christian Faith is contained in our common Profession at Baptism I believe in God the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost If we yet descend to some particulars the case is clear that to believe in God the Father is to believe that he is the most Wise and Great and Good and our Maker and Ruler and our chiefest Good to believe in God the Son is to believe that he is God and man the Redeemer and Saviour ransoming us by his blood and overcoming death by his Death and Resurrection and procuring us pardon and everlasting life by his Merits to believe in God the Holy Ghost is to believe that he is the Sanctifier of the people of God that shall be saved Thus much is Evidently Essential to the Christian Faith and nothing but what is contained in this But then the great difficulty lyeth here whether a more particlar belief of some truths contained under these comprehensive terms be not Essential to Christianity To which I only say in general 1. That the belief of the Truth of the Promise or other verities being necessary in order to the determination of the Will to the Acceptance of the good revealed therein there is therefore so much of the doctrine of Necessity to be believed as is of Necessity to the determination of the Will to accept God for our God by Creation and Jesus Christ for our Saviour by Redemption and the Holy Ghost for our Sanctifier 2. All that is essentially contained in these Relative Titâes our God our Saviour and our Sanctifier must be particularly conceived of and believed 3. The foresaid Explicatory terms well understood seem to contain all such Essentials 4. He therefore that upon a true understanding of âhem doth believe all these doth believe all that is Essential to the Christian Faith 5. Some persons can understand the Matter contained in these words without any more words having first the Grammatical and Scriptural Explication of them others have not yet had such Explications or at least understood them not and so must have more particular express expository terms that they may understand 6. It is Matter that is primarily Essential and Fundamental and that Propter se Words are to be called Essential or Fundamental but secundarily and propter aliud viz. so far as they are Means without which the Matter cannot be received but no further and therefore no particular words are properly fundamental or essential to our Religion seeing that he that never heard those words and yet believeth the matter by equiplloent terms or any
signs is truly a âhristian 7. The Essentials primary in the Matter are to all the same but the Terms of Necessity for expressing them are not the same to all either for number of words or sentences seeing one can receive that in ten words anoâher cannot in twenty And hence is it that if twenty men be set to draw up the Essentials of Christianity they may do it in twenty several forms of words and yet all express the same essântial Matter and one Confession may be in ten lines and another in more pages and yet both speak the same Fundamental Truâhs one more concisely or generally and the other more copiously and plainly 8. Whatever other words may be necessary to some besides those that directly express the above-said Matter of Belief in God the Father Son and Ghost they are not to this end necessary that we may have more matter of Faith than is there contained as if it were not all that is essential but that this may by the ignorant be better understood so that those other particular Articles which some call Fundamentals are but expositions of those three Fundamentals that indeed we may receive them 6. In point of duty a Minister must require a more full and large expression of his Faith from one man than from another viz. From those that he hath apparent cause to suspect of not understanding or not believing what the more Comprehensive Concise Terms do express but yet if either he neglect that duty or his previous inquiry and examination though sinfully or if the party that gave no cause of suspition be yet ignorant or an unbeliever it doth not follow that the Concise Profession was a Nullity for want of larger Explication He that professeth to believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost hath made a Profession of saving Faith in all the Essentials as to the sense of the words and it is to be taken as valid in foro Ecclesiastico in the Judgement of the Church if there be not some of the above-named particulars apparent to invalidate it as Contradiction apparent Ignorance Derision c. May it not be the safest way to imitate the Scripture examples in such cases where we alway find Profession in order to Baptism made but in few comprehensive terms for as by this way we follow the surest Guid so are we most likely to comprehend all the Essentials and leave none out when spinning out a Profession to a Volumn in more particular Explicatory termes if these same generals be not among them may leave out much of the Essence of Religion which these do comprehend Not that I would have the people hear no longer discourses for Explication but it is one thing to put them into a Sermon or Discourse and another thing to put them into the Profession of Faith If notwithstanding all that is said any shall still be prejuced against the requiring of a Professon of saving Faith because of the difficulty of discerning when it is that all the Fundamentals are professed let such consider that it doth as much concern those that differ from us to untye this knot if they can as us We have long shewed the Papists that themselves must be forced to distinguish between those points of Faith which some may be saved without and those which none can be saved without and so indeed Bellarmine and others of them confess And those that say it is a Dogmatical Faith that must be professed must needs comprehend all the aforesaid Essentials in their Dogmatical faith or else they cannot call it the Christian Faith So that as to the Object of Assent they are equally concerned in the difficulties 2. And then for the second part of Faith which is the Wills consent or Affiance or Entertainment Receiving Acceptance Embracing or what other term to that purpose you will use of the Good proposed in the Gospel the same forementioned words do also comprehend all that is Essential to the Object of this Act for the Will as well as the Intellect to Believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost is all our Faith that is To receive God as our God our Creator our Soveveraign and Felicity and Jesus Christ our Saviour from the guilt and power of Sin and to bring us to everlasting Glory and this by Ransoming us by his death and merits By Rising Interceding Teaching Ruling us and at last Raising and Judging us and to receive the Holy Ghost as the witness of Christ the inspirer of the writers of his Word and as our Sanctâfier Thus is the Object of true Christian faith expressed as containing the Objects of the Will To conclude in a doubtfull case it is safe to be as express and particular as we can in our Instructions and Examinations and not barely to keep to the meer Essentials because there are many of the Adjacent truths or superstructures which are of so great use as that the fundamentals are hardly and seldom well entertained without them And yet when we play not the part of Instructors and preparers but of Administrators of Gods Ordinances then we must take heed of exacting more as necessary then is indeed necessary and in difficult Cases when the difficulty lyeth in the Darkness of the persons heart and you doubt by reason of the scantness of his expressions whether he believe as he speaketh we must give credit to his own words as far as reason will permit and to judge the best though we may fear the worst and this will be our Duty and if we should be deceived it will not prove our sin but his that makes the false profession And this leadeth me up to the next part of my Task which is having thus explained the Nature of the requisite Profession to prove the Affiâmative of the Question THESIS Miâisters mây admit persâns into the visible Church of Christ by Bâptism upon the bare Verbal Profession of the true Christian saving faith such as before described without staying for or searching after any further Evidences of sincerity ordinarily and as of necessity to this end This Proposition I prove in short by these Arguments following Argum. 1. We have the warrant of their approved Example in Scripture whom we are to eye as our Pattern in Administrations for the administring of Baptism upon a bare Verbal Profession therefore we may so Administer it I here suppose the Practice of the Church before Christs Incarnation which is out of all doubt Moses took the Verbal profession of all Israel to be a Covenant between God and them wherein they avouched the Lord to be their God and God avouched them to be his people On the like terms did Joshua Asa and others renew the Covenant of God with that people and on the same terms was circumcision administred On these terms did John Baptize multitudes whose lives he knew not before and of whom he required no further Evidence than these present Professions to satiâfie him of their
jus Ecclesiastiâum and in foro exteriori to be in the visible Church we deny it and he shall never be able to prove it And pag. 20. He hath the like And pag. 23 and 25. passiâo the like And pag 20.30 He saith Concl. 2. A serious sober outward Profession of the Faith and true Christian Religion together with a serious Profession of former sinfull courses a serious consideration of these things as such considered abstractâvely abstractions simplici from the work ãâã saving Grace and heart-conversion by true Repentance Faith is sufficient qualification in the Ecclesiastick Court to constitute a person sit matter to be received as a member of the visible Church accounted ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã i. e. Among these that are within If I be asked what I mean by a serious Profession I Answ. Such a Profession as hath in it at least a moral sincerity as Divines are wont to distinguish though happily not alwaies a âupernatural sincerity i. e. that I may speak more plainly which is not openly discernably simulate histrionick scenical and hypocritical in that hypocrisie which is gross but all circumstances being considered by which ingenuity is estimate among men giving credit one to another there appears no reason why the man may not and ought not to be esteemed as to the matter to think and purpose as he speaketh from whatsoever habitual principle it proceedeth whether of saving Grace or Faith or of faith historical and conviction wrought by some common operation of the Spirit A man that hath such a Profession as this and desireth Church-Communion the Church ought to receive him as a member And all be it I deny not but where there is just or probable ground of suspition that the Profession hath simulation and fraudulent dealing under it as in one new come from an heretical Religion or who hath been before a Persecutor of the Faith and Professors thereof there may be a delay in prudence and time taken to try and prove if he dealeth seriously and ingenuously c. And in Page 150 speaking of my self he saith 1. The Learned Author and I are fully agreed upon the mater concerning the outward ground upon which persons are to be admitted and acknowledged members of the visible Church viz A serious Profession of the faith including a Profession of subjection to the commands and Ordinances of Christ is sufficient for this and that persons making this Profession are without delay or searching for tryal and Discoveries of their heart-conversion to be admitted I do heartily approve his weighty Exhortation subjoyned But I cannot yet agree with him in this that men are not to be received into the visible Church but under the notion of true Believers and positively judged to be such though but probably And Pag. 151. I confess also that were a mans outward carriage and way such as did discover him to be an unregenerate man he were not to be received into the fellowship of the visible Church but wiâhall I say He were not to be debarred or not received not upon the account of non-Regeneration or upon that carriage considered under this formality and reduplication as a ââgn and discovery of non Regeneration but materially as being contrary to the very outward profession of Faith My reason is because I conceive it is Gods revealed Will in his Word that men be received into the visible Church that they may be regenerate and converted and that the Ministerial dispensation of the Ordinances are by Gods revealed will set up in the Church to be means of Regeneration and Conversion as well as Edification of such as are Regenerate 3. I conceive that between such as are in a course discovering certainly non-regeneration there are a middle sort of whom there is no sufficient ground probably to judge them regenerate My reason is because to gâound a positive act of Judgement that a man is regenerate in foro exteriori there is requisite some seemingness of a spiriâual sincerity in a mans profession i. e that he doth it from a spiritual principle upon spiritual motives to a spiritual End But a meer sober not mocking serious Profession without more is not a positive appearance of spiritual supernatural sincerity I humbly conceive there cannot be had positive probable Evidences of this ordinarily without observation of a mans way after Profession for a time wherein notice may be taken of his walking equally in the latitude of Duties and constantly in variety of cases and conditions To conclude Mr. Baxter and are at agreemânt upon the Matter concerning the quâlification that is sufficient for admitting persons into the visible Church viz. Serious profession without delay to enquire for more and so we are agreed in the main about the matter of the visible Church We differ in this that he thinks persons are not to be admitted but under consideration of persons judged at least probably converted and regenerated My mind is that they are to be admitted under the name of serious sober outward Professors abstracting from Conversion or Non-conversion I have thus at large recited the words of this Reverend Brother that the Reader may perceive the true state of the Controversie and how we are agreed in the main and on what grounds he proceedeth and that if there be any that consent not with me in the point wherein he and I differ they may yet be perswaded to take up in his way and not remove so far from the truth as I conceive Mr. Blake hath done And as to the difference it self 1. The main thing wherein I perceive that I differ from this Reverend man and some other about such matters is that my Judgement of Charity is much more extensive then theirs seems to be I confess that when it comes to a confident perswasion of another mans sincerity I am apt to be jealous as well as they and also when we speak of the Profession of men collectively considered I am forced to some harder thoughts of many then some have but when I have to do with Individuals I am apt to extend this charitable Judgment further then I see many do not by making the way to heaven any broader than they For when we are upon the point in thesi what is the proper qualification of a Saint I think there is no difference among us but when we speak of it in hypothesi and of the actual qualification of this Individual person whether he have the foresaid life or not I am apt to think it my duty to judge the best till I know the worst and to hope well though with much fear where some think they see no ground of hopes I confess it seems to me but cold charity that can afford men our good thoughts so far as to take them for visible Church members but can find no room for a hope of their being in a state of Salvation I have hopes of the Salvation of many thousands that I perceive some
others have no such thoughts of 2. More particularly I cannot yet see that I can be excused or disobliged from having a positive Hope taking Hope in the vulgar sense of the saving estate of that man that professeth seriously and soberly that he truly Repenteth and Believeth in Christ and hath not yet utterly forfeited the Credit of his word Charity thinketh no evil believeth all things hopeth al things 1 Cor. 13.5 7. I think the very Maxims of Nature cleared and enforced by Christ in the Gospel do teach me to believe that my brother is not a Lyar till I see convincing evidence of the contrary I confess I judge my self to owe this charitable construction and judgement of his serious Profession especially in so so great a cause to my Neighbour who hath not evidently disobliged me even as much as I owe my bread to the hungry and clothes to the naked yea or the liberty of the common Ayr or earth if it were in my power to restrain it 3. And I do not find myself at least ordinarily and easily capable of suspending my judgement of the truth or falshood of a mans Profession and being wholly neutral in it 4. Yea I perceive that it is the judgement of this Reverend Brother that we should noâ be Neutral nor suspend our judgement about the Truth of the Profession which we require but that we should seek after that which he calleth a Moral Sincerity herein yea and sometime delay and try them further who offer a suspicious Profession 5. And I must confess that I take it for a great sin to censure my Brother positively to be a Lyar and to be a child of the Devil ând in a state of Damnation without clear convincing Evidence 6. And it seems to me a thing utterly Improbable if not certainly unârue that God should require any man as sine qua non to his Church-entrance or admittance that he profess true Faith and Repentance to the Minister and Church as before them and yet that both Minister and people are bound to receive this Profession abstractively as to the Faith and Repentance so professed God knoweth the heart without Profâssion it is therefore because of us that know not mens hearts that profession is required And must we then receive such a profession abstractively from the thing professâd Every word iâ ordainâd to be a sign of the mind and a profession is formally a Relative Being The Matter of the Sign viz. The Word or the like a Bruit a Parrot may possiblâ have And if the very Essence of a profession qua talis contein its Relâtion to the thing professed and the mind of the Professor then is it destructive to the very ends and Use of a Profesâion to abstract the material Sign from the thing professed If you sây that it is not Regeneration which they are supposed to profess I answer it is true Repentance and Faith in Christ which they are supposed to profess and that is Regeneration or the principal part of it in sensu passivo To what purpose should we imagine that men should be obliged by God to make so solemn a profession which none of the hearers are in the least obliged to believe to be true 7. We are certainly bound to believe a sober credible person of proved fidelity in other things when he solemnly professeth to Repent and believe else we must deny credit to that which beareth plain Evidence of Credibility therefore we must believe all others according to the proportion of their Credibility and not deny them credit without just cause 8. I never yet heard any assign any other cause why God should require an open profession than the revealing of the thing professed and the consequents thereof therefore till we hear a proof of some other Reason we have cause to adhere to this 9. All men are bound to judge that God would have no man to tell a lye therefore they are bound to judge that God would have no man to profess that he Repenteth when he doth not therefore he that is to judge my Profession to be by Gods commanding and approving Will is also to judge it to be a true Profession But the Ministers and the Church are judicio charitatis fide humana to judge that the Profession of the person is such as God doth require and accept as to the main substance before they baptize him and receive him into Communion upon the account of that Profession 10. I conceive that this Reverend Brother granteth in effect the thing which I dispute for while he affirmeth that such a Moral Sincerity may be lookt after as that All Circumstances considered by which Ingenuity is estimate among men there appears no reason why the man may not and ought not to be esteemed as to the matter to think and purpose as he speaketh For I plead for no more then this Object But this is nothing to the Principle that it proceedeth from special or common Grace Answ. A true Repentance and saving faith can come from none but a supernatural Principle of special Grace and therefore he that professeth this Repentance and Faith doth thereby profess that supernatural Principle therefore if am bound to believe that he speaks as he thinks then I am bound to believe that he is a truly penitent Believer if he know his own heart and he is liker to know it better then I. Moreover he saith that To ground a positive Act of Judgement that a man is Regenerate in foro exteriori there is requisite some seemingness of spiritual sincerity that is that he doth it from a spiritual principle motives c. To which I say that a serious Profession of Faith and Repentance is a Credible seemingness of Faith and Repentance And he that professeth true Faith and Repentance must needs profess them as from a spiritual Principle and Motives and to a spiritual End for they cannot be from any other principle or motives principally nor to any other ultimate End I am therefore forced to dissent from the main reason of this Reverend Brothers judgement herein viz. That there cannot be had a pâsitâve pâobâble Evidence of this ordinarily without observation of a mâns way after Profession for a time c. For though cânfâss this is fuller Evidence which he pleadeth for yet still I judge that a sober sârious Profession is a credible Evidence of the thing professed till the person have quite forfeited the Credit of his word And ouâward Reformation may be forced or counterfeit as well though not easily aâ words ãâã it was a saving faith and Repentance which Peter invited the Iâws to Act. 2 and Paul the Jaâlor Act 16. c. So doubt not but they took the following profession of these men as a credible Evâdence of the same saving Faith which they profest Argum. 4. That which hath Evidence of Credibiliây ought to be believed But the profession of men or their bare words who have not forfeited
we believe divers persons who are to us of divers degrees of Credibility And if after all this we be deceived in the most the sin is only in the deceiver And as for us 1. We proceeded upon that evidence which Nature it self directeth us to take even a mans words as the sign of his mind 2. And upon that Evidence which the holy Examples of the Apostles of Christ have directed us to take who were not rashly venturous nor prophaners of Gods Ordinances 3. And if we be indeed deceived in the most or in many it s rather a sign that we are in Gods way than out of it for as Charity believeth all things credible so Christ hath told us that the tares and wheat must grow together and that many are called and few chosen and that in the end he will take out of his Kingdom all things that offend and them that work Iniquity therefore such there will be Object 2. But it is now the custom of the Countrey and a matter of credit to be Christians in Name and therefore all will be so and if you ask them whether they Repent or Believe they will say Yea Therefore this is no credible Profession though theirs was in the dayes of the Apostles when it hazarded their lives Answ. 1. The hazard that attendeth a mans words is not necessary to make them simply credible though as to the Degrees it makes them more credible else we must believe no man but he that speaks to the hazard of his life 2. The Prosperity of the Gospel will not warrant us to alter the Rule of Nature and Scripture else the Church must Incurre greater difficulties in prosperity than in Adversity if prosperity forfeit all mens credit and so men should be kept out in prosperity who may be admiâted in adversity when the Church had peace and were edified Act 9 31. the Apostles altered not their practice 3. We have great cause to rejoyce when Christianity is in so good credit as that all profess it and so respectively we may be glad when there are so many Hypocrites that is when persecutors befriend the truth which they persecuted and when the Gospel is in so much honour And though I am not of their mind that think it the first prescribed End of the Institution that Sacraments and Church-state should be the means of Conversion yet I doubt not but God foreknowing that many hypocrites would unjustly Intrude hath so fitted his Ordinances as to be advantagious to their Conversion when they have Intruded He calleth not any to come into his Church without saving Faith and Repentance nor is he consenting to any mans lying Profession nor unworthy approach to Baptism or the Lords Supper but yet they that do come unworthily and unwarrantably do find that there which tendeth to their Conversion and frequently effecteth it and this I think is the true mean between their Doctrine who maintain that the Sacrament is prescribed as a converting Ordinance and the unconverted are called to it and theirs that say simply it is not a converting Ordinance Object 3. This is the way to fill the Church with hypocrites and ungodly ones and that breeds all our stir while they scandadalize their Profession and will not be ruled Answ. 1. It is Gods way and then no Inconvenience will disgrace it 2. We are foretold as is said that many are called and few chosen and the Church will have many unfound Professors to the end of the world 3. When they are in the Church they are under teaching and Discipline to inform them or if they be oâstinate in gross evil to reject them 4. God will have a wide difference between the Church in heaven and on earth Object 4. Then we must admit a drunkard or whoremonger that still lyeth in his sin if a bare Verbal Profession will serve the turn Answ. No. You must see that with his Profession of Repentance he do forsake the sin repented of or else he contradicteth and invalidateth his Profession If a man in his drunkenness come to be baptized and profess to hate drunkenness he actually giveth his tongue the Lye If a man swear that he hateth swearing he contradicteth himself and we have no reason to believe him If a Whoremonger keep his Concubine while he professeth to repent he doth one thing and saith another so that this doth not follow Object 5. It was believing with all the heart that Philip required of the Eunuch and such a believing aâ had the Promise of Salvation as Paul and Silas required of the Jaylor Answ. True and it s such that we require But Philip and Paul took a bare present Profession as the Evidence of that faith which they must accept and so must we Object 6. But then we shall apply the Seal to a Blank Answ. By a Blank if you mean One that you ought not to apply it to and that hath no right in foro Ecclesiae I deny it but if you mean one that is not actually the subject of Gods promise and to whom God is not actually obliged but conditionally as he is to Heathens and one that hath no proper right coram Deo or Deo judice as shall justifie his claim and receiving before God so I grant that we set the seal to a Blank But that 's not our sin but his And here I desire the Objectors carefully to note that it is Gods design in the Gospel so to order things that the actual Application shall first be the act of the sinner himself God by his Ministers indeed will be the first offerer and the Spirit in the Elect shall be the first Exciter But the first actual apprehender must be the sinner and then the Ministers application by the seals is in order to come after mens own application For man is to be the chooser or refuser of his own salvation which Clemens Alexandrinus giveth as a reason why in those times of the Church When some as the custom is have divided the Eucharist they permit every one of the people to take his own part For every mans own conscience is best fitted to the act of choosing or refusing Stromat lib 1. pag. 2. so that we are but to follow them with the seal and therefore the applying or refusing act must be first theirs and theirs as professed is the Director of ours And therefore as it is their sin and not ours if they reject Christ and their faith and not ours by which he is chosen to be theirs so it is their sin and not ours if a misapplication be made of the External Ordinance by them and so we take not an invalid profession we are bound to follow their profession for God never appointed heart searchers to administer his seals Object 7. But wicked men know not their own hearts and therefore are uncapable of making a credible profession Answ. They may know them better them I can The Intellect hath naturally a power of knowing it self
the will though its true that the wicked have many difficulties in the way 2. They profess now that they are not wicked but converted therefore you must not take it for granted that they are wicked because they were so unless you can prove it and if you prove them wicked when they profess the contrary then indeed you invalidate their profession but not by proving that they were formerly wicked Object 8. But though all this hold of Heathens or Infidels newly pretending to be converted and so coming for Baptism yet it will not hold of professing Parents that bring their children to Baptism or of such as come to the Lords Supper For such have been long in the Church already and therefore must follow the truth of their Profession by a holy conversation Answ. I grant this and withall that the Pastor should be as diligent as he can to know the conversations of his people But withall I still say 1. That as it was sufficient at his first admittance that he made a verbal Profession so the same Obligation lyeth on the Minister and people to believe his word still till he forfeit his Credit as it did at the first A Verbal profession is still as Obligatory to us for belief though more be required in him to second it 2. And therefore I say that if a Minister through the numero usness of his flock or want of ability or opportunity or other causes yea culpable in himself shall be ignorant of the lives of his people he is to credit their Profession and not on that account to deny them Gods Ordinances 3. They therefore that will exclude any for want of a holy life must bring a certain Proof of his unholiness of life for they can require no more Proof from him of his holiness but that he professeth it And so I grant that as he professed Repentance and Faith at first entrance so he is now to profess that he continueth therein and walketh holy before God And if he do but say that he doth this no man can reject him till he first disprove him supposing him to be a member of his pastoral charge or otherwise obliged to administer it to him if fit Those therefore that will have any mans children kept from baptism for their parents unholiness or persons kept from the Supper must not expect that men bring proof to them of their holiness beyond their profession of it but must deal by them as by other notorious offenders even admonish them of their unholy Carriages and if he hear not take witness and then call the Church and if he hear not the Church then he must he rejected and not denyed the Communion of the Church upon every mans uncharitable presumptions or so heavily punished before he be judged or heard 4. And they must know that it is hainous evils indeed that will prove a Professor certainly ungodly and therefore they must look well to the validity of their proof Obj. 9. But they have forfeited the Credit of their words by their Covenant-breaking and wicked lives Answ. It must be a breach of the Covenant as owned by themselves at age that must be sufficient to prove that 2. And that more then once For once failing doth not forfeit the Credit of a man's word 3. And these violations must be proved and not barely affirmed 4. Yea it must be proved that he doth at the present or hath of late lived in violation of former covenants Otherwise Repentance manifested by Reformation repaireth his Reputation Obj. 10. The text cited in the following Disputation proveth that the Apostles took all the members of the Church to be Saints Adopted Justified c. But we cannot think thus of all that now Profess themselves Christians without being unreasonable Answ. Sometimes the Apostles denominate the whole Church from the better part as we call that a corn-field which hath many tares And sometimes being not heart-searchers nor knowing the falshood of Particular men's Professions they speak of them according to their Profession which the Law of nature and of Christ commandeth us to believe though only with such a humane faith as may be mixt with much jealousie and fear of the contrary concerning many of them which the same Apostles also frequently manifested But yet as they must believe charitably so must they speak charitably of the Professors of true Christianity Besides those Objections many particular Texts are urged by some to prove that it is only the Regenerate and such as shall be saved that are to be added to the Church which I shall not now stand to answer particularly but only give this general answer to them all If they mean only such as are Really sanctified and sincere or elect then we must admit none because we know not one man to be such but if they mean only those that seem to be such I have proved already that their own Profession of what is in their hearts out of our sight is to be taken for such a seeming and doth qualifie them to be visible members of the Church For as the Matter of the Church as Invisible is true Beleivers and Saints so the Matter of the Church as visible is the Professors of that faith and holiness and their seed Besides what hath been said in general Arguments to prove the Proposition I had thought to have gone over many particular Arguments from several Texts of Scripture partly giving us examples of such as by Gods approbation have taken Professions as credible Evidences of the things Professed and partly in precepts requiring a charitable credulity towards our brethren but because I conceive the last so plan as to need no more I wâll forbear this till I hear that it seemeth necessary But yet there 's one other Objection to be met with Those that feel this Proposition pull down the Principles of schism or unjust separation which they are engaged in or inclined to do Object that if a bare Profession may admit to baptism then it may admit to the Lords Supper and to the Priviledges of âhurch-members and so Church-Ordinances and Priviledges shall be dispensed upon bare words and formalities and so made nothing of To which I answer Are you able to search and know the heart can you discern sincerity by an infallâble judgment I know none but Mr. Trask that pretended to it And if you cannot and know you cannot then you must be found to take up with fallible signs your selves And those signs you may as well call meer formalities as you do this in question 2. And if we must needs take up with fallible signs is it not better to follow the Scripture examples proposed to our imitation then to frame a new way of our own especially when the Law of nature and nations doth consent with Scripture and the contrary opinion proceedeth from a dividing principle and tendeth to division 3. Make as diligent search as you can after the sincerity of your flock
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 âe 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 Externâl 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
Chuâch These are both so groundlesly pleaded and by so few that are neer us that I think it not meet to trouble you with them any more 3. A condition pretended to be necessary is A true Justifying faith This also is a mistake but yet how far it is necessary to a true Right I shall open anon none of these three are meant by us in the question for these are not short of saving faith though we exclude the necessity of these as is said 4. Another qualification pleaded necessary and sufficient to the ends expressed in the question is A Profession of a saving Faith which is it that we are to defend 5. A fifth claim is laid upon the pretended sufficiency of a Faith short of Justifying But you will perhaps say what faith is that Those words tell us what Faith it is not viz. It is not justifying faith but they tel us not what faith ât is To which I must say I know not my self nor can I learn of all the writings of those that go that way so perplexed and confounded or uncertain are they saying sometime one thing and sometime another But I shall have a fitter opportunity to enquire further into their mind or words anon 6. Another claim is laid upon the pretended sufficiency of the Profession of a faith short of that by which we are juââified I say the Profession as distinct from that faith it self which the former claim made mention of Some other there are that yet go lower and think we may Baptize any that consent to be Baptized though they profess no faith at all nor their Parents nor pro-Parents neither And there have been so some foolish as to think that it is a work of charity to catch them and Bapâize them whether they will or not But it is not our present business to deal with these The great adversary that we have here to deal with is the Papists And I shall in few words shew you part of their doctrine which we are now to oppose Their great Fundamental error on which they build their tottering Babel and tyrannical usurpation is this that the Catholike âhurch is one Political society united in one visible head and governed by those that hold their power from him or at least are ruled by him and are conjoyned under these overseers in one Profession of faith and use of Sacraments Bellarmines words are these De Eccles. lib. 3. Nostra autem sententia est ecclesiam unam tantum esse non duas et illam unam et veram esse coetum hominum ejusdem Christianae fidei Professione et eorundem sacramentorum communione colligatum sub regimine legitimorum Pastorum ao praecipue unius Christi in terris vicarii Romani Pontificis And he addeth afterward Hoc interest inter sententiam nostram et alias omnes quod omnes aliae requirunt internas virtutes ad constituendum aliquem in ecclesia et propterea ecclesiam veram invisibilem faciunt nos autem et credimus in ecclesia invâniri omnes virtutes fidem spem charitatem et caeteras tamen ut aliquis aliquo modo dicipossit pars verae ecclesiae de qua scripturae loquuntur non putamus requiri ullam internam virtutem sed tantum externam professionem fidei et sacramentoruÌ communionem quae sensu ipso percipitur Ecclesia enim est coetus hominum ita visibilis palpabilis ut est coetus populi Romani vel Regnum Galliae aut respublica Venetorum Yet other Papists be not so strict with us but that they will distinguish between the professing Church and the true believing Church And Bellarmine in the next words citeth a passage as Austins which he commendeth which maketh Faith Hope and Charity to be the soul of the Church and the external profession of faith and use of sacraments to be the Body of it and some persons to be in it in one respect only some in the other only and some in both They confess indeed that of duty men should be found Believers at the first but ordinarily they say that is not to be expected and therefore they are first to be entered into the Church this visible Church by Baptism that this may be a means to bring them higher and by this entrance they are put under right guides and into the true body and so are fed with true ordinances yea with Christs body and blood and so are in the way to a true spiritual state The terms on which they must be admitted they say into this Political Church which is not the holiest of all is a Profession of faith and a consent to be a member of the society and to be under those Pastors and use those ordinances in order to further growth so that these they suppose to have a true faith and to be such as have right to this Church state but yet to be but in the way to a special saving faith for theirs is but fides informis or meer faith which is onely Assent say they joyned with the foresaid consent to live in a Church state but when Love is added then it is fides charitate formata and then they are become of the true spiritual society and have part in the soul as well as in the body of the Church so that though they desire fidem formatam in all yet it is not to be expected that so much as a Profession of it be exacted of those that enter into the first order by Baptism but when they enter into a retired monastical life then it must be expected and it is found in all that are fully justified For say they Baptism which entreth men into the visible Church doth put away their original sin and justifie them that is change them in tantum viz. from Heathenism or infidelity if they lay in it before but it doth not justifie them from their more spiritual latent sins such as lie in the heart and keep out the power of Grace but it is the work of special Grace which is given upon the good use of their Church state and Ordinances that doth this by giving them fidem formatam with charity and hope Among all this there is some truth and some error we confess that the Church is one Political society or Republâck but not headed by men but only by Christ the several particular Churches being as so many distinct corporations that all make up this one Republick and are conjoyned internally by faith love and obedience to the same Lord and laws and externally by the use of the same confession worship c. and holding correspondency and brotherly communion as far as occasion and natural capacity shall enable them but not united in one visible frame of policy so as to be under the same Governors some as subordinate and one person or a General council being the supream No more then all the schools in England or in the world must have such a Political constitution and Government
by combinations of schoolmasters We confess also that the Church is but one as well as they that they are to make the same profession and use the same worship in regard of which they are called visible members and the Church a visible Church as by reason of their faith and the spirit within them it is called invisible as if we should distinguish a man into visible and invisible in respect to his body and soul which make not two men we confess also that there is an ineffectual faith of assent that goeth without a hearty consent and that many are to be admitted by us into the visible Church by Baptism by solemnization upon a bare Profession who have not faith either of one sort or other And we confess that such as so remain in the Church do live under those benefits and means which have a special tendence to their true conversion But yet we very much dâffer in this The Papists make the Primary sense of the word Church to be of the visible Church as the samosius significatum and therefore they say that to be entred by Baptism 1. Into a Profession of assent 2. Into communion in Ordinances and 3. Under one and the same Government or external policy is all that is requisite to make a Church-member But we say that the first and famosius significatum is the whole multitude of true Believers that have the spirit of God and his saving Grace and that it is one and the same Church that is called first mystical as being called out of the world to Christ by true faith and then visible because of their Profession of that same faith and therefore if any Profess that faith who are without it these are members but secundum quid or equivocally as the hair and the nails are members of the body which indeed are no members in the proper and first sense or as a wooden leg is a member or as a body without a soul is a man or as the peas or chaff and straw are corn The body may be said to be part of the man when it is animated but a corps or body that never was animated is not properly a part the straw and chaff are called part of the corn-field though indeed but appurtenances to the corn but if there were no corn they should have no such title and when they are separable they shall lose it Moreover t is not a Profession of the same faith that the Papists and we maintain to be necessary to Church entrance For they require as necessary only a Profession of the Dogmatical or Historical faith of Assent aforesaid with a consent to subjection and use of Ordinances But we require a Profession of that faith which hath the promise of pardon and salvation They take their Church-entrance to be a step towards saving conversion and formed faith we take it quoad primam intentionâm Christi ordinantis to be an entrance among the number of the converted true Believers and that it is accidental through their failing and hypocrisie that any ungodly are in the Church and so enjoy it's external priviledges and that if we could know them to be such they should not be there it being the work of the Gathering Ministry to bring men to true faith and repentance and of the Edifying perfecting ministry to build them up and bring them on And the Papists themselves having received by Tradition a form of words to be used in Baptism which are sounder then their doctrine and which in the true sence do hold forth all that we say are put to their shifts by palpable mis-interpretation to deprave their own form They do themselves require of the Baptized a Profession that he believe in the Father Son and Holy Ghost and when we prove that this is justifying faith and that to believe in doth signifie Affiance the Papists say it is but a naked Assent or Historical faith and when themselves require the âaptized to âenounce the Devil the world and the flesh they say that this signâfieth no more but that at present they profess so far to renouâce them as to enter into the visible Church as the way to a future saving abâenunciation And when themselves do dedicate the person to Christ they say it is but directly to his Church that is to leave the world of Infidels and be numbred with the visible Church as the means to a saving sanctification And these notions they have filed and formed more exactly of late than heretofore to make the snare more apt to catch the simple still magnifying to the uttermost the visible Church-state as the only way to a state of justification and salvation But yet as our Divines have observed against him Bellarmine himself when he hath superficially pleaded his own cause doth frequently in the pleading it let fall such words at unawares that do destroy it and grant what we say As lib 3. de Eccles. cap. 10. he saith Verissime etiam dici potuisse ecclesiam fidelium id est eorum qui veram fidem habent in corde unam esse ecclesia enim praecipuè ex intentione sideles tantum colligit cum autem admâscentur aliqui ficti qui vere non credunt id accidit praeter intentionem ecclesiae Si enim eos nôsse posset nunquam admitteret aut casu admissos continuò excluderet yet I confess it is but his nudus ascensus or fides informis that he seemeth here too mean I pray you read over especially his 9. Chap. ibid. There pag. 227 he answereth one of our Objections thus Ad ultimum dico malos non esse membra viva Corporis Christi hoc significari illis scripturis Ad id quod addebatur igitur sunt aequivocè membra c. a multis solet concedi malos non esse membra vera nec simpliciter corporis ecclesiae sed tantum secundum quid aequivocè Ita Johan Turrecremata l. 1.57 ubi id probat ex Alex. de Ales Hugone D. Thoma idem etiam docent Petrus à Soto Melchior Canus aliiâqui tamen etsi dicant malos non esse meÌbra vera dicuÌt nihilominus verè esse in eeclesia sive in corpore ecclesiae esse simpliciter sideles sen Christianos neque enim solae meÌbra sunt in corpore sed etiam humores dentes pili alia quae non sunt membra Neque sideles aut Christiani dicuntur tales à charitate sed à side sive ù fidei profesâione It appeareth then that the Papists are put of late to refine this fundamental doctrine of theirs from the soundness that it formerly had among themselves and to fit it more to their own turns And I blame them not because their whole kingdom lyeth on it and would be subverted utterly if the foresaid exposition hold which is so much like to ours It s a cutting objection which turned Bellarmine out of his rode At si ita est
these terms The like we have in Rom. 6. chap. 4.5 Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the Glory of the father even so we also should walk in newness of life for if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death we shall be also into the likeness of his resurrection Here also it is evident 1. That all the members of the visible Church are supposed to be baptized into Christ and into his Death and so to be buried with him by baptism into death and planted together into the likeness of his death 2. And that this is not supposed to be only an Engagement for the future but a present entrance into the state of Mortification and Vivification wherein they were to proceed by newness of life And therefore ver 5.6 7 8 11. They are supposed to have the old man crucified with Christ that the body of sin might be destroyed And that henceforth they should not serve sin And that they are so dead as to be freed from sin as to the servitude thereof And that they must reckon themselves dead to sin but alive to God He that Readeth the whole Chapter with judgement and Impartiality will soon discern that true Repentance and Abrenunciation of the service of sin was to be professed by all that would be Baptized And that hereupon they Sealed their own Profession and Covenant by the reception of Baptism as Christ Sealed his part by the actual baptizing them and that hereupon they are by the Apostle all called and supposed such as they professed themselves to be Argum. 5. If it be the very nature and use of baptism to signifie and Seal both the present putting off the body of sin and present putting on Christ then the profession of true Repentance must needs precede or concur with baptism but the former is certain of which more anon I conclude then that both Scripture and the very signs themselves and the common consent of the Church of which more after do shew that true Repentance and present Repentance must be professed by all those that we may baptize or whose children we may baptize on their account And consequently that true saving faith which is Inseparable from it and some think is the same thing must needs be Professed too and not only Promised We should before we leave this Argument hear what the Opposers say against it but they are all in pieces the Papists I mean among themselves about it some of them confessing what we plead for and others of them Especially the New ones contradicting it but by such reasons as I think not worth the while now to discuss There are two Reverend men of our own whose unhappy owning the cause that we argue against doth call us to a more respectful Consideration of their Answers viz. Dr. Sam Ward and Mr. Thomas Blake The former saith Concedo neminem Adultorum ad Baptismum admitti debere absque Professione fidei Poenitentiae Concedo iterum solidam poenitentiam conjunctam cum vera vivâ fide in mediatorem obtinere praesentaneam peccatorum remissionem apud Deum You see how much of my Argument is here yielded Sed nego poenitentiam aut fidem Initialem qua judicio Apostolorum sufficiebat ad dandum Baptisma desiderantibus semper eorum judicio aut praesumptione suffecisse ad tales ponendos in statu adeptae reconciliationis remissionis peccatorum regenerationis aut Salutis c. The sum is that there are two sorts of Repentance and Faith one Initial which the Apostles thought a sufficient Title to Baptism and the other saving or connexed to Justification And this they did not expect a Profession of or suppose but put them in the way to it Answ. To this I shall return Mr. Gatakers answer Contra Wardum pag. 71. Ego quaenam sit sides illa ac poenitentia Initialis non intelligo qua praeâitum quis ausit ad Baptismum admittere quem tamen vera vivaque in Mediatorem fide imbuâum nondum credat Philippus certè Aethiopi baptismum poscenti Si credas inquit ex toto corde licet Act. 8.38 Quasi non baptizaturus nisi id ille profiteretur ipseque Charitatis saltem judicio ità credere credat Non vult âum baptizare nifi credat Inquit Lutherus in Gen. 48. Nec fidem tantùm Initialem illam volebat qui ex toto corde poscit ut credat Et de Anânia Calvinus ad Act. 22.16 Verae fidei expertem non baptizasset ea nempe imbutum praesumpsisse vult Et ex Christo ipso id didicisse videtur Act. 9.11 See the rest I add only the saying of Peter Martyr which be concludeth with in Rom. 3. Vnam esse verae poenitentiae rationem quae à baptizandis adultis exigatur It is milâi Impress TIGUR 1559. pag. 148. Where he reprehendeth some Papists quòd sibi singunt in Baptismo poenitentiam non requiri and confuteth them so he doth also in c. 11.864 and the repentance that he requireth is described p. 143. sed quicquid illi Colonienses dicunt una est ratio verae poenitentiae ut ex animo doleamus admissa peccatae quae Deum à nobis abalienaverunt Cui dolori adjungitur desiderium condonationis preces ut eam obtineamus cum certo proposito non amplius incurrendi in eadem peccata voluntate mortificandi veterem induendi novum quae omnia fide niti oportet quae sine illa constare non possunt Much out of this Author we shall produce anon But I have spoke to this of Dr. Wards already in the Appendix to my Treatise of Baptism 1. To which of mine Mr. Blake taking exceptions and publishing them I published my Defence and among many more used this Argument from the Necessity of Repentance but Mr. Blake found it easier to say that of almost forty Arguments few were to the question and so to pass them by than to give us a satisfactory answer to them But yet I find him upon the Point against another Pag. 107 108. And there I find this Question Did they the Apostles so require it Repentance as in reality to precede Baptism Or were Satisfied with a Profession of it I answer If that you yield the last it is enough to the main Point of difference Pag. 108. He saith Faith takes Christ to give Repentance Answ. Only saving faith is properly called a Taking Christ And that takes Christ to give more Repentance but not to give the first Repentance For Christ gives the first Faith and Repentance ut Amesius in medulla lâb 1. de Vocat before faith take him But if it were otherwise yet both are to go before baptism according to the Intention of the Institutor or the Profession of both To that Mat. 3. They
man which is corrupt accordâng to the deceitful lusts of the flesh He that signally professeth his present Consent to be washed by the blood of Christ from his former filthiness and guilt and to lay by the filthiness of Flesh and Spirit doth eo nomine profess saving faith and Repentance But all that are baptized with the baptism of Christs Institution do by the very voluntary Reception of Baptism so profess therefore they do thereby profess saving Faith and Repentance 3. Quo ad modum It s commonly confessed by us to the Anabaptists as our Commentators declare that in the Apostles times the Baptized were dipped over head in the water and that this signified their Profession both of believing the Burial and Resurrection of Christ and of their own present renouncing the World and Flesh or dying to sin and living to Christ or rising again to newness of Life or being buried and risen again with Christ as the Apostle expoundeth in the fore-cited Texts of Col. 3. Rom. 6. And though as is before said we have thought it lawful to disuse the manner of Dipping and to use less water yet we presume not to change the use and signification of it so then He that signally professeth to dye and rise again in baptism with Christ doth signally profess Saving Faith and Repentance But this do all that are baptized according to the Apostolical practice therefore c. Object about Nullity But it will be objected that this Argument goeth so high that it will prove that all mens baptism is a Nullity who do not profess Saving Faith and Repentance and so that they must be baptized again Answ. 1. This concerneth the Opponents to answer more than me 2. There are no such persons that I know of and therefore they are not to be re-baptized We distinguish between the secret Intention of Professing and the signal Interpretative Professing which the Church is bound to take as really intended And so I say that when Christ hath Instituted baptism for such a signification if any man seek and receive that baptism he doth thereby Interpretatively profess to seek and receive it as such to the use and Ends to which it was Instituted seeing then all the baptized do apparently as far as the Church can judge profess Saving Faith and Repentance even by receiving baptism there is no room for the conclusion of this Objection When they bring us forth one baptized Person who did not make such a signal Profession then we shall give them a further answer 3. If they did by word of mouth say that they believe with a saving Faith these words are but signs of their minds and whether counterfeit or not the Church cannot tell And the same may be said of the Baptismal Action and Reception 4. Therefore the Church must not take the external Sacrament for a Nullity every time a mans secret Intentions agree not with his signal Profession for then we should not know whether ever we baptize any one But when it is discovered after that he had other Intentions that which was wanting must be yet done viz. his sincere Intentions or saving faith and not that which was not wanting be done again viz. The external Administration and Reception of Baptism 5. It is confessed to be essential to the Sacrament that the Receiving of the washing by Water doth signifie the receiving of the souls washing by the Blood of Christ. Now suppose I can prove it of abundance of Parents that when they presented their Children to Baptism they did not understand that the water signified the blood of Christ or the washing our cleansing by it from sin and therefore had no such Intention in Baptism would the Opponents baptize all these again Let them answer this for themselves and they shall answer for us Or if the Case of Infant-baptism be quarrelled at let them suppose that it were the Person himself that had been so baptized though I am satisfied that its all one Argum. 4. If we must baptize none that profess not their Consent to enter themselves presently into the Covenant of Grace with God in Christ then we must baptize none that profess not saving faith But the former is true therefore c. Also if the very Reception of Baptism be a Profession of present entering into the Gospel-covenant with Christ then is it a Profession of saving faith But so it is therefore c. This Argument was implyed in the former but the Medium that I now use is the Identity of this covenanting and the profession of saving Faith supposing the Identity of Heart-covenanting and saving faith it self The Antecedent I think will be granted by many of the Papists and it is the common doctrine of the Protestants and therefore as to them I need not prove it I confess some of the Anabaptists and some few others do question whether Baptism be a Seal of the covenant of Grace But the quarrel is mostly if not only about the bare word Seal for they confess that in sense which we mean by sealing and particularly they confess that we do in Baptism enter into the covenant of God and that it is a professing and engaging sign on our part as well as an exhibiting notifying confirming sign on Gods part The consequence is thus proved He that doth ore tenus or by profession enter into the covenant of God doth profess saving faith therefore if we must not baptize them without a professed entering into covenant then nether must we baptize them without a profession of saving Faith Only the Antecedent requireth proof And if I prove either the Identity of profest covenanting and profest true believing or else the inseparableness of them I prove the Antecedent But I shall prove the Identity or the inseparability yea I doubt not of the first which is the most full proof And here we must first consider what the Covenant is we are to enter 1. And it is confest it is the covenant of Grace and that there is but one covenant of Grace This Mr. Blake aknowledgeth for all the mention of an outward covenant 2. It is also a confessed thing on all hands that it is God that is the first Author and Offerer of the covenant that it is he that redeemed us who made the promise or covenant of Grace upon the ground of Redemption and that this is frequently called a covenant in Scripture as it is a divine Law or constitution without respect to mans consent as Grotius hath proved in the preface to his Annotations on the Evangelists Much more out of doubt it is that it is called a covenant before man consenteth as it is a covenant offered and not yet mutually entered In the former sense the word is taken properly but in another sense and for another thing then in the later But in the later it is taken Tropically viz. Synecdochically it being but a covenant drawn up and consented to by God conditionally and offered to us
that believeth in him as a Teacher only for that is no more then to believe in him as in Moses or Elias 4. He that is sincerely a Disciple in heart must take Christ for his only Teacher in the way to everlasting life renouncing all other except as they stand under him and must be willing to be taught and guided by him in all things therefore he that is a professed Disciple must profess all this And that is to profess saving Faith For without saving faith no man can so believe in him or be heartily willing to be taught by him The lessons that they are to learn of him are self-denial and the contempt of this world and the love of one another and to be meek and lowly in heart that they may find rest to their souls Mat. 11.27 28. And these he proclaimeth when he inviteth men to his school But no ungodly man is willing to learn any of these and therefore unwilling are they to be his Disciples Argum. 8. We ought not to baptize those persons or their Infants as theirs who are visible members of the Kingdom of the Devil and his children or that do not so much as profess their forsaking of the child-hood and Kingdom of the devil But such are all that profess not a saving faith Ergo. The Major is proved thus If we must Baptize none but for present admission into the Kingdom of Christ then we must baptize none but those that profess a present departure from the Kingdom of the devil But the former is true therefore so is the latter The Antecedent is granted by those that I have to do with The reason of the consequence is evident in that all the world is divided into these two Kingdoms and they are so opposite that there is no passing into one but from the other The Minor of the first Argument I prove thus All they are visibly in the Kingdom of the Devil or not so much as by Profession removed out of it who Profess not a removal from that conditionâ in which the wrath of God abideth on them and they are excluded by the Gospel from everlasting life But such are all that profess not a justifying faith Therefore I express the Major two waies disjunctively lest any should run to instances of men that are converted have not yet had a cal or opportunity to profess it If such are not visibly in the Kingdom of the Devil at least they are not visibly out of it The Major is proved in that it is the condition of the covenant of grace performed that differenceth the members of Christs Kingdom from Satans and so it is that condition profest to be performed that visibly differenceth them before men It is the promise of grace that bringeth them out of Satans Kingdom therefore it is only done invisibly to those that profess the performance of the condition Moreover to be out of Satans Kingdom visibly is to be visibly from under his Government but those that profess not saving faith are not visibly from under his Government Lastly to be visibly out of Satans Kingdom is to be visibly freed from his power as the Executioner of Gods eternal vengeance But so are none that profess not saving faith The Minor is proved from John 3.36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life and he that believeth not the Son or obeyeth not shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him where it is plain 1. That the unbelief spoken of is that which is opposed to saving faith even to that faith which hath here the promise of everlasting life 2. And that this leaves them visibly under the wrath of God So in Mar. 16.16 compared with Mat. 28.19 In the later Christ bids them make him Disciples and in the former he describeth those that are such and those that remain still in the Kingdom of Satan He that blieveth and is Baptized shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned Here it is evident that the unbelief threatned is that which is contrary to and even the privation of the faith that Salvation is expresly promised to and that all that profess not this saving faâth are not so much as professedly escaped a state of Damnation and that this is the differencing Character of Christs Disciples to be baptized of which yet more afterward so Acts 26.18 It is the opening of mens eyes and the turning them from darkness to light and the power of Satan to God that they may receive Remission of sins c. which is the true state of them that are Christians in heart and the Profession of this that proveth them professed Christians and they that do not profess to be thus enlightned and converted do not profess to be brought from under the power of Satan for that is here made the terminus à quo So Col. 1.13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness and translated us into the Kingdom of his dear Son Here the passing into the Kingdom of Christ is by passing from the Kingdom of darkness so that he is not Cordially in one that is Cordially in the other and consequently he is not by Profession in the one who is not by Profession past from the other He that professeth not such a faith as proveth men in Christs Kingdom professeth not so much as may prove him out of Satans And expresly it is said 1 John 3.8 10. He that committeth sin is of the Devil In this the Children of God are manifest the Children of the Devil he that doth not righteousness is not of God c. These passages will be further touched when we come to the Argument from the true visible Church Argum. 9. If it be the appointed use of all Christian Baptism to solemnize our marriage with Christ or to seal or confirm our union with him or ingraffing into him then must we baptize none that profess not justifying faith Because this is necessarily prerequisite and no others can protend to union marriage or ingraffing into Christ But the Antecedent is true Both Antecedent and consequence are evident in Gal. 3.27 28 29. For as many of you as have been baptized into Chrâst have put on Chrâst Ye are all one in Christ Jesus And if ye be Chrâsts then are ye Abrahams seed and heirs acccoding to promise Here 1 We see that it is not an accidental or separable thing for baptism to be our visible entrance into Christ our putting him on our admittance by solemnization into the state of Gods Children and heirs acording to promise For this is affirmed of all he baptized with true Christian Baptism If we be truely baptized we are baptized into Christ. If we we are baptized into Christ then are we Christ's and have put on Christ and are all one in Christ and are Abrahams seed and heirs according to promise If any object that the Apostle speaks this but of some of them even of the
Regenerate because he saith as many of you I answer it is manifest that he speaks of all 1 Because it was all of them that were baptized into Christ. 2. He expresly saith as much in the next foregoing words vers 26. For ye are all the Children of God by faith in Christ Jesus To which the words following are annexed as the proof For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. The assumption is implied But you have all bin baptized into Christ therefore ye have all put on Christ and so in him are all the Children of God 2. Note that they are the special gifts of saving grace that are here ascribed to all the Baptized 3. Note also that all this is said and proved to be by faith 4. Note also that it is expresly said to be a âustifying faith before vers 24. That we we might be justifyed by faith Indeed this Text affordeth us divers Arguments 1. The Apostle supposeth all the Baptized to profess a justifying faith among the Galathians therefore so must we suppose of others and expect that they do it The Antecedent is proved from vers 24 25. and 27. compared 2. All the Baptized are said to have put on Christ therefore they are supposed to profess that faith by which Christ is put on But that is only justifying faith 3. All that are duly Baptized are baptized into Christ therefore they are supposed to profess that faith by which men are united or ingraffed into Christ but that is only justifying faith But the rest of the Arguments here will be further touched on anon Mr. Blake saith p. 152. Whether all union with Christ imply Regeneration let John 15.2 be consulted where an union with Christ is clearly held out Yet Mr. Baxter brings that text among others to prove that there are some saints that shall never be saved Answ. 1. But I told you that by Saints I meant only those that profess an Acceptance of Christ and not your Saints that only profess a lower faith In this you do by me as you use 1. Union with Christ in the primary and proper sense is proper to the sound believer or else no Title or benefit on earth is proper to him But as those are believers in profession that are not so in heart so those are united to or ingraffed into the Church and so to Christ by an outward Profession who are not so in heart And this is called a Union because they profess that inward Union which they have not which is the famosius significatum Whether these be only equivocally said to be united to Christ we shall enquire in season But tell me where any man was ever said in scripture to be united to Christ without saving faith or the Profession of it 3. I suppose you know how many of our Divines do expound Iohn 15 of a saving Union and take the cautions about unfruitfulness and Apostacy to be de rebus nunquam futuris purposely given that they might not be future But this I stick not on Next he citeth Mr. Cobbet Mr. Hudson and Mr. Ames to shew that Christ is the head of the visible Church and hath many unfruitful members c. Answ. As pertinent as most Citations that I there have met with that is utterly impertinent It 's yielded that as they have a Profession of saving faith so by profession they are members of the visible Church But prove if you can that ever any are such visible members but the professors of a saving faith and their Children I conclude then that Christ hath appointed no Baptism but what is for a visible marriage of the soul to himself as the Protestants ordinarily confess therefore he hath appointed no Baptism but for those that profess to take Jesus Christ for their Husband and to give up themselves to him as his Espouse But this is a Profession of Justifying faith For heartily to take Christ for our Head and Husband is true saving faith and proper to his own Regenerate people if any thing in the world be so And no man can profess to be married to Christ that doth noâ profess to take him for a Husband Therefore for my part I never intend to baptize any without profession of saving faith As for Mr. Blakes answer that we are oftener said here to be espoused to Christ then married I think that this and many hundred such passages do need no answer But yet I shall say 1. Either will serve my turn No unregenerate man is truly espoused to Christ. 2. Though the whole Church in one be solemnly to be married to Christ at judgement that is presented perfect justified and glorified yet that particular believers are married to Christ here I am resolved by Gods assistance to believe while I believe Isa. 54.5 Eph. 5. and many other Texts of scripture Arg. 10. If Paul account all the Baptized Saints or sanctified men dead with Christ and risen with him such as have put on Christ sons of God by Adoption Abraham seed Heirs according to promise and justified then did they all profess a true justifying faith But the Antecedent is certain ergò so is the consequent The Antecedent Mr. Blake confesseth And I shall prove it by parts The consequence is that which lieth chiefly on me to prove and I shall do both together The Apostle in the beginning of his Epistle to the Corinthians and in may other places calls the whole Church Saints 1 Cor 6.11 He saith to them But ye are washed ye are sanctified c That part of the Antecedent then is certain The consequence I prove thus There are none called Saints in all the new Testament but only such as where in heart Devoted to Christ by a saving faith or Professed so much therefore the word Saints in this case must signifie only such If any will prove a third sort of Saints viz. such as profess a faith not saving they must do that which I never yet saw done 2. The first and most famous signification of the word Saints or Sanctified in the new Testament is only of them that are in heart devoted to Christ by true faith therefore the borrowed or Analogical or less proper signification call it what you list must be of that which hath the likeness or appearance of this and that is only the profession of it and not the profession of another thing 3. Let us peruse the texts and see whether it be not a special Saint-ship which Paul ascribeth to these and therefore as to appearance and Profession they had 1 Cor. 6.11 such were some of you but ye are washed ye are sanctified ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the spirit of our God and that sanctification whâch is joyned with justification which is wrought by the spirit of God cleansing men from their former reigning sins which else would have kept them out of the Kingdom of God and which
profess to assent to the truth of that Doctrine and no moâe unless as that Assent may imply the Consent of the Will are not Saints But let us peruse some other Texts besides these that Mr. Blake citeth The Congregations of the Saints are mentioned in the Old Testament as Psal. 89 5 7. and 149 1. But what Saints these were may appear by the Promises made to them Ps. 149.5 9 4 16.3 37.28 97.10 132.9 16. 145 10. The Children of Israel a people neer unto him are called Saints Psal. 148.14 but it is because they are a part of them his people in heart and the rest profess themselves to be his People in a saving sense And if there were any that did not so he was not an Israelite by Religion nor to be of that Common-wealth but to be cut off from his People Acts 9.13 The Saints at Jerusalem that Paul persecuted were such as not only professed saving Faith but also had the witness of Martyrdom and Persecutions to testifie their Sincerity They that continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship and breaking bread and prayers having all things common selling their possessions and goods and parting them to all men as every man had need praising God c. did profess more then a Faith and Repentance short of that by which we are saved But so did the Church at Jerusalem Act. 2.41 42. to the end yea the multitude of them that Believed were of one heart one soul and great grace was upon them all c. Acts 4.32 to 36. so that we may see what Saints the Church at Jerusalem were And if all were not such we see evidently that the whole was denominated from such The Church of Rome were all called Saints Rom. 1.7 True But what was meant by that word and what Saints did they appear to Paul by their Profession to be Even such as were beloved of God whose Faith was spoken of throughout the world that were dead to sin but alive to God that had obeyed from the heart that form of Doctrine delivered to them and being made free from sin became the servants of Righteousness and of God having their fruit to holiness and the end everlasting life Rom. 1.7 8. and 6 11 14 17 18 21. whose obedience was come abroad to all men Rom. 16.19 Here is more then the Profession of a common Faith The Corinthians are called Saints True But what is meant by Saints such as called on the name of the Lord Iesus Christ having much of his grace enriched by him in all things coming behind in no Gift waiting for the coming âf our Lord Iesus Christ who shall confirm them to the end that they may be blameless at his coming 1 Cor. 1.2 to ver 10. all was theirs 1. Cor. 3.22 23. They were such Saints as were washed and sanctified and justified in the name of the Lord Iesus and by the Spirit of God and such as were to âudge the World and the Angels Chap. 6.3 11. delivered from that unrighteousness that would have kept from Heaven ver 9.10 11. such as had no temptation but what was common to man whom the faithful God would not suffer to be tempted above their strength c. Chap. 10.13 such as were not so much as to eat with the notoriously wicked Chap. 5 11. and therefore doubtless Professed Godliness themselves in whom godly sorrow had wrought carefulness clearing of themselves zeal c. 2 Cor. 7.11 in whom the Apostle had confidence in all things ver 16. Object But Paul saith they were carnal and taxeth them with some gross Errors and Sins Answ. 1. So are all the Regenerate carnal in part and guilty of too many sins And it is not Impenitency after admonition that he chargeth them with Their sin was no worse to our eye than David's or Solomon's 2. If any were so bad as to be notoriously ungodly those are not of that number whom he calleth Saints as they are not of them that have the following Descriptions of Saints which I have cited but only were among them but not of them The Galathians I find not called Saints but to call them a Church of Christ or Believers is Equipollent And what Saints were they Why they were all the Sons of God by Faith in Christ Jesus having been baptized into Christ and put him on and were all one in him and were Abraham's seed and heirs according to the Promise Gal. 3.26 27 29. And because they were sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into their hearts by which they cryed Abba Father and therefore were no more servants but sons and if sons then heirs of God through Christ. Object But Paul was afraid of them lest he bestowed upon them labour in vain Answ. 1. It appeareth by what is said that it was not such a fear as made him take them for ungodly 2. This confirmeth what I maintain that the Apostles judgement of them proceeded according to the Evidences of probability He took himself bound to believe their Profession so far as they contradicted it not and according to the prevalency of their Errors which were against it he was jealous of their condition and if they had proceeded so far as to have declared themselves certainly ungodly Paul would have denominated them a Church no more The Church of Ephesus are called Saints Eph. 1.1 But what Saints such as were blessed with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ chosen before the foundation of the world to be holy and without blemish before him in love pâedestinated to the adoption of Children by Jesus Christ according to the good pleasure of his will to the praise of the glory of his Grace wherein he made them accepted in the beloved in whom they had redemption through his blood the remission of sins and have obtained an Inheritance being predestinated c. Who trusted in Christ and were sealed with the Holy Spirit of Promise which is the earnest of their Inheritance they were such as believed in the Lord Jesus and loved all the saints and were quickened who had been dead in trespasses and sins were raised up together and made to sit in heavenly places If Mr. Blake while he abhorreth the name of a Saint or Church equivocally so called would not make all words equivocal that in Scripture are used to denominate or describe a Church or Saint we might easily be resolved by such passages as these what Paul meaneth by a Church or Saint See further Eph. 3.18 All Saints comprehend what is the breadth and length depth height and Christ dwelleth in their hearts by faith and they rooted and grounded in love Eph. 3.17 18. But Mr. Blakes Saints do none of this therefore they are no Saints in Scripture sense With this text compare Eph. 2.19 and see what a Church is and what it is to be fellow-Citizens with the Saints and of the houshold of God and
Eph. 4.12 what Saints they were that were to be perfected and 5 3. what Saints they were that must not so much as name Coveteousness filthiness c. And 3.8 Paul professeth himself less then the least of all Saints But Paul never did nor would profess himself less then the least of Mr. Blakes Saints who are not as much as by profession in a state of salvation nor from under the curse and wrath of God He that pronounceth them accursed with Anathema Maranatha that loved not the Lord Jesus bids grace be with them that love him in sincerity 1 Cor. 16.22 Eph. 6.24 would not have pronounced himself less than the least of these excommunicate accursed ones And were I worthy to be heard I would advise my Reverend Brother to better consideration before he make such accursed Saints or Churches or Believers at least that are visibly so and that he would be cautelous of Canonizing those on whom Paul pronounceth Anathema Maranatha To proceed the Church of Philippi are called Saints True but what Saints such on whom Paul was confident that he which had begun a good work in them would perform it till the day of Jesus Christ to whom it was given on behalf of Christ not only to believe but to suffer for his sake who alwaies obeyed in presence absence for God wrought in them to will and to do they only communicated to Paul in giving receiving and they were such as bad cause alway to rejoyce Phil. 1.6 29. and 2.12 13. and 4.15 4. The Church of the Colossians are called Saints But what Saints such as had faith in Christ Jesus and love to all Saints and had hope laid up for them in heaven who were made meet to be partakers of the Inheritance of the Saints in Light being delivered from the power of darkness and translated into the Kingdom of his dear Son that is the Church in whom they had redemption through his blood even the forgiveness of sins being reconciled by the body of his flesh through death to be presented holy and unblameable and unreprovable in his sight if they continued in the faith grounded and setled and were not moved away from the hope of the Gospel whose ardor and stedfastness of faith in Christ Paul beheld in the Spirit with joy who were buried with Christ in baptism and risen with him through faith and being before dead were quickened with him and had the forgiveness of all trespasses having put off the body of the sins of the flesh who were dead and their life was hid with Christ in God and who shall appear with Christ in Glory when he appeareth Col. 1. and 2. and 3. If it shall be replyed that Paul spake all this of them in the Judgement of Charity or denominated the whole from the better part and the Profession of the rest I say even so also it is that he calleth them all Saints the denomination is on the same ground as the description is I cannot imagine what reasonable evasion can be made from this evidence The Thessalonians are consequentially called Saints in being called a Church of Christ. And what a Church and what Saints such as had the work of Faith Labour of Love and patience of Hope in our Lord Jesus Christ whose Election Paul knew who turned to God from Idols to serve the true and living God and to wait for his Son from heaven who delivered them from the wrath to come they received the word as the word of God which effectually worked in them that believed who followed the Churches in suffering who were Pauls joy and glory in the presence of Christ at his coming whose faith and Charity was so reported to Paul that he tells them be liveth if they stand fast for God had not appointed them to wrath but to obtain salvation by Jesus Christ. 1 Thess. 1 2. 3. 5. They were such Saints whom Christ would come at last to be glorified in and such Believers in whom he will then be admired even because the Gospel was believed among them therefore say not To believe the Gospel is a common thing short of saving Faith 2 Thess. 1. We see then what the Church and Saints at Thessalonica was The Hebrews to whom the Apostle wrote are called Saints Heb. 13.24 And he doth not groundlesly call them Saints for they were such as were made a gazing-stock by reproaches afflictions and became companions of them that were so used took joyfully the spoiling of their goods knowing in themselves that they have in heaven a better and more enduring substance vid. ult Heb. 10.33 34 35. They were such indeed as he saw cause to exhort to perseverance and warn of the danger of Apostacie and the best have need of that But yet though he so spake he was perswaded better things of them and such as accompany salvation and he gives his reason of it Heb. 6.9 10 11. And having said so much of the several Churches under the name of Saints I shall proceed and shew you what they are as Churches though this will after fall in in another Argument because it will be fittesâ for all to lie together and then I shall refer you hither when this afterward falls in You may see by what is said what Churches all these were that are already mentioned and consequently what a Church is in Scripture-sense not a society of men professing a faith short of justifying but a society of men professing true saving faith yea so far professing it as to induce the Apostles to denominate them such as supposing them such indeed For as they knew some were such so did they not know the contrary by any particulars except those whom they commanded them to cast out as none of them The Apostle Peter writes to the scattered Jews that professed Christianity And what kind of Christians or Believers did he take them for Why for such as were Elect according to the fore-knowledge of God the Father through sanctification of the Spirit unto Obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ. And Mr. Blake cannot say that this was a common Election or common Sanctification and Obedience and Sprinkling of Christs blood For it is added that God of his abundant mercy had begotten them again to a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead to an Inheritance incorruptible and undefiled that fadeth not away reserved in heaven for them and that they are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last times wherein they greatly reâoyced suffering the trial of their precious faith and having not seen Christ loved him and believeing in him rejoyced with joy unspeakable and full of glory receiving the end of their faith the salvation of their souls If all these people had not or professed and seemed not to have a saving faith I know not what words can express a saving faith nor
what persons have such a thing The like testimonies the Apostle John gives of them as may quickly be seen But all the doubt is Whether the seven reproved Churches in Rev. 2. and 3. were such or not To which I say 1. All of them professed the foresaid saving Faith 2. There is no sin charged on them that was visible and inconsistent with true saving Faith 1. For the Church of Ephesus we heard what they were esteemed by Paul a little before and here their grace is mentioned and the faults expressed are consistent with true grace 2. The same I say of the Churches of Pergamus and Thyatyra And for the Nicolaitans and other Hereticks whom they are blamed for suffering as the former is commended for hating them they are such as were to be cut off from the Church and while they were in it were not of it Nor are they any where called Believers Saints Disciples or Church-members But it is the Church of Sardis that Mr. Blake takes special notice of And it is said of her indeed that she had a Name to live and was dead But 1. in that they had a name to live it seems it was a living faith which they Professed and not only one short of it 2. Their death was not a death in reigning sin such as is the death of the unsanctified But a declining condition comparatively called death as the children of God do oft complain of deadness And therefore its next said Be watchful and strengthen the things that remain that are ready to dye And it s exprest that their deadness was in that their works were not found perfect before God that is that many or most of them had defiled their garments with some Heresie or vice which the rest had not done 3. How far this was notorious to others is of further enquiry 4. If they had gone on so far as by obstinate impenitency after admonition to shew themselves void of saving faith they had been unchurched as appeareth by the threatning The Church of Philadelphia is so far commended as that the case is put out of doubt And the Church of Laodicea though discommended hath nothing visible charged upon it inconsistent with sincerity and the luke-warmness which is charged on them they are threatned to be spewed out for and so to be unchurched And thus we see what a Church was and what Saints were and what Believers and Disciples were supposed to be by the Apostles and what is the signification of these words in Scripture for they are all of the same extent Mr. Blake saith He is a believer in Scripture that is a visible Professor that puts himself in the number of those that expect salvation by Jesus Christ. Answ. 1. A Professor of what Of true saving faith 2. Not that puts himself among them locally only for so may an Infidel but that becomes one of them as far as to a Profession of it And if they expect salvation by Christ either they profess that faith which salvation is annexed to or else they give God the lye and contradict both Scripture and themselves even in their very Profession As if they should say I look to be saved by Christ but I will not take him for my Saviour nor be saved from sin by him And sure such a Profession makes no mân a Saint Believer or Church-member Thus much I have said to prove that all the Baptized are accounted Saints and therefore Professed a saving Sanctity The second Title which I mentioned follows of which I shall be more brief All the Baptized are accounted to be dead and risen with Christ even dead to sin and risen to newness of life therefore they all profess a saving faith The proof of this is full in the two Texts already cited Rom. 6. and Col. 2.11 12. Rom. 6.33 c. How shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death Therefore we are buried with him by Baptism into death that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father so we also should walk in newness of Life For if we have been planted together into the likeness of his Death we shall be also in the likeness of his Resurrection Knowing this that our old man is crucified with him that the body of sin might be destroyed that hence forth we should not serve sin for he that is dead is freed from sin Now if we be dead with Christ we believe that we shall also live with him Likewise reckon ye also your selves to be dead indeed unto sin but alive unto God through Iesus Christ our Lord. Here is a full Report of the use of Baptism and the Profession of all that are Baptized and the state that they are supposed to be in so that I cannot speak it plainlier than the words themselves do Calv. on the Text saith Extra Controversiam est induere nos Christum in Baptismo hâc lege nos baptizari ut unum cum ipso simus Imò docet hanc mortis societatem praecipuè in Baptismo spectandam esse Neque enim ablutio sola illic sed mortificatio quoque veteris hominis interitus proponitur Vnde palà m fit ex quo recipimur in Christi gratiam mortis ejus efficaciam statim emergere Porro quid valeat haeâ cum morte Christi societas continuo sequitur ut scilicet nobis emortui si amus novi homines Nam à mortis societate transitum merito facit ad vitae participationem quia haec duo inter se individuo nexu cohaerent veterem hominem Christi morte aboleri ut ejus resurrectio justitiam instauret nosque efficiat novas creaturas Haec autem est Doctrina Quod Mors Christi efficax est ad nequitiam carnis nostrae extinguendam ac prostigandam Resurrectio vero ad suscitandam melioris naturae novitatem quódque per Baptismum in istius gratiae participationem cooptamur In summa Qualis sit Baptismi ritè suscepti veritas docet So Col. 2.11 12. which I shall not stay to recite because it is to the same purpose and before cited The third Title mentioned in the Argument is this All that are Baptized have Professedly put on Christ therefore they have professed saving Faith The Antecedent is expressed Gal. 3.27 For as many as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. The Consequence is proved in that to put on Christ heartily is to be made true partakers of him and living members of him therefore to Profess this is inseparable from the Profession of saving Faith yea by that faith is he truly put on Putting on Christ is the same with Putting on the New man which after God is created in Righteousness and true holiness being renewed in the spirit of our minds Ephes. 4.20 21 22 23 24. Col. 3.10 It is putting on the New
the Promise in Christ by the Gospel even the unsearchable riches of Christ. Heb. 6.17 The heirs of Promise have their salvation confirmed by Gods Oath And Heb. 1.14 They are all called the Heirs of salvation And Heb. 11.6 9. It is true Justified Believers that have that Title And Jam. 25. they are called Heirs of the Promised Kingdoms And 1 Pet. 3.7 they are called Co-heirs of the same Grace of Life So that to be Heirs in the first and proper notion is to be Sons that have Title to the Inheritance of Glory and therefore to be Heirs in the second Analogical notion for I will not yet anger Mr. Blake with the term Equivocal is to be such as seem such by Profession of that faith which hath the promise of that Glory But the Professors of any other faith are none of them The last Title that I mentioned in the Argument was Justified Paul calleth all the Baptized Church of Corinth Justified None that profess not a Justifying faith are called Justified therefore none such should be Baptized The Major I proved to Mr. Blake out of 1 Cor. 6.11 Ye are washed ye are sanctified ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God Mr. Blake doth not at all deny the Major or the sense of the Text alledged to prove it But darkly in generals Intimateth a denial of the Minor silently passing over that particular Title Justified as if he durst not be seen to take notice of it I confess its sad that good men should be so unfaithfull to the Truth which is so precious and is not their own and which they should do nothing against but all they can for it But in general he saith pag. 152. Of Sacrament Other phrases are there brought or Titles as proper to the Regenerate which are well known in Scripture to be applyed to such as have Apostatized and are brought by Arminians to prove falling away and are censured by their Adversaries Answ. Those other Titles which I proved to be given to the generality of the Baptized were no other than what we ascribe to them to be Heirs and Justified quickened and have all trespasses forgiven them and to be saved And if indeed these Titles be so promiscuously used it will be harder to understand Scripture than Interpreters have hitherto thought Why did not Mr. Blake shew but one Text for this one in hand where any are said to be Justified upon a faith short of Justifying I think he was loath to name this Title lest he should have seemed to contradict himself in the terms or be put to the searching out for a distinction of Justification which we have not yet heard of that he may tell us in what sense the unregenerate are Justified If he should say it is a conditional Justification so Infidels are justified without any faith at all but that is no Justification because not actual Mr. Hudsons words and Ames which he annexeth mention not Justification much less that any not Professing Justifying faith are Justified And here I must needs again say I know no man that hath made Scripture terms so Equivocâl as Mr. Blake hath done while he pretendeth to abhor it Two senses of the word sanctified Believers Disciples c. we yield him viz. as they signifie those that are such in Heart and those that Profess to be such in heart But these will not serve his turn but he must moreover have a third sort even such as only Profess another faith short of Justifying yea and a faith which is specificially distinct from Justifying faith yea and that by a Physical specification if he will be understood for he falls upon me for making but a Gradual difference who yet ever affirmed a Moral Specifick difference So that we have not onely many sorts of Sanctification Faith c. but also of Justification too Whether we shall have as many Salvations and as many Heavens or not in his sense I yet find him not express But I would know why he doth so usually say that a faith short of justifying entitleth to Bââtism and Disciples Saints c. are titles that belong to more then the justified If indeed he take his own short faith to be really justifying and his own new made Saints to be really justified Doth not his own ordinary appropriating the Titles of Regenerate and justified to I know not how to call them for he hath left me no one proper name for them that I can remember to those that are the Heirs of Glory shew plainly that in the primary signification they speak only of such even in hâs own apprehension and that therefore the words simply expressed signifie no other bare Professors of justifying faith being but seemingly Analogically secundum quid such and his Professors of another kind of faith being not such in either sense Having gone thus far about Titles let me add another because I find Mr. Blake so oft apply it to the justified I shall crave leave to use that term as proper to them or else I confess I shall be at some loss for a name for them because he hath taken them all out of my hand that I can think off And this is the Title Regenerate Christ hath instituted no Baptism but what is to be a sign of present Regeneration at least to men at age But to men that Profess not a justifying faith it cannot be adminstired as a sign of present Regeneration therefore he hath Instituted no Baptism to be administred to such The Major I have proved already in the first Argument And its plain in Joh. 3.5 Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God and so in Tit. â 5 Where it is called the Laver of Regeneration In both which though I am of their mind that think that the sign is put for the thing signified yet it may thence plainly appear what is the thing signified even Regeneration or the new birth yea so commonly was this acknowledged by all the Church of Christ that there 's nothing more common in the writings of the Fathers than to take the terms Regenerate Illuminate c. and Bâptized as signifying the same thing or at least spoken of the same person which occasioned one of our late Antiquaries so stifly to plead that Regeneration in Scripture signifieth meer Baptism and that all the Baptized are Regenerate I grant that it oft falls out that Baptism being misapplyed sealeth not Regeneration at present and that the samâ person may afterward be Regenerate and his remembred Baptism may then be of use to him for the confirmation of his faith But this is not the Institutors commanded use of it to be so administred at first if the party profess not saving Faith though this review of it is a Duty where it was so abused at first of which none afterward The Minor I shall take for granted while Regeneration stands in
Scripture so connexed to salvation I know no Regenerate ones but the justified or those that profess to have a justifying faith Nor hath he proved any more Argum. 11. All that are meet subjects for Baptism are after their Baptism without any further inward qualification at least without another species of faith meet subjects for the Lords Supper having natural capacity by age But no one that professeth only a faith short of justifying is meet to receive the Lords Supper therefore no such a one is a meet subject for Baptism Or thus Those at age whom we may baptize we may also admit to the Lords Supper without any other species of faith But the Professors of a meer common faith short of justifying we may not admit to the Lords Supper Ergo c. The duty of a particular examination before the Lords Supper is nothing to our purpose because 1. that makes a man fitter than he was but the want of it is not in the cognizance of the Minister alwaies nor will not justifie our refusal of a godly man excepting some apparent gross evils 2. And it is the necessity of another faith and state that we are enquiring after which will not be proved by the necessity of an actual examination or excitation of our present grace The Major Mr. Blake will easily grant me and if any other deny it I prove it thus 1. It is the same Covenant that both Sacraments Seal one for initiation the other for confirmation and growth in grace therefore the same faith that qualifieth for the one doth sufficiently qualifie for the other For the same covenant hath the some condition 2. They are the same heresies that are conferred in baptism and the Lords Supper to the worthy Receiver Therefore the same qualification for kind is necessary for the reception The Antecedent is commonly granted Baptism uniteth to Christ and giveth us himself first and with himself the pardon of all past sins c. The Lords Supper by confirmation giveth us the same things It is the giving of Christ himself who faith by his Minister take eat drânk offering himself to us under the signs and commanding us to take himself by faith as we take the signs by the outward parts He giveth us the pardon of sin sealed as procured by his body broken and blood shed 3. A member of Christs Church against whom no Accusation must be brought from some contradiction of his first profession must be admitted to the Lords Supper but the new baptized may be ordinarily such at age therefore if he can but say I am a baptized person he hath a sufficient principal title to Baptism coram ecclesia I mean such as we must admit though some actual preparation be necessary unless he be proved to have disabled his claim on that account either by nulling and reversing that profession or by giving just cause of questioning it 4. The Church hath ever from the Apostles daies till now without question admitted the new baptized at age to the Lords Supper without requiring any new species of faith to entitle them to it I take the Major therefore as past denial All the controversie between Mr. Blake and me is like to be about the Minor whether the profession of his common faith short of justifying make people fit for or capable of the Lords supper 1. No man should be admitted to the signal profession of Receiving Christ as he is offered who will not orally profess to receive him as he is offered But all that are admitted to the Lords supper are admitted to the signal profession of receiving Christ as he is offered Therefore no man that will not orally so profess to receive Christ should be admitted to the Lords Supper The Major is plain because 1. Else we cannot know who is fit if he will not make profession of it 2. His refusal shews that he either understandeth not what he doth in the Sacrament or is wilfully uncapable by infidelity or impenitency 3. The Minor is evident in the nature of the Sacrament The offer of the bread and wine with the command Tade eat drink is signally the oâfer of the Lord Jesus himself with a command to take him He that puâs forth his hand to take the bread professeth thereby to Accept of Christ as offered If it be said that Mr. Blakes professor of a lower sort of faith doth profess to take Christ as offered I say No This proposition I here suppose as evident in it self that no man but the sound Believer doth take Christ as offered no not as Christ. He is offered as a Saviour from the Guilt and Reign of sin and so Mr. Blakes professor doth not so much as profess to accept him For I hope we are agreed that so to accept him heartily is saving faith 2. No man should be admitted to receive a sealed pardon of sin or have it delivered to him that doth not profess that faith which is of necessity to make him capable of a sealed pardon but he that only professeth a faith short of justifying professeth not that faith which is of necessity to make him capable of a sealed pardon Therefore he is not to be admitted to the Lords supper It is a present sealed pardon that they profess there to receive by the very actual receiving God presently offereth and they presently profess to accept it signally and therefore must do so verbally 3. No man is to be admitted to the Lords supper that professeth not true Repentance for sin But Mr. Blake's Professor doth not so for that is inseparable from saving faith Therefore Mr. Blake must deny the Major or say nothing that I can imagine but what is to no purpose And if he do deny it 1. I would desire him once to give us a just Description of that Repentance short of saving which he will be satisfied with the Profession of in his Communicants 2. I must confess as much as I am against separation I never intend to have communion with Mr. Blakes Congregation if they profess not saving Repentance and faith And if he exact not such a Profession I say still he makes soul work in the Church And when such soul work shall be voluntarily maintained and the Word of God abused for the defilement of the Church and Ordinances of God it is a greater scandal to the weak and to the Schismaticks and a greater reproach to the Church and sadder case to considerate men than the too common pollutions of others which are meerly through negligence but not justified and defended And if Mr. Blake be angry at my speaking these things I cannot help it I am bound to tell him of it as a faithful Brother that I doubt not but God is angry at his Doctrine and the great wrong that he doth the Church of God while he is so angry at his Brother for resisting it For my part I would not have done his work no nor justified it as some of his
neer Learned Friends have done for more than I will speak of It s like he will hardly exact a Profession of saving Repentance from the lapsed for their Restoration to the communion of the Church if he will not do it of the Church themselves in their Sacramental communion Argum. 4. Furthermore they that will not profess true Love to Christ as a Redeemer are not to be admitted to the Lords Supper But no man can Profess true Love that will not Profess true faith Ergo c. The Major is proved in that it is a Sacrament of communion in Love We receive the highest expressions of Christs love and are to receive them with gratitude which hath alwaies love in it Argum. 5. They that profess not true Pope of Christs coming in Glory are not to be admitted to the Lords Supper But none can do that but the Professors of a saving faith Therefore the Major is proved because it is the very end and use of the Sacrament to exercise Hope of Christs coming Do this in remembrance of me till I come which Implyeth Expectation or Hope Argum. 6. No man is to be admitted to the Lords Supper that Professeth not a sincere love to the Saints as Saints But so can none do that Profess not a saving faith without contradicting himself Ergo. The Major is proved in that the very business of that Church there next their communion with Christ is to have communion with the Saints in Love and if they be at variance but with one they must leave their gift at the Altar and go first and be reconciled to their Brother and then come and offer their gift But Mr. Blake is so far from excluding the ungodly that he would not have us so much as disswade them from coming Pag. 196. he saith to that 1. It is as I suppose without all Scripture Precedent to warn men upon account of want of a new life by the Spirit wholly to keep off from this or any other Ordinances of Christ that we should warn men upon this account upon this very ground to hold off from all address to Ordinances I have not learnt Answ. That we should disswade them to come till they have that Faith and Repentance and Love to the Brethren which is the fruit of a new life I have proved and more have done it than you will ever well answer And it will not follow as you pretend that then none must come that have not the certainty of their sincerity in the Faith as I shall further shew when I come purposely to your Objections And where you talk of unregenerate mens being incapable of examining themselves it s a great mistake else no wicked man could despair if he be not able to find himself to be wicked And then it would be a sufficient Evidence of Grace for a man to find himself graceless which is a contradiction And it s an unhappy confusion that Mr. Blake is guilty of almost all along while he pleadeth against the Interest of the Regenerate only in the Sacraments that he confoundeth most commonly the Professors of Justifying Faith and holiness with his Professors of a faith short of Justifying and thus in his arguing against Mr. Hooker and Galaspie and others carrieth on the matter in the dark as if these were all one or the arguments will serve for the one that will serve for the other which is meerly to lose his own and his Readers labour or leave him deceived which is worse How many leaves of that volumn and his former of the covenants are guilty of this dark misleading work I could willingly here answer his Arguments for unregenerate mens right to this Sacrament but 1. I shall meet with much more about their pretended right to baptism anon and the answer of those will serve for both 2. And he hath so mixt the two Cases of Professors of saving faith and of not saving together that if I deal with him on the later he may say he speaks of the former The first Argument of Galaspies 201 which he answereth is from the Nature of Sacraments which are to signifie that we have already Faith in Christ Remission of sin by him and Union with him The sense of the Argument is That seeing Sacraments according to Christs institution are confirming signs presupposing the thing signified both on our part and on Gods therefore none should use them that have not first the thing signified by them at least those at age To this Master Blake answereth This to me is as strange as new that Sacramental signs declare shew that we have Faith remission of sins The Sacrament now in question is a sign of the body blood of Christ in whom by faith remission of sins may be obtained I know but that it is a sign either that we do believe or that we have remission of sin otherwise than upon believing to which this engages but not presupposes I know not Repl. Though I undertake not to defend all the Arguments that other men use in this Case yet this doth so much concern the cause of baptism which I am now debating that I shall give you this reply to it 1. The sacramental Actions are signs as well as the substance of bread and wine The Offer with Take eat signifieth the offer of Christ to us to be received and applyed the Taking and Eating and Drinking signifieth our Acceptance Application of him With himself is offered the pardon of sin and given to all that Accept him which by Taking Eating and Drinking we profess to do It is my duty to tell you that it is sad that a Treatise of Sacraments should profess not to know that our believing and Remission is here signified It s pity but this had been known before you had written of them at least Controversally What Divines are there that deny the Sacraments to be mutual signs and seals signifying and sealing our part as well as Gods and how ill do you to wrong the Church of God by seeking to make men believe that these things are new and strange If it be so to you its pity that it is so But sure you have seen Mr. Gatakers Books against Doct. Word and Davenant wherein you have multitudes of sentences recited of our Protestant Divines that affirm this which you call new It is indeed their most common doctrine that the Sacrament doth pre-suppose Remission of sin and our faith and that they are instituted to signifie these as in being though through infancy or error some may not have some benefits of them till after it is the common Protestant Doctrine that Sacraments do solemnize and publikely own and confirm the mutual Covenant already entered in heart as a King is crowned a Souldier listed a Man and Woman married after professed consent so that the sign is Causal as to the Consummation and Delivery as a Key a Twig and Turff in giving possession but consequential to the Contract
wonderful confidence If Mr. Blake will bring as good proof of any converted by it as we can that the eleven Apostles that the Church at Jerusalem Acts 2. and 4. and the rest of the Churches were strengthened by it he will make good that Assertion 3. What he saith of our not having precedents by name is nothing to the purpose If he can prove it of any named or unnamed specially of Societies it will suffice 4. He tels us that The examples of Conversion by the word perhaps well examined would prove short of such Conversion as is here intended The Conversion in Gospel-Narratives is to a Christian profession Repl. 1. This is too unkind dealing for any Preacher of the Gospel to use with that Word which converted him and hath brought in so many thousands to Christ and which he himself preacheth for the conversion of others I should offend the patience of the Reader to stand to confute this by proving that the Word hath been a means of true saving Conversion yea the ordinary means I refer Mr. Blake to what I have said before of the state of the Churches that Paul wrote to Was there not one sort of Ground that received the seed in depth of earth and brought forth fruit Was not Paul sent by preaching to open mens eies and turn them from the power of Satan to God Act. 26 v. 18. Doth not Paul in all his Epistles speak of the Saints as converted savingly by the word of the Gospel What heaps of clear Testimonies might we bring out of his Epistles How contrary is this new Doctrine to the Word and all the ancient Churches and all approved Protestants Judgements I would we had such Evidence of true Conversion now among our Professors as the multitude of Converts gave Act. 2. and 4. and as the Jaylor gave Act. 1.6 and the Eunuch Act. 8. and as Lydia and many other 2. But what if the Word had not truly converted them its somewhat to be brought to an outward Profession of true faith which the rest were that were then Church-members But the Profession of your faith of another species is not the Profession of a Christian Faith though you call it so If you will give me but as good proof of any one baptized person that was brought but to the Profession of this lower Faith as I will give you of multitudes that were brought to true saving Faith by the Word and more to the Profession of it I will say that you have done that which never man did before you I pray make tryal for the proof of some one Well! But the main strength of the Argument which you had to answer was concerning the Promise To which you say 1. When the adversary shall bring a Promise made to the Sacrament for spiritual strength it will happily be found of equal force to the giving of a new life Repl. You next say Implicite Promises may serve Shew but one such You say Every Promise made to the Word is made to the Sacrament Repl. Prove that and take all Though we have no Promise particularly of converting this or that man by the Word yet we have that it shall convert many in general Shew where is a word of Promise that the Sacraments shall convert any one Sure if Paul had but had such a Promise of converting men by Baptizing them as he had of converting them by Preaching Act. 26.17 18. and elswhere he would never have said I thank God that I baptized none of you but Crispus c. for I am not sent to baptize but to Preach the Gospel 2. We find where in that Sacrament men have Communion of the Blood of Christ and of his Body and are partakers of the one Bread and have communion with one another and are helped by it in calling to Remembrance Christ death in hope of that coming all which are undoubtedly strengthening 1 Cor. 10 16 17. 11.25 26. Act. 2 c. But you cannot shew where ever any was either united first to Christ or his mystical Body by the Lords Supper or where it was appointed to be used to any such end or where ever any generaral or Implicite Promise of such a thing is made The tenth Argument was from the expresse danger of unworthy receiving 1 Cor. 11.17 The summ of the answer is That This Argument would take off every Ordinance from the honor of Conversion Repl. But I conceive that the strength of the Argument or that which ought to be its strength is wholly overlookt which is not from the Necessity of a Preparation in general but of a special Preparation or Worthiness which is not so pre-requisite to the fruitful use of converting Ordinances There is a saying by the superfluity of naughtiness malice c. requisite before a man can in reason expect that the Word should convert him and yet it may convert thousands that are not so far prepared by doing that and the rest But the Worthiness of a Partaker of the Lords Supper must be more than this For 1. That which the Church is Judge of must be that the Receiver be a Church-member professing true Faith and not contradicting that Profession by a scandalous life 2. Himself is required to examine himself for more that is whether he be sincerely what he Professeth and Christ be in him or else he is a Reprobate and not to take the childrens bread 2 Cor. 13.5 and also that he have a Particular Preparation according to the nature of the Ordinance It s expresly Necessary 1. That he discern the Lords Body 2. That he do this in remembrance of Christs death and with a hope of his coming and 3. For communion with Christ and his Church and to be partakers of the one bread 4. And with a Heart to take Christ and Eat that is to feed on him by Faith when he takes the bread But all this cannot be done by the unregenerate nor is this prerequisite before a man come to the Word that it may convert him That Preparation which is pre-requisite in a meet receiver of the Lords Supper it was not instituted to effect unless as it may do it when God sees good in an unworthy or prohibited use But true Faith and Repentance are Preparations pre-requisite Ergo c. You cannot say that to the hearing of the Word as a means of conversion true faith and Repentance is so requisite The text you mention 1 Pet. 2.1.2 I say again speaks of the confirming and edifying use of the word and not of the converting use The converted must bring true saith to the Word if they will expect encrease of it but the unconverted must not needs bring true faith if they will be brought to believe by it 3. Yet remember that we say not that men ought to forbear coming that are unconverted but that they ought to come but how To believe and repent and so to come and to do it in this order and no
give it to men that Profess a Dogmatical faith whether they have it or not or else we must give it to no man because we know not the heart The conclusion therefore is unavoidable that according to Mr. Blake's Principles it is the end of the Lords Supper to convert Heathens to Christ by receiving it so they will but lye and say they are Christians first I profess I see no way of Mr. Blake's avoiding this but by renouncing his dangerous Doctrine The 3. Argument is The Law and the Gospel in their joynt strength may convert c. But in the Lords Supper there is Law and Gospel c. Ergo. Answ. 1. What may possibly fall out is nothing to the Question of Lawful Demanding or Giving 2. There 's neither Law nor Gospel in a wicked mans unjust Demand and Reception and Lying signal professing to take Christ when he doth not but Law and Gospel is against it 3. The Law and Gospel which you mention as annexed to the reception are separable and all you can thence prove is that a wicked man may be converted by seeing and hearing and therefore may see and hear but that 's nothing to receiving 4. Nor will it prove that he may see and hear because its possible he may be converted by it because the same Gospel is in its season with due application to himself to be preached to that end and Christ hath not appointed his beholding the Application to another to be the commanded means for such ends The 4. Argument is from the Heart breaking use of the Sacrament by aggravating sin c. Where the London Ministers are cited c. Answ. The same answer as to the last may serve And 1. A wicked mans Demand and reception hath no humbling use but as any Lye or other sin hath though his Beholding may 2. It s an exalting use that this humbling use prepareth for to the Receiver seeing therefore the wicked are uncapable at present of the exalting use they must have that humbling word delivered by it self which they are capable of and not conjunct with that which they are uncapable of 3. The London Ministers speak not of the first humiliation in the passage of the New Birth but of subsequential at least as to the first Intention of the work and if of conversion it is but upon supposition that unjust Demanders do intrude 4. By the like Argument from the signification of the signs connext with the word which declare Christ crucified and risen again you might prove as well that it is for converting heathens The 5 Argument is That which is annexed to the word to second it in that very thing which works the soul to conversion to God may bring c. Answ. 1. To the Major if it may convert it followeth not that it may be demanded to that end 2. To be added in that very thing is not to be added to that very use For the same word which confirmeth doth convert but the Sacrament is not added to it for the converting use as commanded but for the confirming use To the Minor I answer by denying it as to the end The Sacrament is not annexed to that use or end though to that thâng because this is a use which the word hath without the Sacrament and the Sacrament added to the same word is added for higher inâeparable uses which the unconverted are uncapable of It s added to be a professing sign on our part that we take Christ and Remission of sin by him and a seal applicatory on âhrists part And because the wicked are uncapable of these special uses they are uncapable of a lawful receiving of the Sacrament 2. You may as well by this Argument too prove that it is for conversion of Infidels Jews Turks For the Sacrament is annexed to the word in those very things that are for their conversion The 6. Argument is from experience To which I answer All the experiences which Mr. Blake mentioneth are not only nothing for his cause but abundantly destructive to it Many have been unwakened by fears of receiving unworthily to their condemnation as wicked men do will it follow that therefore they may receive it who are wicked and unworthy or that there is no such danger to them if they do Or rather that they should not receive while they are such and that there is danger if they do sure it is some danger that is the matter of their fear some threatning which is the ground if it be their duây to receive it even while they know themselves to be wicked because it is an appointed means to their conversion what need they so to fear it unless they fear the means of their own good If they say it is the unworthy receiving which they fear It s true but that is to receive it in state of wickedness Impenitence and unbelief as all the unregenerate do surely it is the wrath of God and eternal damnation which they fear therefore they fear least it should fix them in that state But your worthy communicant is in state of damnation when only our unworthy communicant is such Moreover will it follow that because other mens doctrine which are against you doth put men into these fears which occasion their conversion that therefore your doctrine which abateth such fears is sound 2. Or will it follow that Receiving converteth because the fears of unworthy Receiving do convert or conduce thereto surely preparations and fears of unworthy Receiving are one thing and the wicked mans unworthy Receiving it self is another thing The former may do much good when the later is like to do much hurt The thing that such fear is least they should have no saving part in Christ or pardon or eternal life which you confess your pretended worthy Receiver hath not at all The 7. Argument is from the Confession of eminent Divines of an opposite judgement who will have all admitted present at the consecration to see the bread broken and divided Ans 1. Had you named those Divines you had been the more capable of an answer I know some that have told men of your judgement that all their reasonings do prove no more than thus that the seeing and hearing and not the taking may be fit to convert But I never knew any that said they will have all admitted present to see c. 2. But what if they had or did say so What 's your consequence How prove you that therefore they should be admitted to receive or that receiving is a means ordained and enjoyned for conversion because seeing and hearing is so much for that Argument My 12. Argument is from Mat 22.12 Friend how camest thou in hither not having on a wedding garment and he was speechless To come in hither is To come into the Church of Christ. By the wedding garment is undoubtedly meant sincerity of true faith and repentance so that I may hence argue If God will accuse and
condemn men for coming into his Church or the communion of Saints without sincere faith and repentance then it is not the appointed use of Baptism to initiate those that profess not sincere faith and repentance But the former is plain in the text Ergo c. The 13th Argument is this We must Baptize none at age that profess not themselves Christians nor any Infants but on such a Profession of the Parents or Pro-parents but they that profess only a species of faith short of Justifying faith profess not themselves Christians Ergo. c. The Major is certain because it is the use of Baptism to be our solemn Listing sign into Christs Army our Initiating sign and the solemnization of our Marriage to Christ and Professing sign that we are Christians and we do in it dedicate and deliver up our selves to him in this relation as his own So that in Baptism we do not only promise to be Christians but profess that we are so already in heart and now would be solemnly admitted among the number of Christians The Minor I prove thus 1. No man is truly a Christian that is not truly a Disciple of Christ that 's plain Acts 11.26 No man is truly a Disciple of Christ that doth not profess a saving Faith and Repentance save the children of such therefore no man that doth not so profess is truly a Christian. The Minor I prove thus No man is truly a Disciple of Christ that doth not profess to forsake all contrary Masters or Teachers and to take Christ for his chief Teacher consenting to learn of him the way to salvation But no man maketh this Profession that professeth not saving Faith and Repentance therefore no man that professeth not saving Faith and Repentance is truly a Disciple of Christ. The Major is evident in the nature of the Relation The Minor is as evident in that it is an Act of saving Faith and Repentance to forsake other Teachers and take Christ for our sole or chief Teacher in order to salvation 2. No man is truely a Christian that professeth not to take Christ for his Lord and King forsaking his Enemies but no man doth this but the Professors of a saving faith Ergo. c. 3. No man is a true Christian that professeth not to Take Christ for his Redeemer who hath made propitiation for sin by his Blood and to esteem his blood as the ransom for sinners and to trust therein But none do this but the Professors of saving Faith therefore none else are Christians The Major of all these three Arguments is further proved thus No man is professedly a Christian that professeth not to Accept of Christ as Christ or to believe in Christ as Christ But no man doth profess to take Christ as Christ that professeth not to take or accept him as a Priest Teacher and King Ergo. c. The Major is plain in it self The Minor is as plain it being essential to Christ to be the Priest Prophet and King And from these essentials related to us and accepted by us doth our own denomination of Christians arise And that a bare Assent without Acceptance doth not make any one a Christian is past doubt and shall be further spoke to anon If Baptism then be commonly called our Christening and so be our entrance solemnly into the Christian state then it is not to be given to them that are not Christians so much as by Profession but that Mr. Blake's Professor of another species of Faith is no Christian so much as by Profession I doubt not is here proved And furthermore If a Faith defective in the Assenting part about the Essentials of its Object serve not to denominate a man justly a Christian then a faith defective in the Consenting or Accepting part about the Essentials of the Object serveth not to denominate a man a Christian But the Antecedent is true therefore so is the Consequent By Defective I mean not only in the matter of perfection of degree but that wanteth the very Act it self The Antecedent is proved because else the Turks are Christians because they believe so many and great things of Christ and else a man might be a Christian that denyed Christs death or resurrection or other Essentials of Christianity The Consequence is good For Christianity is as truly and necessarily in the will as in the understanding consent is as essential an Act of covenanting as any So that I may conclude that as he is no Christian that professeth not to believe that Christ is the Priest Prophet and King so he is no Christian that professeth not to consent and accept him for his Priest Prophet and King But so doth not Mr. Blake's Professor of another faith therefore he is no Christian nor to be baptized The 14 th Argument is this If we must baptize men that profess not saving faith and repentance then is it no aggravation of such mens sins that they either plaid the hypocrites in such Professions or fell from them or walkt contrary to them For no man can walk contrary to a Profession which was never made But the Consequent is false therefore so is the Antecedent Our Divines ordinarily charge wicked men with contradicting of Profession which they made with God either in Baptism or the Lords Supper And they expound many places of Scripture which the Arminians take as favouring their Cause to be meant according to the Profession of wicked men Now it seems to me that Mr. Blake by his Doctrine doth undertake to justifie all these wicked men from this aggravation of their sin and to take them off from repentance and humiliation for it For if they made no such Profession in baptism if at age or in the Lords Supper then it can be no aggravation of their sin that they walk contrary to it But I dare not undertake to secure them from the punishment Argum. 15. If all at age that are baptized and all that receive the Lords Supper must engage themselves to believe presently in the next instant yea or at any time hereafter with a saving faith then must they Profess at present a saving faith Or if we must baptize none that will not engage to believe savingly then must we baptize none that will not Profess a saving faith But the Antecedent is true therefore so is the Consequent The Antecedent is Mr. Blake's Doctrine who affirmeth that it is not necessary that they that come to baptism or the Lords Supper do Profess a present saving faith but its sufficient that they engage themselves to believe by such a faith The Consequence is proved thus 1. It is not the Beginning of saving faith which we are to engage our selves to in the Sacraments but the Continuance therefore the Beginning is presupposed in that Engagement and so we must no more baptize without a Profession of Faith in present than without an Engagement to believe hereafter The Antecedent is proved thus There is no one word in
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 ârguments 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 Pâg 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 fâr 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 ând 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 possibâle 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 coâfest 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
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 thât 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 siâc 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 Accepâaâion 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
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 servaâts 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 justâfying 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
faith 2. But a proper right from promise or proper gift which may warrant them to claim or require the thing from God or man this I deny to any but true believers and their seed They may not lawfully require it though we must give it them if they do require it upon such a profession 3. But without a profession of saving faith they may neither require it nor we give it if they do require it whatever other short faith they have or profess 4. Thus also the Case was with the Jews allowing the difference made by the foresaid peculiar Promise to them ARGUMENT II. Mr Blake Those that are a People by Gods gracious dispensation nigh to God comparative to others have right in the sight of God to visible admittance to this more near relation This I think is clear men have right to be admitted to their right But those that come short of Justifying faith are a people by Gods gracious dispensations nigh unto God comparative to others this is plain in the whole visible Nation of the Jews as appears Deut. 4 7. Psal. 147.19 and 148.14 Those therefore that are short of Justifying faith have right in the sight of God to admission to this nearer relation ANSWER The Jews were nigher to God than other people 1. In that they had the offers of Grace which other people had not 2. And many great Deliverances and temporal priviledges which others had not Both these Infidels and Heathens may now have and therefore they prove no Right to Baptism 3. They were nigher by some promises peculiar to that Nation which is nothing to us 4. They were nigher by their Consent to the offers of Grace and the Covenant of the Lord which was proper in sincerity to the sanctified 5. And by their profession of Consent and external engaging themselves to the Lord whether they had inwardly faith or not Now to the Major I grant it but add that the three first sorts of Nearness give not right to Baptism All admission to near Relation comparatively to others is not by Circumcision or Baptism But it is only a Nearness in the two last senses that are questionable as to this And I have before shewd in what sense true Consent to the Covenant gives right and in what sense an outward profession of Consent gives right and that your common faith gives none in either sense Lastly if your conclusion were granted it s nothing to our question For as is said all admission to near relation is not by baptism One Infidel may be nearer God and the Kingdom of Heaven then another and yet ãâã be baptizable for all that ARGUMENT III. Mr. Blake Those that God ordinarily calls his People and owns as his openly avouching himself to be their God have right in the sight of God to the signs and cognizance of his People and are to have admission into the society and Fellowship of his People This is plaân if God in Covenant will own servants then his stewards may open the door to them if he will own sheep his servants doubtless may mark them But God owns all in visible communion though short of faith that is Justifying as his People and openly avouches himself to be their God as in abundant places of Scriture is evident See Deut. 26.18 These have therefore right to the signs and cognizances of his people to admission into the Society and Fellowship of his People ANSWER 1. To the Major with the fore-mentioned distinction of Right applyed as before I grant it 2. To the Minor I say God owneth them as his people by internal consent and covenanting who indeed are so and he owneth them as his People by outward Covenanting or Expression or Profession of consent who are such But those that have neither of these but only profess some shorter faith or consent to some other Covenant or but part of this he will not own in either relation nor would have them taken into the Communion of his Church Nor do you prove any such thing for Deut. 26.18 is so much against you that I marvel you were not troubled at the citing of it For that Text alone is enough to confute all your pompous allegations out of the Old Testament from the Church state of the Jews The words are Thou hast avouched the Lord this day to be thy God and to walk in his waies and to keep his Statutes and his Commandments and his Judgements and to hearken to his voice And the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people c. Do you think that they that in heart consent that the Lord be their God and to walk in his waies c. have not saving faith Then there was no such thing then on the earth And if they had such faith who sincerely consented then they Professed such faith that Professed such consent And the word avouching sheweth that it was present profession and not only a promise for some distant futurity This Argument therefore is but like the rest ARGUMENT IV. Mr. Blake Those whom the Spirit of God ordinarily calls by the name of Circumcision they had a right in Gods sight to Circumcision and those of like condition have like right to baptism This I think is clear the Spirit of God doth not mis-name doth not nick-name nor ordinarily at least give equivocal names But men short of Justifying faith are called by the Spirit of God by the name of Circumcision as needs no proof Christ was a Minister of the Circumcision Rom 15.8 And he was sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel Those then of a faith short of that which is Justifying have right in the sight of God to Baptism ANSWER 1. I have no need to deny the Major but it is not sound for they are called the Circumcision i. e. the Circumcised because they were actually Circumcised and not because that all that were so had right to it 2. To the Minor I grant it but with this note that it is not because of their short faith that they were to be circumcised but upon the Parents or their own profession and sincere consent to the Covenant The Conclusion again containeth not your Thesis There 's nothing in it about giving title or any thing of necessary connexion ARGUMENT V. Mr. Blake Those that are the servant of God whom God owns as his servants have right in his sight to be received into his house and to be entitled to the Priviledges of his Church This we think should not be denyed and that God will take it ill if any shall deny it But men short of that faith which Justifies are owned of God as his servants as is clear Lev. 25.41 42. There every Israelite that was sold to any of the Children of Israel and his Children are called of God his servants and that as Israelites of which a great part were void of that faith which Justifies Therefore those that are short of faith
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 Faiâh 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 Queââion 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-mâmbers 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
that faith to be the qualifying condition of Visibility of Member-ship But your other kind of Faith to be neither ARGUMENT XII Mr. Blake The Children of God have right in the sight of God to be admitted to Baptism this is clear enough but men short of Justifying faith are Children of God even those that drew down judgements on the old world as Gen 6.2 The whole body of the children of Israel Deut. 14.1 ANSWER The same Error continued requireth the same Answer ARGUMENT XIII Mr. Blake Those whom God ingraff's by his power into the true Olive and makes partakers of the fatness of the Olive they have right in the sight of God to be admitted This is plain God ingraffing right must not be denied but he ingraff's by his power those that are short of that faith that justifies even the whole body of the Church of the Gentiles and we expect the like of the Church of the Jews as appears from the Apostle Rom. 11. Therefore those that are short of a justifying faith have right in the sight of God to Baptism ANSWER Again the same Error Therefore accept the same Answer ARGUMENT XIV Mr. Blake All of those that professedly embrace a Gospel-tender in which there is a conditional Promise of Justification Adoption Glorification have right in the sight of God to all Ordinances ordinarily necessary and requisite to bring them up to these conditions and to the fruition of these glorious Priviledges and consequently to baptism the leading priviledge This none can deny that know the readiness of Christ in imparting saving ordinances to a People But those that are short of faith which is justifying may embrace a Gospel-tender in which there is a conditional Promise of Justification Adoption Glorification Those therefore that are short of faith which is justifying have right in the sight of God to all such Ordinances and consequently to Baptism ANSWER Embracing is a Metaphor and can signifie nothing here but their Wills Consent and Use. The words Gospel tender signifie either the thing tendered or the act of the tenderer To consent to and so embrace the latter is no more than to be willing to hear or to consent thaâ God and his Messengers shall make the render This an Heaâhen or Infidel may do To consent to and embrace the thing tendered upon the terms that it is tendered is saving faith In that sense therefore I deny the Minor and in the former the Major as extending to Baptism All that consent that Christ shall be offered to them ought not to be baptized nor any on that account None that consent to have Christ offered Christ as Christ can be truly said to be short of saving faith If by embracing you mean Metonymically the profession of embracing Christ then you say as I say give up your Cause It s that Profession and not his short faith nay that without any faith that will warrant us to baptize him ARGUMENT XV. Mr. Blake If the Apostle argue for a right to Baptism from gifts that are common to the justified and unjustified then faith which is short of justifying gives right in the sight of God to Baptism This none can deny unless they will call the Apostles Logick into question and deny his Consequence But the Apostle thus argues for a right to Baptism from those gifts that are common to the justified and unjustified This is plain Act. 10.47 Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we The Holy Ghost there is the gift of the Holy Ghost then poured out the gift of tongues as in the 45 46. verses is held forth which is a gift not only inferiour to Charity but such as may be served from it 1 Cor. 13.1 A gift of that kind that men of a miraculous faith ordinarily did as in an instant conferr They are therefore gifts common to the justified and unjustified Those therefore of faith short of that which is justifying have right to Baptism ANSWER This is the only Argument of all the seventeen that doth so much as speak to the question A strange way of arguing To the Major 1. I deny the Consequence The Argument will not hold from one common gift to any common gifts nor to this common faith Prove this Consequence 2. I distinguish in the Antecedent between arguing from gifts as a Title or the condition of a Title and arguing from them as satisfactory evidences of a Title such as profession it self is To the proof from Acts 10.47 I say further It followeth not he that hath received the Holy Ghost may be baptized therefore he that hath your common faith may be baptized For that 's no evidence of receiving the Holy Ghost 2. The Holy Ghost was promised only to be true Believers Mark 16.17 and not to any others Yet God did not hereby restrain his own power from giving it to others Seeing therefore God had promised it to true believers though he did give it to some others it followeth that it was a probable evidence of saving faith though not a certain And therefore it might warrant us to baptize them as Profession it self might do Especially when it accompanied that Profession seeing that both Evidences are more full than one and yet one is sufficient as to us 3. You cannot prove that ever God gave the holy Ghost to any that professed not saving faith Nor yet that any man was baptized upon any such gift of Miracles without the profession of saving faith Those Acts 10. confessed Christ and professed faith before they were baptized 4. You cannot prove that it was only common gifts of the Spirit that is meant in Acts 10.47 For ordinarily the Holy Ghost was given at once for Sanctification and such extraordinary works And anologum per se positum stat pro significato famosiori And their praising God doth intimate their love to God and honour of him and sense of his goodness which proceed from the sanctifying Spirit ARGUMENT XVI Mr. Blake If the promise be to others besides Believers then so is the seal for to whom God promiseth to them he engageth himself to perform But the Promise is to others therefore the seal is to others This will be evident if it be once understood that it is only the conditional Covenant which God sealeth by the Sacraments for this promise is made to unbelievers though the good promised is not to be enjoyed by any but those that perform the condition ANSWER The 16th Argument Mr. Blake fetcheth from my words to Mr. Tombs that he may prove me a self-contradicter But I do not contradict my self every time Mr. Blake understandeth me not I confess still that the Seal is to others besides Believers but though the promise be conditional we must not seal to any but those that profess consent to the Conditions And therefore not to any but those that profess to be true believers ARGUMENT XVII
I have no true faith I cannot believe Faith is a perswasion of Gods love to me or a resting on him for salvation and I cannot be perswaded of his love to me nor can I rest upon him And when I have convinced them that the Gospel is 1. a Narrative of what Christ is and what he hath done and suffered for us and 2. an offer of Christ and life to all that will accept the offer And therefore that faith is 1. an Assent to the truth of his Report and 2. a Consent to be Christs and that he shall be ours And when I have asked them whether they do these two things or not whether they believe the Gospel to be true and are willing that Christ and Life be theirs and that they be Christs they profess very cheerfully both this Assent and Consent they are wâlling to have Christ if they know their own hearts and yet they dare not say that they are true believers partly through general fears and partly because they know not that this which they profess is saving faith Now in such a case we are to let them know that it is the thing and not their Certainty of the thing that God hath mâde necessary And therefore we do not nor must not ask them in Sacramental Administrations whether they have saving faith by meer name without description but whether they believe in God the Father Son and the Holy Ghost and renounce the World Flesh and Devil and whether they are willing to have God for their only God and Christ for their only Saviour and the Holy Ghost their Sanctifier And he that saith yea doth profess a saving faith though he know it not so to be And what would Mr. Blake do with him if he say neither Yea nor Nay Having thus vindicated the Proposition against their Objections and shewed the vanâty of all other waies and that we can have no certainty what Profession to expect if we expect not a Profession of saving Faith I may well sum up all and still insist on the 19th Argument that we must expect the profession of a saving Faith seeing if we take up with any other we are utterly at a loss Mr. Blake cannot agree with himself what faith to require nor hath given any certain description of it when he hath so voluminously talkt for it and what he or others seem to require as a thing distinct from saving faith we see sufficient Reason to reject as being wholly unproved and by us proved insufficient to this use I shall now therefore proceed to my 20th and last Argument for the Proposition which is drawn from the constant practice of the Universal Church of Christ. It hath been the constant practice of the Catholike Church since the Apostles daies till now to require that Profession of saving Faith and Repentance as necessary before they would baptâze and not to baptize any upon the Profession of any lower kind of Faith Therefore it must be our practice also And here I must confess my self in as great an admiration at the words and dealings of Mr. Blake and some godly learned Divines that go with him in this Cause as ever I was brought to by the groundless confidence of such men He must shut his eyes against the fullest Evidence of Historie and Church-practice that will deny that it hath been the practice of the Universal Church of Christ to baptize upon the profession of a saving faith and not otherwise Insomuch that I must profess that I am not for my own part able to prove that ever any one person since the daies of the Apostles was baptized upon the profession of any other faith by any save the gross Hereticks even those whose Baptism was accounted invalid I desire Mr. Blake or his Neighbours of his mind to help me to an instance of any one approved Baptism since Christs time or his Apostles upon the account of a faith that was short of justifying and not upon the Profession of a justifying Faith Hitherto this is not done by them the contrary is fully done by others and yet to my admiration they as confidently affirm that all the Church of Christ hath gone their way or that it hath been their constant practice and that they should forsake the example of the Church if they should do otherwise and they except against my Opinion as novelty I must confess that such Experience hath brought me to lower thoughts of the credit even of good men than formerly I have had and to resolve to try before I trust One would think that the matter of fact in such a point as Baptism which we all pass through should have been out of question before this day For the proof of the Churches practice 1. I have already said enough about the Apostles own practice and the Church in their daies Even when they describe the faith which they require expresly by assent alone yet they shew that it is a saving Assent which they require and the promise of pardon and salvation is in the same or other Scriptures affixed to that Assent But this I shall not recite now 2. The constant practice of the Church since the âpostles to this day is undoubtedly known 1. by the very form of words in Baptism and 2. be the historie of their proceedings therein 1. It is certain that the Church did ever Baptize into the Name of the Father Son and holy Ghost And as I have proved before the voluntary seeking and reception of that Baptism containeth the actual profession of a saving Faith 2. It is certain that the persons to be baptized if at age did profess to believe in the Father Son and holy Ghost whâch as is shewed is saving faith 3. It is also certain that they did profess to renounce the Flesh the World and the Devil which is a profession of saving Repentance 4. And it is certain that they promised for the future to live in new obedience which is the consequent of saving faith and thus they publikely entered the three stipulations Crediâ Credo Abronuncias Abrenuncio Spondes Spondeo And no man can do this that hath not saving faith therefore the professing of it is not without the professing of a saving faith Nay indeed it containeth the profession of that faith 5. Moreover it is a known case that the ancient Churches commonly took all those that were duly baptized to be in a state of salvation That they supposed them to have the pardon of all their sins I think none doubteth that ever read much of their writings Davenant in his Epistle of Baptism giveth many proofs and many hundred more may be given if any be so blind as to deny it All the doubt is Whether they also ascribe Regenerating Renewing Grace to all the rightly baptized And though Davenant deny that they ascribe the infusing of habits to it as to infants yer 1. he denieth it not as to the Adult nor 2. that they ascribed
the Gift of the Holy Ghost to it as to Infants And yet as long as they put all duly baptized both Infants and Adult into a state of salvation it matters not as to our question whether Infants had habitual Grace And yet Mr. Graker hath brought so many proofs out of the mounments of Antiquity even for this also that the Fathers uno ore took all the Baptized to be regenerate or renewed by inherent grace that when his Amanuensis had transcribed them he fâund them near four times as big as his whole Book besides and the very naming of the Auâhors and Books and Pages takes up near ten or eleven Pages Stâiâtur in Davenaââ Epist. pa. 53. to the end of 63. He begins with Justin âarry Irenaeu c. I will not so much as trouble the Râader to name the Authors seeing he may there have them with the places together And lest Mâ Blake should say that it is but common sanctification which they assert he may there see the placeâ qâoâed where âhey aâcribe to all the dulâ baptized peccatorum remissionem mentis illumiâationem vâii sordiumque ablutionem expurgationem animae purgationem purificatinem emaculationem totius hominis verant integram Circumcisionem refectionem renovationem recreatioâeÌânnovâtionem animâtionem emundationem sanctificationem internam reformationeÌ ad divinaÌ imagineÌ similitudineÌ restitutioneÌ regenerationeÌ geâerationis nativae correctioâeÌ acâreparationeÌ veteriâ hominis mortem sepulturam noviânativitatem vetustatis abstersionem exutum despoliatioâem dâpositionem vitii omnis evomitionem peccati interfectionem criminum mortem sepulturam viâtutis vitam Spiritus sancti infusionem gratiae coelestis consecutionem hominis mentis immutationem in melius transformationem Hinc Baptismum appellant Vndam genitalem aquam salutarem rorem purificum sanativum vivificum sanctificumq lavacrum Et Sacramentum hoc asserunt peccatis exuere peccata expurgare spiritualem lepram auferre gratiae ac virtutum Spiritus sancti donis atque primitiis induere vim generativam habere Dei siitos generare corpus peccuti destruere vertutem vitalem indere gratiam spiritualem conferre atque infundere divinam imaginem instaurare novam facere massam condere creaturam dealbare nive candidiorem facere purum justum sanctum novum facere hominem peccatum radicitus evellere justitiam sanctitamque tribuere animae sordes maculasque abluere ulcera morbosque sanare aestus sedare febres extinguere putredines exuere vitia exinanire oculos aperire aures reserare vigorem dare vires addere formam floremq Deo dignum conciliare in vitam primordialem animam restituere textum novum contexere animas reparare viventes spiritu informatas utì aqua olim reptilia producere esse baptizâ to quod matrix Embryoni eo modo effigiare quo infans in utero essingitur pari modo ex aqua resingere reficere quo ex terra primó fingebatur refundere refingere prout statua solet tingere ut lanum purpurâ purgare emollire fulgidum facere ut ignis ferrum charactereÌ effigiemque imprâmereâut cerae sigillum vitium solvere absumere peccata exurere ut ignis ceram homineÌ terreum ut terraÌ metallicaÌ in auruÌ transmutare crassos animales in coelestes spirituales transformare infantiam juventutem revocare puritati originali restituere vel eâ etiam praestantiorem splendidiorem reddere Typos baptismatis affirmant fuisse Naaminis purgationem Pharaonis submersionem Cataclysum Noathicum piscinaÌ BethesdicaÌ aquatilium creationem formationem protoplasti I have recited all these terms Mr. Gataker telleth you where to find them all least Mr. Blake should not be able to find any one that certainly signifieth saving Grace if we named not all For though he abhorreth to impute equivocation to the Scripture as I do yet he sticks not to do it much more where it serveth his turn Regeneration Renovation Adoption Sanctification Disciples and I doubt Justification and what not are all equivocal terms with him in Scripture if I can understand him and so is the Church the body of Christ and many such like Perhaps therefore it will not move him that Mr. Gataker nexe addeth pag. 63. De baptismo denique exponunt illas sacras Scripturea Periochas Psal. 34.5 juxta Graec. Ver. Psal. 103.5 Isa. 1.16 Ezek. 36.25 26. Psal. 51.10 Joh. 1.13 3.5 6. Rom. 6.3 6. 1 Cor. 6.11 Gal. 3.27 Ephe. 4.22 24. 5.26 Col. 2.11 13. Tit. 3.5 Heb. 6 4 10.22 Quae loca IlluminationeÌ purificationem renascentiam regenerationem refectionem sanctificationem mortificationem vivisicationem cordis renovationem imaginis restaurationem spiritus infusionem hominem veterem exutum crucifixum abolitum hominem novum Christum ipsum indutum loquuntur nec aut ad solam reatus amotionem possunt accommodari aut de ea sola saltem ab ullo opinor unquam interprete sunt exposita Constat itaque Patres antiquos tam Regenerationem propriè dictam quae in hominis renovatione interná consistit quà m peccati sive originalis sive actualis remissionem sacramento isti tribuisse Constat ex iis quae suprà indicavimus aevi itideÌ inferioris Scriptores plerosque cùm in eadem sententia fuisse tum in candeÌ menteÌ patruÌ priscorum dicta cepisse So far Gataker If all these terms be equivocal and none of them signifying saving Grace we must even give up the use or certainty of Language But it may possibly be Objected that this was the Fathers error who ascribed too much to Baptism Answ. What ever they did in that it proveth the point in hand and sheweth us what persons the baptized and the visible Church were taken for by the Fathers Object But doth it not rather shew that saving Faith was not presupposed because they supposed that Baptism did give the spirit and sanctification and therefore found not men sanctified before Answ. 1. It is undeniable that they took all that were duly baptized to be presently in a state of salvation without any delay and therefore they did not take Baptism as a common Ordinance to lead men up to the use of other Church Ordinances as the Supper c. which is also common to the notoriously ungodly and so to saving grace 2. And if the âatholike Church hath in all ages thus annexed saving Grace to Baptism and made any common faith the condition qualifying the person for this Baptism then it would be plain that they all affixed saving Grace to the preparation of common Grace and so the Catholike Church hath been Pelagian which he that shall affirm will do that for the Pelagian Cause which will better please the Jesuites than any considerate Reformed Divines It is therefore not to be doubted oâ but that it was some Antecedent special Grace to which they thus confidently affixed other saving Grace Which will the more appear in that Austine himself and those that followed him against the
the sense they are not agreed among themselves Some of them as is said would have Baptism only necessarily to admit Infants into the visible Church and place them under Government and ordinances and give them ex opere operato a certain preparatory grace Some of them will have it to imprint an indelible Character they know not what and to give them true Sanctification which they call justification by inherent grace Some of them affirm that as to Infant-Baptism the Council of Trent hath not defined whether it justifie or not and therefore it is not de fide And Accordingly some of them make true faith pre-requisite in the Parents and some of them make a certain congruous disposition Meritum de congruo to be pre-requisite but wherein that congruous Merit must consist they know not or are not yet agreed Commonly its thought to be in a fides informis or bare Assent Which Mr. Blake calls a dogmatical Faith conjunct with a reverent esteem of the Sacraments and a consent to become members of the Catholike Church and to be under their Government and use the Ordinances Or a consent in the Parent that the child do these And for the reformed Churches it is past all question by their constant practice that they require the Profession of a saving Christian Faith and take not up with any lower The Practice of the Church of England till the late change may be seen in the Common-prayer-Book wherein all that is forementioned is required The Judgement of the present Guides of our Churches as to the most is easie to be known by the Conclusions of the late Assembly at Westminster In the larger Catechism they say baptism is not to be administred to any that are out of the visible Church and so strangers to the Covenant of promise till they profess their Faith in Christ and obedience to him but Infants descending from Parents either both or but one of them professing faith in Christ obedience to him are in that respect within the covenant and to be baptized Here you may see whom they take to be of the visible Church and in that respect within the covenant 1. The words professing faith in Christ if they were alone do signifie a justifying faith profest For though to believe in Christ may sometime signifie a lower kind of Faith yet analogum per se positum stat pro famosiori significato 2. But that there may be no doubt of their meaning they add the necessity also of a profession of Obedience to Christ to shew that it is the working faith which must be profest And it is not only a Promise of Obedience for some distant futurity but the Profession of it which they make necessary And I conceive that he that professeth faith in Christ and obedience to him professeth that which will prove saving if he have but what he professeth The same they say in their confesâion of Faith Cap 28. And again in the shorter Catechism Profession of Faith in Christ and obedience to him is the thing required In the Directory also they tell us that Baptism is a seal of the Covenant of Grace of our ingraffing into Christ and of our Vnion with him of remission of sin Regeneration Adoption and Eternal Life that the water in Baptism representeth and signifieth both the blood of Christ which taketh away all guilt of sin original and actual and the sanctifying vertue of the spirit of Christ against the dominion of sin and corruption of our sinful nature That baptizing or sprinkling and washing with water signifieth the cleansing from sin c. That the promise is made to believers and their seed c. And they mean no doubt the promise of the foresaid special mercies for even Mr. Blake himself doth once deny any promise of baptism to be made to the Infants that he pleadeth for And the promise of Justification Adoption c. is made to no believers but those that have justifying faith otherwise than as it is barely offered and so it is to Infidels also They add also in the same place that All who are bapâized in the name of Christ do renounce and by their baptism are bound to fight against the Devil the World and the flesh All this is further manifest in our daily administration of Baptism I never heard any man baptize an Infant but upon the Parents or Susceptors or Offerers Profession of a justifying faith Nor do I believe that Mr. Blake himself doth baptize any otherwise though he dispute against this and for another Baptism The grounds of my conjecture are 1. Because I suppose he is loth to be so singular as to forsake the course of the Church in all ages And therefore I conjecture that he requireth them to profess that they believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and that they renounce the world the Flesh and the Devil 2. Because he so often professeth that he taketh the baptized to be in covenant with God and that this covenant is by them entered in baptism he saith that he knoweth but of one Covenant and that is the covenant of saving grace and that they are presently obliged debetur quovis tempore and therefore it is not only for a distant futurity that they engage themselves And if this be so it is past doubt that they profess a saving faith For the Gospel hath two parts 1. the Narrative or Historie of Christs person and sufferings resurrection c. 2. and the offer of Christ and life to sinners Accordingly Faith hath two parts 1. the Assent to the History or to the truth of the Christian Doctrine and this Mr. Blake maintaineth to be necessary and 2. Consent to the offer And this is called the Receiving of Christ And this is our Internal covenanting which Mr. Blake confesseth necessary For the covenanting of the Heart is this very consent with a resolution for future duty and the covenanting of the mouth is the Expression or Profession of this Consent with a promise of the necessary consequent duty So that though Mr Blake do say pag. 171. that âustifying Faith is with him the thing promised and do thrust from him the imputation of such an egregious piece of affâcted non-sense as to say that justifying faith is a promise Yet it is not only all the sense that I have of the nature of justifying faith that iâ is an Assent to the Truth of the Gospel with a consent to the offer or heart-promise to be Christs but it must also be his own sense though disaffected or else he must palpably contradict himself There being no other internal entering or accepting the Covenant or Offer of Grace but by that consent and heart promise 3. And I must also conjecture this because we even now found Mr. Blake denying that ever he denied the necessity of the Profession of a saving faith to baptism But if in my conjectures I be mistaken in Mr. Blakes practice I must say
description of the Covenant pag. 154. Foedius Gratiae est quo deus per fidem in Christum nos pro justis reputat ac proinde pro faciis Foederis quod in remissione peccatorum gratuitò imputatione Justitiae Christi consistit agnoscit Georg. Solinius Method Theolog. makes no other of the Adult the subject of Baptism but the Professors of faith pag. 245. and that either verè credentes or hypocritae pag. 244. Et in Exeges Confes. August pag. 823. Si à Deo instituta sunt Sacramenta ut generalis illa promissio gratiae de Remissione pecoatorum viâae aeternae singulis qui Sacramentis legitimè utuntur peculialiter obsignetur c. At sacramenta in hunc sinem instituta sunt Rom. 4 Gal. 3. 1 Pet. â Melancthon's Judgement is the same as the rest as is apparent in his Common places and in Sohnius Thes. Theol. ex Corpore doctr Phil. Melancthonis c. 19. pag. 59.60 61 92. Trelcatius Instit. Theol l. 2. p. 198. Materia baptismum recipiens sunt omnes soli qui probabiliter in foedere censentur Censentur autem tam adulti qui principiis fidei initiati ad Ecclesiam accedentes fidem suam poenitentiam apud homines profitentur tam infantes c. Many passages before and after shew that he as others take to be foederatus or in foedere to be proper to the truly Regenerate and therefore they truly say qui probabiliter censentur esse in foedere Jo. Ger. Vossius Thes. de Sacram. Essicac Th. 37. Disp. 2. p. 3.28.339 mentioning the Answers of the Reformed Divines to an Objection divideth them into two parts as not agreed in the point The first is those qui dicere solent eum qui fidem habet praedicationi Evangelicae virtualiter quidem salutem habere quia dispositus est ad salutem consequendam instrumento instructus quo gratiam sâlutarem attingere consequi possit c. And thus they confess that Faith goeth before Baptism even this Justifying faith which they call the Instrument but they think that Justification and Sanctification follow Faith and Baptism The other sort are they who think that the Spirit by the Word before Baptism doth not only beget Faith but also offer to Faith and conferr the spiritual Grace of Regeneration So that both sorts agree of the Precedency of Faith in the Adult And Thes. 42. Contrae haec objicitur à quibusdam quòd Abraham Justitiam Fidei habuerit ante Circumcisionem Rom. 4.10 quod item Cornelius gratiam Sanctificationis habuerit ante Baptismum Act. 10.2 verùm neque nos negamus Gratiam Justificationis aut Sanctificationis ab Adultis ante Sacramenti usum Fide apprehendi sed dicimus ordinariè ante usum SacramentoruÌ tenuem tantùm Gratiae gustum haberi extraordinariè autem posse etiam tum auctiorem esse manifestiùsque sentiri So that ordinarily some true saving grace antecedeth Wollebius defineth Baptism thus Baptismus est primum novi Foederis Sacramentum in quo Electis in Dei familiam receptis externâ aquae aspersione peccatorum remissio regeneratio per sanguinem Christi Spiritum sanctum obsignatur And p. â21 he makes it as others do one difference between the Word and Sacraments Quod Verbo ordinariè Fides excitetur Sacramentis confirmetur And therefore Grace which may be confirmed must be before expected Luther Tom. 2. Pag. 439. shews that Baptism containeth the Profession of saving Faith In Baptismo est Promissio Dei offerentis nostrum VOVERE nihil aliud est quà m ACCEPTARE CHRISTVM qui offertur nobis Felix sanè votum quod non promittit dare sed tantum bona accipere acceptis adhaerere Alstedius Definit Theolog. pag. 137. Baptismus ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã consideratus est sacramentum in quo homo electus tam certò abluitur sanguine Christi quà m certò corpus ipsius aquâ aspergitur Gal. 3.27 Baptizari in Nomen Patris Filii Spiritus sancti est baptizari in cultum sanctae Trinitatis quidem ità ut Pater Filius Spiritus sanctus nobis promittant Remissionem peccatorum vitam aeternam nos vicissins illis promittamus obsequium Et Distinct. c. 27. pag. 129. Vsus baptismi est commuâit vel singularis Ille est respectu hypocritarum credentium There is no third sort acknowledged to have right to Baptism Bishop Vshâr in his body of Divinity pag 415. The outward Elements are dispensed to all who make an outward profession of the Gospel for in Infants their being born in the Church is instead of an outward Profession because man is not able to distinguish Corn from Châff but the inward grace of the Sacrament is not communicated to all but to those only who are heirs of those Promises whereof the Sacraments are Seals For without a man have his name in the Covenant the Seal set to it confirms nothing to him 1. It is here apparent that it is the outward Profession of no other then a saying faith that he meaneth As also he shews afterward 1. By opposing such Professors as Hypocrites when have not the thing professed to the Elect and Justified as here he doth the half to the Corn and 2. by his Description of the faith professed The Church doth not only baptize those that are grown and of years if any such being bred Pagans be brought up within the pale of the Church and testifie their competent understanding of Christianity and profess their faith in the Lord Jesus and Gods pretious Promises of Remission of sins by his blood and their earnest desire to be sâaled with Baptism for the strengthening of their souls in this faith Quest Doth the inward Grace alway accompany the outward sign Answ. No but only when the Profession of their faith is not outward only and counterfeit but sincere and hearty c. Here then is no third sort that are hearty professors of a lower kind of faith Amesius Bellarm. Enervat De Necessit Bapt Gen. 17. Ero Deus tuus Semânis tuiâ Filii corum qui participes sunt benedictionis Abrahae sunt Filii Dei etiaÌ quum primò nascuntur c. 1. Regenerationem esse partem promissionum singulari modo ad fidelium filios pertinere forderis ipsius formula manifestè declarat 2. Filii Christi incipimus esse per fidem ante baptismum 3. Baptizantur propriè homines quia pro filiis Dei habentur non ut incipiant esse Filii Alioquin ratio nulla esset quare filii infidelium non aequè baptizarentur ac filii fidelium Et cap. 3. pag. mihi 53. repugnat haec distinctio of a faith before Baptism which is but a disposition to Justification that is to Sanctification and a faith after Baptism whâch is an essential part of Sanctification which was Bellarmin's distinction 1. Scripturae quae fidem justificantem antecedere
docet Baptismum Acts 15.9.2 Rationi experientiae dictanti eâdem plane fide recipi Baptismum quâ recipitur fructus Baptismi 3. Confessioni ipsius Bellarmini quae extat lib. 2. de Effect Sacr. cap. 13. Adulti per fidem contritionem veram Justificantur antequam reipsa ad Sacramentum accedant Dr. Willet on Rom. 4 Contr. 6 pag. 224. saith The Sacraments then non institut sunt Justificandis sâd Justicatis are not instituted for those that are to be Justified but are for them which are already Justified as Paraeus Musculus Loc. Commun de Baptis Artic. 2 pag. mihi 728. Propter hanc nondum debet baptizari qui gratiam Christi praedicatam tam sibi per incredulitatem aversatur tantisper dum in eà tergiversatione incredulitate perseverat cor impoenitens retinet Hâc de causâ Apostoli poenitentiam sidei in Christum confessionem requirebant ab adultis priusquam eos baptizarent Sic Petrus Act. 2. c. His locis patet requiri ab adultis cor poenitens sermonem gratiae recipient in Christum credens ità ut impoenitentes sermonem gratiae recusantes increduli baptismi hujus capaces nondum esse qutant etianisi sint de Electis donec convertantur Scharpius Curs Theolog. de Baptis loc 24. col 1228. Baptismus est primum Novi Testamenti sacramentum à Deo institutum quo Remissio peccatorum Regeneratio initiatio in Ecclesiam significatur in fidelibus obsignatur ut obligatio nostrâ ad obedientiam Col. 1254.1255 Arg. 2. Qui sunt in foedere gratiae illi necessario servantur licèt non habuerint signum foederis quia foedus ejus signum non sunt ejusdem necessitatis c. Arg. 3. Infantes sine Baptismo dicuntur sancti 1 Cor. 7.14 quia Baptismus infantes sidelium non facit filios Dei sed illis obsignat foedus gratiae illósque in foedere contineri certos reddit Col. 1193. Quid recipiunt Impii in Sacramentis R. Nuda tantùm signa idque ad condemnationem 1. Qua beneficia in Sacramentis oblata tantùm de fide percipiuntur at Impii non habent fidem ergo 2. Nihil spirituale conserunt aut obsignant Sacramenta nisi iis quibus in Verbo hoc promissum extat At in Verbo nihil Impis promittitur sed solis fidelibus quia omnes promissiones habent annexam conditionem fidei ergò 3. Christi beneficia tantùm in legitimo Sacramentorum usu percipiuntur at nulli Impii legitimè Sacramentis utuntur sed indignè participant 1 Cor. 11.27 ergò Lèg Col. 1202 1203. Resp ad Bellarm. Object 5. Cartwright against the Rhemists on Mat. 3.6 pag. 15 saith So that we bring not our children to the end that they should thereby have Remission of sins but because we are by the promise induced to believe that as being the Elect of God they have already received it Otherwise it were as much as to put the Seal to a blank wherein nothing is written nor nothing is given Dr. Fulk against the Rhemists on Rom. 6. § 5. saith The Apostle by express words excludeth Circumcision from being a cause of Justification because Abraham was justified before he was circumcised who is the form of Justification of all men as St. Ambrose saith Com. on Gal. cap. 3. And Baptism succeeding in the place of Circumcision is a seal of Justification by faith in all Christians as Circumcision was in Abraham not a cause thereof See him on 1 Pet. 3.21 The Divines of the Assembly that wrote the Anotat on the Bible say on Act. 8.27 If thou believest c. With a sincere and perfect heart without which Ephraim cannot save he had here to do with a man of years and yet an alien and therefore might not admit him into the Church of Christ untill he had made profession of his faith You see here that it is a saving faith which they think necessary to admittance of which also they speak on ver 12. Faith ought to precede Baptism in men and women of years when they who were aliens and strangers come to be baptized For it is necessary that they should confess their faith and testifie their Conversion before they be admitted by Baptism Ambrosi de Poenit. l. 2. c. 5. And the Repentance that was to precede Baptism in the Jews Act. 2.38 they expound thus This Repentance is not only in knowing or acknowledging our sins or saying God be mercifull but in the change of our minds purposes and evil câurses of our Lives As Austin de Eccl. Dogm cap. 58. saith very well Poenitentia vera est poenitenda non admittere admissa destere See also Tertul. advers Marc lib. 2. cap. 24. And on Mat. 3.6 Confessing their sins In words professing their detestation of them and Repentance for them Deodate on Acts 8.12 Were baptized Renouncing by the same means all manner of Impiety and Superstition c. Verse 13. Simon believed made an outward profession of believing or gave some assent to the doctrine but hypocritically and without giving way to the inward operation of the Holy Ghost to a true conversion and lively Regeneration On Mat. 3.6 Were baptized confessing c. viz. to God in the person of John his Minister though not with a particular enumeration but yet with a true feeling of compunction shame humble acknowledgement and with hate and disturbance of sin for to implore divine mercy Act. 19.18 So on Rom. 6.3 Namely for a Sacrament that we are Christian not only by profession but lâkewise in spiritual truth receiving the grace and Spirit of God and then co-operating thereto by faith voluntary obedience and newness of life Many other passages to the same purpose I omit Rob. Bodius in Eph. 5.25 26 pag. Opus operatum Papistarum in alio gravissimo errore fundatum est quo nempe statuunt illi Baptizandos priusquaÌ hoc signaculo obsignentur Christi membra non esse c. p. 756.757 Et sicut Abrabamo jam per fidem justificato impressus est Des mandato novus ille circumcisionis Character non ad Justitiâm primitus illi conferendam sed ad eandem visibili illo signo obsignandam sic etiam in Christum credentibus adultis jámque per eam fidem coram Deo justificatis confertur ex Christi mandato Baptismi sigillum non ut per illud tum primùm Justitiam accipiant ut absurdè docent Adversarii sed ut illa fidei Justitia quâ jam in Christo doncti sunt hoc externo Baptismi sigillo eorum cordibus obsignetur Et pag. 760. col 2. Supponit quod falsum est à nobis constanter negatum suprà refutatum viz. Baptismum esse solum nos Justificandi Sanctificandi instrumentum nec ante mentes conscientias nostras à peccatis ablui quà m externè baptizemur Atque nos hucusque
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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is sometime used for Genero And though the word Parens be not usually applied to those that Adopt yet Pater is And not unfitly
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 Thâre could not be a higher evidence of Apâstacy than to giâe 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 uâon 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 Magâstrate 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
of their Duty and we ought not to refuse any part of a mans Duty Answ. 1. It is not a duty but a sin to do the External later part without the former Internal part It is a duty to intend to relieve the poor and perhaps to express it by promise but to promise without any intent to perform it is to lye and so to sin The tongue must not go before and without the heart because the action of both is a duty It were better say nothing at all 2. The Sacrament of Baptism is not appointed to be affixed to every kind of duty but to our dedication to God and Gods acceptance of us Object If their Profession may engage them then may we seal it by baptism but it may engage them Ergo. c. Answ. I deny the Consequence A false dissembling may oblige the Promiser but Baptism was not appointed to seal every notorious false promise It is also Gods Seal as well as mans Circumcision is his sign and called his Covenant Gen. 17. And Abraham received it as a seal Rom. 4. And it signifieth Gods action of washing the soul by the blood of Christ. Therefore where we are sure God disclaimeth it and withdraweth his Action there may we not apply the Mutual Seal and Sign Object We see in New England the sad effects of denying baptism to the children of the unregenerate now they are all come to be obstinate Infidels Answ. Thâs is more than I have heard any good testimony of and therefore am not bound to believe it Secondly They in N. England as we hear do refuse to baptize all that are not children of the members of their own Churches but so do not we they baptize not the members of the Universal Church unless they be in a particular Church but we do otherwise And it s reported that they requâred positive proof of Conversion beyond a profession of faith and Repentance but so do not we Thirdly Mens obstinacy in sin and proceeding worse will not warrant us to take an unlawful course in pretence to do them good Fourthly Do you give us any reason to believe that a notorious ungodly person in your Church is in any better a state than an Infidel Nay that they are not in a state much worse It is they therefore that should chiefly move you to compassion Can you so lament the estate of the less miserable and not of the more miserable Object But it is good that at least in words they confess Christ. Answ. Either you speak of a Good of Duty or a Good of Means For the first it is a Duty and so good to confess Christ with heart and tongue but if with the tongue alone it is a sin and no duty Indeed the tongue conjunct with the heart doth part of the duty but separated it loseth the Goodness And as a means First to their own salvation it is not good but rather condemneth them Secondly As to Gods honor if he make it a means in providence thereto that 's no thanks to them And if you did not now speak of the Notoriously Ungodly but should suppose men to be near to the Kingdom of God it doth not follow that therefore they must be baptized because they have some good in them for some good must go before the nearest aptitude nor yet that this good is the effect of Baptism in the unlawfully baptized or if it were occasioned by Baptism it followeth not that therefore unmeet persons should in hope of it be baptized Use Gods means to his appointed Ends and do not frame a course of means of your own heads for Gods ends For it is the means of his appointment and blessing that must succeed Though I have done with the Quesâion it self yet I suppose it is not the least matter in reference to our practice that is yet behind though I shall dispatch it in brief What the better are we to know that we may not baptize the children of the Notoriously ungodly till we know who these are Let us therefore answer this Question Whom must we take for Notoriously ungodly As in all that is gone before I doubt not but I shall be thought too rigid so in this which followeth I as little question but I shall be censured as too loose in my Doctrine and charitable beyond the warrant of reason But Truth is Truth which I will search after as well as I can And first on the Negative I lay down these Propositions Proposition 1. In General We are not Certain of every mans ungodliness whom we probably strongly and groundedly suspect to be ungodly We may have more reason of fear than of hope concerning them and yet not be able to conclude that they are certainly ungodly Secondly In General It is not easie judging of the certainty of mens ungodliness at a distance nor by some actual gross sins till we have spoke to them and admonished them and discern what degree of obstinacy and impentency and wilfulness they are guilty of or till we understand this certainly by those that have admonished them and heard their Answers Thirdly It is hard judging of the certainty of a mans ungodliness by one or two or a few Actions without knowing the course and scope of a mans life Fourthly I think it is few among a thousand of the common people that we can say are certainly ungodly though we have reason to think that the most by far are so More particularly Fifthly A man must be guilty of more sin than Noah was than Peter was in denying and forswearing Christ that is notoriously ungodly Yea than Lot was who was drunk two nights together and committed Incest with his own Daughters twice that after the miraculous destruction of Sodom of his own Wife his own miraculous deliverance The Opinion of most of our Divines is that a man that is Notoriously Ungodly in the sense in hand or unsanctified must be a greater sinner than Solomon was 1 King 11. He loved many strange women of the Nations which God forbad the Israelites to joyn with such as Ezâa caused them to put away after Marriage He kept three hundred Concubines besiâes seven hundred Wives When he was old his Wives turned away his heart after other gods and his heart was not perfect with the Lord as Davids was He went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians and after Milcom the abomination of the Amonites and he did evil in the sight of the Lord. He built an high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab in the hill that is before Jerusalem and for Molech the abomination of the children of Ammon And likewise did he for all his strange Wives which burnt Incense and sacrificed to their gods And the Lord was aâgry with him because his heart was turned from the Lord God of Israel which appeared to him twice and had commanded him that he should not go after other gods but he kept not that which the
necessity of our holiness and Obedience to him He that denieth the Holy Ghost the Truth of his Miracles by which he sealed Christs Doctrine or the necessity of his Sanctification this man is Notoriously ungodly if he Notoriously deny these for he professeth ungodliness it self So doth he that denieth Christ hath any Church on earth and that denieth to have communion with his Church 2. That man is notoriously ungodly that is notoriously utterly ignorant of God and his son Jesus Christ of the Goodness Wisdom or Power of God of the Incarnation Death and Resurection of Christ and his Redemption of us hereby of the necessity of Faith and Holiness and of the evil of sin and of the everlasting blessedness that is promised to the Saints I will now only say excluding not the rest that the Ignorance of any one of these is inconsistent with true Godliness But I must tell you anon that there is need of much wariness in judgeing of such Ignorance 3. All those are Notoriously ungodly that do Notoriously upon Deliberation and with Obstinacy profess that they will not take God for their God and Governour or that they will not take Christ for their Redeemer and Lord nor be Ruled by him nor Trust in him for pardon and salvation or that they will not believe his word nor will be sanctified by his Spirit 4. All those are Notoriously ungodly that deliberately and ordinarily when they are themselves do Notoriously profess that they set more by the Pleasures Profits or Honors of this world than by the promised Blessedness in the life to come and that they will not part with these for the hopes of that Blessedness 5. All those are such also who though in the general they will say that they will be Ruled by God saved by Christ Sanctified by the Holy Ghost and guided by Gods Laws yet when it come's to particulars do deliberately in their ordinary frame profess that they will not part with their known sins at the command of God but resolve to displease him rather than obey 6. Such also are all those that though in general they profess to prefer Heaven before Earth yet when it comes to practice and trial do Notoriously and deliberately in their Habituated frame profess that they will not let go particular known sins for the hopes of Heaven 7. Such also are all they who living in gross sin and being convinced of it will not promise a sincere endeavour to reform nor will remove from or put away the removeable occasions which draw them to sin nor will be perswaded to use those known means which God hath commanded for the curing of their sin as to hear the Word to change their Company to confess their sin and take shame to themselves and profess Repentance They that Notoriously thus refuse Reformation when by Ministers or discreet Christians they are urged to it or that refuse Gods means which they are convinced he requireth of them and this obstinately are notoriously ungodly though they do not profess it in words For though it be exceeding hard to determine how great many or long the sins of a true Believer may be yet we are certain that he cannot manifest such a Love to them or Habituated unwillingness to be cured of them For that will not stand with true Repentance 8. All those are Notoriously ungodly that profess or express notoriously a Hatred of those that would draw them from their sins not for their harsh or indiscreet management of a reproof nor upon a meer mistaken conceit that the Reprover oweth him ill will but on that very account because they would draw them from known sin For this is Notorious impenitency and shews a Love of sin and the Reign of it in the Will 9. All those are Notoriously ungodly who do by Scorns Threatnings Persecutions or otherwise Notoriously express a Deliberate Habituated Hatred prevailing in their hearts against God Christ the Spirit the Scripture or Godly men because they are godly that is because they do Believe love God and live a Holy life and obey God in those things which they are convinced that he commandeth For this shews that Ungodliness prevaileth in the heart 10. All those are Notoriously ungodly that being convinced that its a Duty to pray to hear the Word to mind the Life to come and prefer it before this and to live a holy Life do yet so far dislike all this or any of this that they profess themselves resolved never to practice it and that they will venture their souls come on 't what will rather than they will make so much ado or live such a life yea though they will not profess this yet if they will not on the contrary be perswaded to profess that they resolve to live such a life and will not be drawn actually to the practice of it in their endeavours thereby manifesting that it is not so much for want of Ability as from a predominant unwillingness to be Holy in Heart and Life I say if this be Notorious then is it Notorious that these people are ungodly and accordingly to be judged and used by the Church Though I understand that many think that it is too rigid to go so far as I have already done in maintaining the Negative of the former Question yet I think it necessary to go further and to determine that It is our Duty to refuse to baptize the Children of more thân the Notoriously Vngodly If you would know who else it is that we must exclude or refuse remember that before I told you of Excommunication from 1. A particular Church for some reason proper thereto or to some more but not common to all 2. From all Incorporated Congregations as such 3. From the society of Christians as such and that this last is either for a time because of the scandalousness of the sin and the credit of the Gospel with those without though we may yet see signs of Repentance in the sinner 2. Or for the Infectiousness of the sin as a Leprosie As if a man take himself bound to perswade all men to some greater and dangerous Error which yet may stand with Grace and Salvation but makes it very difficult and much hindereth it and if no means can convince this man of his Error nor take him off this is a kind of a Heretick who must be excluded from all Christian Communion but is not certainly and notoriously graceless 3. There is also exclusion from the society of all Christians upon an evident Proof that the man is no true Christian that is that he is Notoriously an Unbeliever or Ungodly person This I have spoke to all this while 4. But then there is also an exclusion upon a violent Presumption or very strong Probability though short of a Certainty that such a man is graceless or ungodly Hereupon I lay down what I take to be the Truth in the Propositions following Proposition 1. I may not deny the right of
but there is no such thing Yea the Scripture maketh it plain that it is saving faith which it meaneth that is pre-requisite to Baptism as is already manifest from Acts 16.30 31 32 33. 16 14 15. 15 7 8 9. 8.37.2.38 39 40 41 42 44 Mark 16.16 c. To which add Mat. 28.19 20. Go ye therefore and Disciple me all Nations Baptizing them in the name c. Those and only those that are Discipled must be baptized But none are Discipled Internally but true Believers nor visibly but the professors of a true saving belief and their seed Therefore no others should be baptized The Minor which only requireth proof is thus proved None are Disciples but those that take or profess to take Christ for their chief Teacher and Saviour But all that do so heartily or profess to do so have or profess to have saving faith Therefore none but those that have or profess to have saving faith are Disciples The Major is undeniable The Minor is clear If he that heartily takes Christ for his chief Teacher and Saviour have not saving Faith there is no such thing It is he that will not hear the Prophet that shall be cut off and he that will hear him that shall live And he that heartily takes him for his chief Teacher is willing to hear him and learn of him And he will give rest to the souls of all that will come to him and that learn of him as Matth. 11.28 29. Argum. 4. God giveth Right to Sacraments to none but those to whom he giveth Right to Remission of sin But he giveth Right to Remission of sin to none but true Believers Therefore he giveth pâoper Right to Sacraments to none other The Major Mr. Blake wonders at that all men should have right to the End or Fruit of the Ordinance who have right to the Ordinance when it is the right use and Improvement of Ordinances that must give right to the End But 1. the form of a Sacrament is Relative and the nearest end essential to it and therefore all ends are not separable and at a distance 2. God giveth no man Right to use Sacraments contrary to his Institution But the ends to which the Sacraments are instituted is to seal up Remission of sin already given him by the promise therefore he giveth Right to Sacraments to none but those to whom he giveth Right to Remission of sin The Major is proved in the former Disputation Object But our Divines say that Baptism is not only for the Remission of sins past but of future sins Answ. 1. True but still including sins past 2. It is the review or consideration of Baptism which they say is for the strengthening of our faith concerning the Remission of sin daily as we commit it 3. If any of them do make Baptism to be effectual to the Remission of sin hereafter when present sin is not remitted they suppose this to be by accident when contrary to the intent and Institution of God it is misused at the present but rightly considered of in believing reviews He that hath not Right to be baptized for the obsignation of Remission of sin hath no Right given him by God to Baptism For God hath appointed no other Baptism There are indeed certain distant benefits of the Sacraments which are suspended upon a distant improvement of them But a saving participation in Christ and pardon of sin is a present benefit which the person must be qualified for the obsignation of before he have Title by Gods gift to that Sacrament Ar. 5. Ad homineÌ It is but few Protestants that I know of that seem adversaries to our present Assertion and those few also do grant it Mr. Blake saith pa. 124 of Sacraments so that I conceit no promise of these ordinances made to such a faith but an actual investiture of every such believer in them And when I supposed that he had thought there was a distinct promise of Church Priviledges upon condition of a faith not justifying or saving he tels us of some body I know not who that said I rather feigned this of him then found it in him and himself addeth And I profess I know no man whose brain ever hatched or vented such a crotchet we are therefore here secure or should be one would think from Mr. Blakes opposition If this much secure us not see him p. 122. where having thrown by my distinctions as confusion pag. 120. and my positions as not looking toward the business i. e. for ought he could see and having confuted me by my own words pag. 121. before he understood them he brings me in thus stating the Question Whether these men be in Covenant with God as to Gods actual engagement to them so far as that Gods Promise is in force for conveying actual Right to them as to the promised Blessings And so whether it be a mutual Covenant and both parties be actually obliged And thus I say that wicked men are not in Covenant with God that is God is not in Covenant with them neither have they any Right to the main Blessings given by the Covenant viz. Christ Pardon Justification Adoption Glory To this I annexed which he leaves out Nor to the common Blessings of this Covenant for they are given by the same Covenant and on the same conditions as the special Blessings so that though they may have Right to them at present on the Ground of Gods present collation or trusting them with them as a servant hath in his Masters stock yet have they no Right by Covenant Mr. Blake replyeth 1. That he knoweth no man that hath spoke so much to prove the affirmative as I. But where He will tell us Logically thus So long as they break not the Covenant Engagement in which he confesseth they have obliged themselves God stands engaged to them for the greatest spiritual blessings But according to him they break not Covenant till they arrive at final impenitency and unbelief Rep. 1. I said in another book that as the new Law of faith is called Gods Covenant so no man but final unbelievers doth so break that Covenant as to be the subject of its proper actual commination i.e. penal censure or that its penalty should thereby become his due the penalty being a peremptory remediless exclusion from all hope And what doth Mr. Bl. but make me say in an unexplained general that they break not Covenant till they arrive at final unbelief c 2. I said over and over that they broke their own covenant engagements though they did not so far violate Gods Covenant as to incur the foresaid curse And what doth Mr. Blake but intimate that I teach that they break not the Covenant engagement in which they oblige themselves Yet he stops when he should have repeated these words in his Minor perceiving it a cleanlier way to let the Reader infer them Ah sorry Tempter that could procure such a volume of so
246.2 The Church with whom the Covenant is made and to whom the Promises of the Covenant are made is the Spouse of Christ his Mystical Body the Sons and Daughters of the Lord God Almighty a Royal Priesthood a chosen Generation Kings Priests to God But this is the Invisible Church of elect Believers not the Visible Church of Visible Professors Pag. 248. The Church whose gathering together and whose unity of faith c. the Lord intendeth by giving to them to that end some to be Apostles c. must be the Church to which all the promises of the Covenant and Priviledges do belong But the Lord intendeth the gathering c. only of the Invisible Elected and Redeemed Church not of the Visible Professing or Confessing Church c. Pag. 249.4 The Invisible Church and not the Visible as it is such hath Right to the Sacraments because these who have Right to the Covenant have Right to the Seals of the Covenant But only the Invisible Church hath Right to the Covenant For God faith only of and to the Invisible Church and not of the Visible in his gracious purpose Jer. 32.38 And I will be their God and they shall be my people Jer. 31.33 I will put my Law c. Now the Visible Church as the Visible is not within the Covenant therefore the Visible Church as the Visible Church and being no more than the Visible Church hath not Right to the Seals of the Covenant but in so far as they are within the Covenant and in so far as God is their God and they his pardoned and sanctified People as it is Jer. 31.33 34. 5. It is known here that our Brethren joyn with the Papists For Papists ignorant of the doctrine of the Visible Church labour to prove that c. Just so our Brethren take all the places for the Priviledges Covenant Promises Stiles of Sister Love Dove Spouse c. 6. A Church in Covenant with God and the Spouse of Christ c. is a Church whereof all the members without exception are taught of God c. But so it is that no Visible Church on earth that are visible Professors of any competent number is such a Church c. therefore no Visible Church as such is a people or Church in Covenant with God See Roger's Catechis part 2. Art 6. pag. 176 177. Concl. 3. A visible Profession of the Truth and Doctrine of Godliness is that which essentially constituteth a Visible Church Only our Brethren and we differ much about the Nature of this Profession Our Brethren will have none members of the Visible Church but such as are satisfactory to the consciences of all the Visible Church and give Evidences so clear as the Judgement of discerning men can attain unto that they are truly regenerated See further This much I have cited specially as to the main Cause Further as to the Distinction in question see him after pag. 185.4 § 5. 1. Dist. All Believers in foro Dei before God have Right to the Seals of the Covenant These to whom the Covenant and body of the Charter belongeth to these the Seal belongeth But in foro Ecclesiastico in an orderly Church way the Seals are not to be conferred by the Church upon persons because they believe but because they profess their believing See further Pag. 188. 1. The Seals of the Covenant are principally given to the Invisible Church as the Covenant it self c. and The Invisible Church as such as a number of Believers have only Right before God to both Covenant and Seals 2. It 's true the Orderly and Ecclesiastick way of dispensing the Seals is that they be dispensed only to the Visible Church Pag. 286. These and many other places do strongly prove our point and specially that the Profession of Simon Magus who before God deserved to be cast out of the Church Act. 8. is sufficient to make one a member of a Visible Church Yea but none deserve in foro Ecclesiae in the Churches Court to be cast out but such as either confess scandalous Sins or are contumacious or convicted judicially of the same before witnesses c. The same Author in his Peaceable Plea pag. 181. We preach and invite in the Gospel all the uncircumcised in heart and all the wicked to come and hear and partake of the holy things of the Gospel and receive the promises thereof with faith And when they come to this heavenly banquet without their wedding Garment Math. 22.12 13. 2 Cor. 2.16 Mat. 21.43 44. it followeth not because they profane the holy things of God that Ministers who baptize the Infants of hypocrites and profane persons are accessary to the profaning the holy things of Christ It is one thing whom Ministers should Receive as members of the Sanctuary and Church and another thing who should come in Pag. 183. Object Divine wrath is kindled for the profanation of holy things Answ. That this is the Ministers or Churches profanation of holy things is not proved It is not wrath procured by the Ministers or those who Receive them into the Church but wrath procured by the unworthy In comers So far Rutherford Having said thus much to Mr. Blakes denyal of the distinction of Gods judgement and the Churches in this case I proceed to that which followeth in his book pag. 141. Mr. Blake 3. They may tell him of the necessity that is put upon Ministers to prophane this Divine Ordinance in putting this seal ordinarily and unavoidably to meer blank paper which is a most contumelious abuse of it Ans. They may sooner tell it than prove it to be any prophanation or contumelious abuse Big words may be bad arguments It s the Claimer that is the Prophaner whom you encourage by telling him that he hath a Title but it is not the Minister who was never made a searcher of hearts no not to know the truth of a Dogmatical faith and therefore may justly set the seal to a blank paper when the Receiver is made judge whether it be blank or not or at least is to give us the evidence that we must proceed upon I would you would before this have told us whether one that dissemblingly pretendeth your Dogmatical faith be a blank paper or not or one that as a Parrat is taught to say I believe in God c. when he understandeth not what he saith If not it seemes a Dogmatical faith is not the Title then in your account If yea then doth the Minister prophane the Ordinance in giving it such and hath not Mr. Blake sealed to many such blanks and contumeliously abused the Ordinance Mr. Blake They may tell him that poor souls are thus miserably cheated in bearing them in hand that these great priviledges and consequently all further Church priviledges are theirs when the conveyance is meer fraudulent that casts it upon them Answ. 1. Alas poor souls Alas miserable cheaters But who are they They that bear them in hand that
upon lying fame as it is This is the way to discredit all history when Godly men dare publish that of so many in a County which the whole Country almost that are capable of understanding such marters do know to be false 3. Have we groaned and prayed and suffered so long in hope of Discipline and yet are there Godly Ministers among us that have the hearts to calumniate and reproach the attempts of it where they never had the face to acquaint us with the least mistake or miscarriage in our way Ah what wonder if the poor Church consume away in its corruptions and divisions when this is the friendship and assistance of its guides But of this before The other summary of Mr. Blakes oppositions is pag. 550 551. in his introduction where he thus declares his minde Mr. Blake And truly Sir if I should have a thought of changing my opinion I know not how to look to the end of the danger that will follow I must first necessarily engage my self in an everlasting Schism being not able to find out a Church in the world of any interest in which I shall dare in this account to hold communion Answ. O the power of prejudice What Church in all the world was ever of your Judgement And would you have separated from all the Churches in the world But le ts hear the reasons of your fear Mr. Blake I shall see in many members too clear symptoms of non-Regeneration and Vnbelief Answ. 1. Do not those persons profess a Justifying faith 2. Or is it Infallible symptoms of the contrary which you mean or which are sufficient to nullifie or invalidate that Profession if not you say nothing if so then 3. Dare you hold communion with no Church that hath some members that in your own Judgement are unfit to be there How oft hath this opinion been confuted in the Separatists But you add your reason Mr. Blake Though this will not bear a separation yet this consideration of their non-baptism will necessarily enforce it Answ. 1. The Enemy of the Church needs no hands to do a great part of his work but our own The Anabaptists take us to be all unbaptized and thence infer a necessity of Separation Their Separation troubleth the Church much more than their opinion for re-baptizing Our endeavour is at least to bring them to this that being re-baptized they would rest satisfied and live in peaceable communion with the Church Mr. Blake steps in and confirmeth them in their consequence on supposition of the Antecedent which we cannot satisfie them in and so frustrateth all our labour and gives them the day in that and considereth not I fear the danger of promoting such a schism But he would do well first to answer the many Reasons that Mr. John Goodwin hath brought against that opinion and take his work clean before him If I knew a Church or whole Nation of men that thought verily they were truly baptized and I thought that it was not so if yet they profest true Faith and Holiness I durst not separate from them 2. But how irksom must it needs be to your Judicious Readers to have such conclusions tost up and down with meer confidence upon suppositions which you disdain or deign not to prove One Argument to have proved that our Principles infer the Nullity of the Baptism of the Unregenerate had been more worth than all this kind of talk I say that Deo Judice such men have no Title by any Grant or Gift of God to claim or receive the Sacraments though the Minister have Commission to give it to some unjust claimers This opinion professeth the Nullity of the Title which is denyed Do you prove that it also inferreth the Nullity of the external Baptism it self which was justly administred though unjustly demanded It s tedious to read voluminous Disputes where that which requireth proof is still taken for granted But if all this were so I think you must still be a Separatist on your own Principles For where would you find a Church among us where there be not many that have not a Dogmatical faith which you say must give them Title to Baptism Mr. Blake And if I be holpen out as indeed I utterly despair by any distinction of forum Dei and forum Ecclesiae Vnivocal and Equivocal what thought then shall I entertain of the Holy Scripture Answ. I cannot tell what thoughts you will have of it but I can partly tell what thoughts you should have of it Will you deny that the Scripture most commonly speaks of God himself himself in equivocal terms I hope you will not And how should it speak otherwise to mans understanding And yet what thoughts will you entertain of the Scripture You will not I hope take on you to know no difference between Jesuitical dissembling equivocation which is to deceive and the use of equivocal terms either necessarily for want of other words in being or Rhetorically for ornament or when custome of Speech hath made them the most apt Will you so far equivocate with equivocal terms as to confound the culpable equivocation with the laudable and then say What thoughts shall I have of the holy Scriptures this doth not beseem an Expositor of the Scriptures And whereas you next add the many titles given to the unregenerate I have answered it before and more may do in the next Dispute besides what you had even now from Mr. Rutherford These titles were never given to any of your Professors of a faith short of that which Justifyeth And yet there is no passage in your Book that amazeth me more than your frequent and confident Assertions of the contrary and pretenses of the common Judgement of the Church to be on your side Pag. 116 117. When I had said that Dr. Ward would not have found a second to undertake his cause you say How this passage fell from his pen may well be to very intelligent Reader matter of admiration that a man of such multiplicity of reading should think that Dr. Ward in this opinion would not have found a second when if he had perused our approved Authors about the question especially since it came to a punctual just debate he may soon see that he hath almost every one to appear for him if this which he mentions be his opinion unless perhaps he hath been so held in reading the Fathers and other Writers for the first thirteen or fourteen hundred years in which few will I think come out and vie with him that he hath not regarded what hath been said this 1500 years in this corner of the world Answ. 1. Your groundless insipid scorn about reading the Fathers of the first 1400 years doth no whit clear the Truth nor strengthen your Cause nor I think tend to the pleasing of God 2. One of us have certainly exposed our selves to the Readers when we stand wondering thus at each other and profess our understanding to be at so great
as the Jews were so many of the Gentiles as profess Christianitie And because it is no more it is nothing to their purpose To the Third I Answer There 's no doubt but the promise belongs to all that God shall call that is the bare offer belongs to all them that are called uneffectually and still remain in unbelief And the worst of them are invited to Repent and Believe which when they do they have Title in that same promise to Remission and the Seals of it And when they profess to Repent and Believe and so require the Seals they have such a Right Coram Ecclesiâ as that we must admit of them But more than this here is yet no proof of To the Fourth The Called some of them obey not at all some of them obey ore tenus and as to some faith short of justifying and some of them obey the Call sincerely You mean the Second Of whom I say 1. Prove if you can that any called ones may have the Sacraments that profess not saving Faith 2. And prove that they who barely profess it have the Title which is in controversie between us which will justifie their claim as well as our giving it on that claim The saying that they are called is no proof As for your phrase of an outward being in Covenant you know I affirmed it long ago ex parte hominis they outwardly covenant with God and oblige themselves But if you mean it ex parte Dei that he hath any such meer outside promises when he meaneth not as he speaks or that he is actually obliged as a Covenanter to them yea but for outward things I have long waited from others for the proof in vain As to the phrase Equivocal you shall have more of it God willing in due place To the Fifth There 's difference between the Jews then and the World 1. In that one part of the Jews were sincere in the Covenant and that in great numbers in whom as it were the life of the Church did abide 2. In that the rest of them as to the main body professed that true faith which others had 3. And in that such bare professors were thereupon admitted into that Societie and into those Ordinances which tended to help them to that sinceritie which they wanted some of which Ordinances they were immediately bound to use and others of them but in order after their Conversion and though they used them unjustly before Conversion the thing was a mercy in it self though mis-received by them 4. And then they had many temporal promises which no other Nation had nor have we I think here 's a difference from the Gentile world Prove more if you affirm it To the Sixth I have answered it over and over before They are commanded to be circumcised but as a sign and seal of the Covenant Therefore they are bound first in order to consent in heart to the Covenant And if they do the former without the later it may shew that they have by outward covenanting obliged themselves to God and so are annumerated with his listed souldiers by the Church But it proveth not that God is in actual obligation to them except only as to any of those mercies that were absolutely promised to the Israelites and belong not to us To the Seventh The weak unworthy Author of the book of Infant Baptism whom you are pleased to load with a Title which his conscience doth disown doth heartily persist in believing that the conditional Covenant is made to more than the Elect even to all at least that hear it and that this is the effect of Christs blood and that the entrance into covenant and accepting the terms of it ore tenus or not sincerely and unreservedly is common to Elect and Reprobate But all this is nothing to the present business To the Eighth It is a strange consequence that such Must renounce their profession and never come to ordinances c. Must importeth Duty And their duty is sincerely to Repent and Believe and Profess and not to renounce profession but only to lament the falshood and hypocrisie in professing what they did not do Nor is any bound to stay from Ordinances simply but to repent believe and so come as Peter hid Simon Magus Repent and Pray c. But if he will profess falsly and come without Repentance let him do it at his peril and not think God is obliged to bless him in it which would lead hard up to the Papists Opus operatum though I know how much this is disclaimed by Mr. Blake For when you liberally give such men a a Title Coram Deo to the Seals what can be that Title but the Opus operatum of a verbal profession For though a Faith short of Justifying be talkt of none of you all can tell who hath it and who hath it not and yet I find not so much openness as to speak out and tell us whether indeed all the Hypocrites that have not so much as the Dogmatical Faith which they profess have indeed a Title before God to the Seals on the Opus operatum of profession or not Though by consequence it appeareth that you must say so or cast all your cause away To the ninth I Answer If you know him not a dissembler he is to you what he professeth to be If therefore he profess that the Foundation is laid when it is not you must endeavour to build him up But if you know him to dissemble I suppose you will rather help to lay the Foundation before you go any further But 2. If you can say as much to prove that I may not teach any but Disciples the observable commands of Christ in sensu activo that is do my best to teach them as I have done to prove that wicked men have no Title to the Sacraments which will warrant them Coram Deo to claim them you will do much towards the changing of my minde To the Tenth I answer This confusion marrs all I have oft told you unregenerate men are really in covenant as to their external engaging act and this they may break But doth it follow that they cannot violate their own promise unless God be actually obliged by promise to them To the Eleventh I will not stand now to search whether Judas was one of them that was bid Eat and Drink But supposing it granted it is most certain that he was commanded as much to take and feed on Christ by faith and that he was offered the Sacrament as a Sacrament that is a sealing and professing sign as I have before explained Now if he had so received it as it was offered and in the nature of a Sacrament as Christ bid him Take Eat Drink then certainly he had done it in faith And if he did not so as he did not he did not what he was commanded And therefore you cannot hence prove a Right in Judas by any grant to the separated sign
while he was destitute of the faith which by his action was professed Receiving the Sacrament as a Sacrament is an actual profession oâ faith And you can never prove that Christ commanded Juda to lye by professing the faith which he had not but only that he commanded him at once to Believe and thus profess it He that will have men compelled to come in to the Church intendeth that they must bring a wedding garment or else they shall hear how camest thou hither You apprehend John Timpsons words to be apposite which imply a contradiction or touch not the point If the right Object be really believed even that which is the full Object of saving faith that very belief is saving and proveth the holiness of the person To the Twelfth I answer General and special Grace I resolvedly maintain But when will you prove that it is a part of General Grace to have a proper Title given by God to the Sacraments which seal up the pardon of sin actually where there is such Title To have the universal conditional promise or covenant ex parte Dei enacted and promulgate and offered the world with many incitements to entertain it is General Grace But so is not either our actual heart-covenanting the Remission of our sin nor such a proper Title to the sign of both When you tell us of the Worlds Potential and the visible Churches actual Interest in General Grace you give us pardon the truth a meer sound of words that signifie nothing or nothing to purpose You cannot call it General Grace Objectively as if the Saints had a particular Objective Grace the rest a General For Generals exist not but in the individuals It is therefore the General conditional promise or gift which you must mean by General Grace This is to the world without indeed but an offer But is it any more to any of the unbelievers or unregenerate within what can be the meaning of an actual Interest in a conditional promise which all the hearers have not and yet is short of the true actual Interest of them that perform the condition I feel no substance in this notion nor see any light in it I confess there is a certain possession that one such man may have more then others but as that is nothing to proper Title so it is not the thing that Sacraments are to seal I have not Mr. Hudsons book now by me but your solution by the two sives had need of some sifting It s one thing to ask what is the end of Sacraments quoad intentionem praecepti and another thing to tell what eventually they produce I do not believe that the sive that brings men into a state of Grace is in the hands of God only so as if he used not Ministers thereto Ministers are said in Scripture to convert and heal and deliver and save men To your 13th and 14th and last I answer That we easily confess that the covenant under the new Testament is better than the old but this makes nothing for you nor do you prove that it doth the force of the first section of your book as it may be the matter of an Objection I have answered before As to your Authorities I say 1. Mr. Vines saith nothing which proveth any approbation of your opinion whether Mr. Burgess do I leave to himself for I know not certainly All that I know of since Dr. Ward is Mr. Blake Mr. Humphrey and John Timpson and John Timpson Mr. Humphrey and Mr. Blake Your 3d and 4th Sections need no more answer I think than what is already given You needed not these pillars to support that point which is the design of your Treatise To these I find you add another the greatest of all pag. 611. which you say sinks deep into you but if reason will do it I will pluck it up by the roots partly by desiring you to peruse what I have twice or thrice before answered to it and partly by adding as followeth That 1. If a man by mistaken doubtings shall keep himself away from a Sacrament that doth not destroy his Title to it or the Grace signified nor is it any ones fault but his own I therefore deny your Minor It is not this doctrine that cuts off doubting Christians from the Sacrament but themselves that do culpably withdraw To your Prosyllogism I deny the Major that doctrine which concludes it sin in the doubtful Christian to Receive doth not cut him off For it concludeth it not his sin to Receive in it self but to Receive doubtingly so that it is not Receiving but Doubting that is properly his sin and withall we say that it is his Duty to Receive and his greater Sin not to Receive than to Receive And though an erring Conscience doth alwaies ensnare and so create a necessity of sinning which way soever we go till it be rectified yet it s a greater sin to trespass against a plain precept than against an erring Conscience in many cases But the main stress lyeth on your proof which is from Rom. 14.23 Whatsoever is not of faith is sin But I could wish you would consider it better before you press home that Text to the same sence against all other duties as you do against this lest you leave God but little service from the Church 1. It is one thing to doubt about indifferent matters such as Paul speaks of as eating c. For there he is condemned if he eat because he is sure it is lawful to forbear but not sure that it is lawful to eat But press not this upon us in case of necessary duty If God command me to pray praise or communicate my doubt will not justifie my forbearance and though it entangle me in sin it cannot disoblige me from duty but I shall sin more if I forbear You say If it be sin for the unregenerate to Receive then cannot the doubting Christian be perswaded and consequently sinneth Ans. True but that 's not long of the doctrine but of his error and it is the case of all practical errors which will not therefore justifie you in blaming the doctrine it s the unavoidable effect of an erring Conscience And again I say he sinneth more in forbearing Whereas you conclude this Argument to be convincing I have told you before why it convinceth not me but to your selves I would ask whether it do not also convince you that your own doctrine is as unsufferable For I am past doubt that not only most Christians but even most doubting Christians have more knowledge that they have true justifying faith than the rest of the world have that they have true Dogmatical faith Though the wicked doubt less because they believe and regard it less yet indeed they have not only far more cause to doubt of the truth of their Dogmatical faith but have less true knowledge of it At least many of them it s thus with when so many true Christians do as much
9. § 1. But as he further noteth They that hold that we do uno actu plura ut dissimilia cognoscere must say also that praeter nomen conceptus formalis est idem aequivocis differt ab univocis quòd univoca habent eundem conceptum objectivum similem secus verò aequivoca quae habent plures dissimiles item differunt in conceptu formali quia aequivocus aequivalet pluribus c. These things about the nature of Equivocals being supposed I must next consider of the several terms now in question and examine them hereby as applyed to the Godly and the Wicked And first the Word Church in its general sense is not the thing that we have now in question Otherwise I should soon confess that in all Assemblies there is something common a Congregation of materials is common to them all And thus it may as well be said that the word Ecclesia is univocally spoken of a mutinous confused tumult Act 19.32 39 40. or any other common Assembly as of an Assembly of meer Professors But it is a Christian Church than we are speaking of which being Coetus Fidelium vel Christianorum is differenced from other societies by the Matter and by the End And for the first If bare Professors are but equivocally called Christians or believers in Christ then they are but equivocally Church-members nor a Church as consisting of such but equivocally a Church But the antecedent is true therefore so is the Consequent The Consequence is undeniable because it is not a Congregation or Society in general but the Christian Church thus specified by its Matter and End which we speak of as is said The Antecedent I prove reducing the Paronyma into the Abstracts and first of the term Believers If Faith be but equivocally attributed to the bare Professors and the true Believers then they are equivocally called Believers But the Antecedent is true as I prove thus If the name of faith be the same and the ratio substantiae secundum illud nomen be divers then faith ascribed to bare Professors and to true Believers is an aequivocum But the Antecedent is true as is most apparent For that its the same name Faith Belief Believers we are agreed And that it is not the thing in both that is thus named I think we are also agreed For in one sort it is a true saving Faith that is called by the name of Faith and in the other it is no faith at all but the bare verbal Profession of that faith which they have not And I hope we are agreed that faith and the Profession of Faith are not the same thing Object But though this hold as to bare Professors or meer Hypocrites that have no faith yet it will not hold of these that have a faith short of Justifying Answ. 1. It cannot be denied that bare Professors of saving Faith are visible members of the Church though they have no faith at all therefore it must be granted of all them that they are but equivocally Believers and of them is our question 2. I have before proved that it is this profession of a saving faith that constituteth a visible member and therefore all such and only such with their seed are visible members and that it is not the reality of any faith special or common that constituteth a visible member For that which makes visible must it self be visible But so is neither a special nor a common faith for no man knoweth it in another So that à quatenus ad omne à forma ad nomen it is plain that all Professors and none but Professors are visible Members and that if any have the Faith professed special or common that makes them not visible Members but the profession of Faith whether they have it or not So that it plainly followeth that a visible Member qua talis is denominated a Believer only equivocally 3. And if they be denominated Believers ab ipsa fide scil that which is short of Justifying yet its plain that this faith it self is not the same with that of sound Believers no not of the same species Mr. Blake himself being Judge who so keenly girds me for making saving and common faith to differ but in degree when in the very writings that he must fetch the slander from I again and again profess that they differ morally in fâecie If then his lower faith and saving faith do so much differ then there is not the same ratio substantiae secundum illud nomen For I have not yet found that it is a Generical Nature common to both which he supposeth signified by the word faith in our Question much less that Church-membership is constituted by such a thing But if he should come to that I must first desire him to describe that Generical nature and no more to lay it upon the specifical nature either of Dogmatical or Justifying faith and when he hath so done I doubt not to bring many more species that shall on as fair pretences put in for a place as participant in that generical nature as his Dogmatical faith hath done So that by this it is evident that not only the thing which constituteth men visible Church-members which is alwaies in the Adult a Profession and not the Faith professed is but equivocally called Faith but also that the lower faith is equivocally called the Christian Faith But the first alone sufficeth us to prove that visible Members as visible are but equivocally called Church-members because the ratio substantiae is divers secundum illud nomen 2. And it is as plain that bare Professors are but equivocally called Christians For the Ratio nominis in found Christians is true Faith in Christ as Christ but in the other it is only the Profession of such a faith and these are certainly divers And If you again carry the Question to Dogmatical Believers I answer as before both 1. That they are not the persons in our Question 2. That as such they are not members visible no nor mystical 3. That even as to them the Ratio substantiae is so divers as makes the name apparently equivocal 3. The same also may be said of the word Saints Holiness in the Regenerate is the hearty Devotedness and Separation of the Person to God as God Holiness in bare professors who are visible Members is but the verbal Devotion and extrinsick Separation And Holiness in the common Believer is but a half Devotedness and Separation and wanteth the Essentials which the Regenerate have So that it is not the same thing that is called Holiness in these âhree and therefore the word Holâness as to them is equâvâcâl 4. The same also I say of Regeneration The true Believeer is called Regenerate because he is so changed by the spirit as to be as it were born again not of flesh nor of the wiil of man but of God and is become a new creature but the bare Professor is called Regenerate only
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 maâe a living Member 1. I shouâd desire such to be at the pains to see what our Dâvines 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 âssertions 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 thâtis 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 nân eris Sanctificari ergò in Christo oâortet omnes qui in populo Dei censeri volunt Porrò âanctificationis verbum sâgregation in signâficat 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 frigâdum videtur ab usu Scripturae alienum est Idem Institut lib. 4 cap. 1. sect 7 De Ecclâsiâ visibili qué sub cognitionem nostram cadit quale judicium facere conveniat ex superioribus âam lâquere existimo Diximus enim bifariam de Ecclesiâ Sacras Literas loqui Interdum quum Ecclesiam nominant tam intelligunt quae reverâ est coram Deo in quam nulli recipiuntur nâsi 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 statûâ vel conditionis non sunt numerandi inter Ecclesiae membra etiam si ut ità loquar Apostolatu fungereÌtur Sed hîc cavândum 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
Universal Church I shall refer you to the Book to save the labour of transcribing And pag 522. col 1. He reckoneth this among Bellarmine's Errors as the sixth Quod impios quidem nâgat esse viva corporis Christi membra at intera statuit esse mortua membra corporis Christi At 1. embiguitate ludauâ Nam membra corporis Christi vel ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sunt vel ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Deinde si de membris Christi ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sermo sit falsa est distributio quaedam membra Christi-esse viva quaedam mortua Vt enim in vivo corpore naturali c. So pag 521. col 1. he saith that only the justified are called the sons of God ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and others only ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã And col 2. he saith the like of their Saintship Et hic tertius est istius ratiocinationis error Sancti enim ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã dicuntur Propriè quidem soli santificati spiritu adoptionis Impropriè vero ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ii qui sanctam fidem Christi ore profitentur licet non sint spiâitu sâncto sânctâficati 6. Ravenellus Bibliothec. pag. 510.511 saith Vox Ecclesiae ambiguè sumitur Propriè strictè pro coetu illorum hominum quos Deus ante jacta mundi fundamenta elegit in tempore efficaciter vocât c. vel Impropriè c. And having cited many Texts to prove that Electi Fideles sunt Membra corpus Christi he addeth Quod nota contra Pontificios qui docent ipsos reprobos sceleratos ad Ecclesiâm propriè dictam etiam pertinere 7. Peter Martyr in 1 Cor. 1.2 p. 5. defineth the Church thus Esse dicemus coetum credentium ac renatorum quos Deus in Christo colligit per Verbum Spiritum sanctum c. Nam illi sancti solùm verè coram Deo sunt de Ecclesia Quae alioquin habet admixtos permultos alienos a Chrâstâ hi specie tantum noâ reipsa pertinent ad Ecclesiam Et Paulus postquam dixisset hoc loco Ecclesiâe Dei per oppositionem adjunxit sanctificatis per Christum Jesum vocatis sanctis ut intelligamus impios ad Ecclesiam revera non pertinere licet in ea perpetuo versentur Scio commentum circumferri quod impii membra Christi sunt verum mortua quae tamen vivificari possiat At hoc ita est verum at si mortuum hominem dixeris hominem esse sed in praesentiâ id tantummodo contendimus tales homines reipsa quo ad Deum non esse partes Ecclesiae So on Rom. Loc. Commun he hath much of the like Indeed Loc. Com. Clas 4. c. 1. p. 741. he hath the very same words over again at large which I have cited from him on 1 Cor. 1.2 8. Musculus Loc. Com. de Eccles. p. mihi 655. Porro cum Scripturâ docet esse Ecclesiam Corpus Christi an non satis manifestè significat Ecclesiam Christi non esse eorum qui inter membra Christi recenseri non pâssunt Sum quidem in externae professionis societate quamplurimi mali atque hactenus in Ecclesia verùm de Ecclesia non sunt quia verae Ecclesiae membra non sunt Aliud est esse in externa Christianorum societate aliud pertinère ad internam quae spiritus est fidei quâ Caput Corpus membra cum membris spiritualiter veraciter communicant Aliud inquam est esse in Ecclesia aliud esse de Ecclesia And he citeth that of Austine as many other Protestants do l. 2. contra Crescon c. 21. At per hoc etiam nesciente Ecclesia propter malam pollutámquae conscientiam damnati a Christo jam in Corpore Christi non sunt quod est Ecclesia quoniam non potest Christus membra damnata habere See him on Mat. 3. p. 33. 2. Rutherford 's Peâceable Plea pag. 93. c. 9. 4. Dist. If a true Church and a visible Church as visible may not for a time be opposed by way of contradiction c. Pag. 96. Separatists Arguments must be weak for they all conclude that which we deny not and no other thing to wit that Heretick Aduâterers Sorcerers Blasphemers be no parts of Christs visible Church as it is a Church Yea we may say that as the tree-leg and the eie of glass and the teeth of silver by Art put in the body are no members of the living body so neither are these members of the true Church and so much do all our Divines as Calvin Beza Junius Whitaker Tilen Piscator Pareus Vrsine Trelcatius Sibrandus Amesius prove against Papists Pag. 107. A Church and a visible Church may be opposed by way of contradiction as a number of Believers and a number of non-Believers For a Church essentially is a number of âelievers and Christs mystical Body else it is not a Church c. Pag. 114. The Church visible as a Church is indeed Christs Body a royal Priest-hood a chosen Generation but as visible it is sufficient that it be a Royal Priest-hood only by Profession c. Our Adversaries give us no right description of the true natural and lively members of the true visible Church he that would give such a definition of a man as agreeth both to a living man and to a pictured or painted man were but a painted Logician Pag. 173. Although the Parents indeed as concerning any real union of faith be plain strangers to the Covenant and members of the Church only as an arm of wood is a member of the body See him also in his Due Right of Presbyâeries chap. 9. sect 9. pag. 256.257.259 10. Maccovius Colledg Theolog. Part. 4. Disp. 13. Thes. 3 4. c. Haec Ecclesia jam dicitur visibilis jam invisibilis Quae distinctio non eo spectat ut statuantur duae Ecclesiae c. sed est haec distinctio nominis ut loquuntur in Scholis 7. Et hinc jam liquere potest quomodo Ecclesia visibilis sit invisibilis visibilis nempe confusè dum in socictate illâ quam definivimus credimus esse electos aliquos etiamsi qui illi sint non novimus scientia perfecta sed conjecturali duntaxat 21. Notae ergo Ecclesiâe ad hoc nobis ser viunt non ut sciamus distinctè qui pertineant ad Eccle siam sed ut sciamus quibuscum nobis colenda sit communio seu publica seu privata nempe cum illi quibus illa insunt unde judicio charitatis colligi possit eos veram esse Ecclesiam vel pertinere ad veram Ecclesiam 11. Cocceïus de S. Scriptur Potent p. 575. Quod attinet coetuÌ sive multitudinem vocatorum saltem Verbisono Christi fidem profitentium eam vocamus Ecclesiam partim propter fideles qui in eò sunt partim propter spem Charitas enâm omnia
ex Deo non sunt non possunt inter Ecclesia membra numerari 18. Ab Autoritate patrum where he citeth Cyprian Origen Hierom Ambrose Ruffinus Gregory Epiphanius Augustine Chrysostom Theophilact Bernard c. 19. Arg. A consensu testimonio totius Ecclesiae Catholicae ducitur Recitantes enim Symbolum Apostolorum omnes Christiani profitentur se credere sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam Sanctorum Communionem 20. Arg. Ab Adversariorum confessione of which more anon And six Reasons he addeth fol. 24. col 2. And fol. 25. he refuteth Bellarmines Arguments for the contrary the same that others since make use of from Scripture and Reason Where Bellarmine saith They cannot be cast out of the Church by Excommunication if they be not in it he answereth Si Fide Charitate Spiritu sancto careant tum licet vel Praelatorum sedes occupent vel in Ecclesiae catalogo censeantur non tamen sunt vera membra Ecclesiae Nec ad rem facit quod Christus malis Praelatis obaudiendum docet Hoc enâm sit quia tales adhuc videntur esse in Ecclesiae Of a Councils testimony produced by Bellarmine he saith Licet Concilium quoddam Et iscoporum in colloq cum Donatistis fateatur malos esse nonnunquam in Ecclesia velut paleas in area non tamen asserit hujusmodi malos esse vera membra Ecclesiae sed ostendit quid vulgus existimat I know the answer to all this must be that Dr. Sutlive speaks all this only of the Catholick mystical Church and not of the Visible Church To which I Reply 1. He and other Protestants profess that they hold not that there is two Churches one Visible and the other Invisible but one Church only 2. And that this one is called Invisible from its essence and Visible from an adjunct which is so 3. And therefore that where there is Profession without true faith and so men that have only that which denominateth it Visible without that which denominateth it Invisible these are only equivocally and not truly members Hear further what Sutlive saith of this fol. 25. Hinc ergo cadit calumnia illa Adversarii quasi nos faceremus duas Ecclesias VnaÌ enim nos facimus Ecclesiam Catholicam quae tantum bonos continet licet mali in ea conseantur quia non omnes certo norunt esse malos At Bellarminus revera duas facit Ecclesias unam ex bonis tantum alteram ex malis bonis aliquando ex malis tantum Nam ad Ecclesiae formam constituendam nullam putat requiri intornam virtutem And fol. 26. answering to Bellarmines Arguments from the Fathers he saith of Nazienzen Nullus dixerit eum existimâsse hujusmodi homines vera esse membra Ecclesiae Loquitur enim de Ecclesiae militantis parte that is of the particular Church of Constantinople Ãdque secundùm vulgi sententiam non secundùm veritatem ubi proprie loquitur Moabitas Ammonitas licet in mysteria nostra irrumperent distinguit à veris Christianis Cap. 7. He proves that Infidels and Hereticks though occult are not vera Ecclesiae membra And fol. 27. col 2. he saith Vt agamus de forma Ecclesiae ubi potius essentialis ejus forma posita est quà m in fide Christi interna Forma enim illa substantialis est non accidentalis Ecclesiaeque dat esse vere demonstrat quis ad Ecclesiam pertineat At confessio fidei externa non magis demonstrat Ecclesiam ejusque partes quam tabula picta hominis naturam Licet ad Ecclesiam admittantur qui profitentur fidem ut dicit Bellarm. non tamen sequitur eos fieri vera Ecclesiae membra nisi habeant etiam fidem quam profitentur Neque enim civis est qui pro cive se gerit licet aliqui ita putent sed qui revera Jus habet civitatis Fol. 28. Praeterea nos ostendimus excludi omnes ex Ecclesia Catholica tanquam membra non vera sed ficte adnascentia qui non habent charitatem hoc Catholicorum omnium testimonio confirmavimus adeo ut jam constet Bellarminum esse Monachum à Christi Ecclesia extraneum non Catholicum I desire the contrary-minded of our Brethren to mark what a heavy censure I must fall under if I should turn to their opinion Fol. 29. Nulli ferè haeretici non se Christianos esse proââântur eos tamen Chrysostomus ex Ecclesia excludit Nam non nomen sed veritatem facere Christianum Many Arguments he here useth of which I will recite only the last fol. 30. col 2. Si Fides non minùs requiritur quam Baptismus ut quis fiat membrum Ecclesiae cur magis sit membrum Ecclesiae qui profitetur se fidem tenere non tenet quam qui profitetur se baptismum habere non habet They that will read the rest may see much more to the same sense but I find I have staid long enough on one Witness 14. Amesius Medul Theol. lib. 1. cap. 32.11 Illi autem qui professione tantum sunt sideles dum remanent in illa societate sunt membra illius Ecclesiae sicut etiam Eccâesiae Catholicae quoad statum externum tantum non quoad statum internum aut essentialem 1 Joan. 2. ver 19. Et in Bellarm. Enervat Tom. 2. lib. 2. c. 1.3 confuting Bellarmines calumny that feigneth us to make two Churches a Visible and an Invisible he saith we only affirm Vnam quoad essentiam internam alteram quoad modum existendi externum and urgeth Augustine saying Bonos sic esse in domo Dei quae est Ecclesia ut ipsi sint domus constructa ex vivis lapidibus malos sic esse in domo ut ipsi tamen non sint domus § 7. Where Bellarmine saith Reprobates belong to the Church he answereth Hoc non potest negari si intelligatur secundum extrinsecam rationem Ecclesiae militantis prout capilli ungues aut mali humores pertinent ad corpus humanum quam explicationem dedit nobis Bellarm. cap. 2. aut quemadmodum Civitas Romana multos non Cives dicitur complecti § 8. Bellarm. Magni manifesti peccatores sunt in Ecclesia Resp. At hoc etiam conceditur à nobis eodem sensu quo antecedens illud effatum i. e. ita ut istius modi peccatores non sint membra vera nec simpliciter corporis Ecclesiae sed tantum secundùm quid Aequivoce 15. Wendeline in Christ. Theol. lib. 1. cap. 28. is large upon it He makes spiritual Union with Christ to be the Internal and Essential form of the Church and visible Externals to be but an Accidental external form In all his definitions he makes only the Elect-believers and Justified to be the true members and that both of the Universal Church and of Particular Churches He hath nine Arguments against the Papists to prove Hypocrites no true members of the
putative ad illam pertinere Quae in contrarium disputantur a Bellarmino plane futilia ficulnea sunt 26. Altingius Loc. Com. Part. 1. Loc. 11. pag. 180 181. Item Part. 2. Loc. 11. pag. 580.581 582. Cum solis Pontificiis certamen superest 1. An âraeter electos vocatos etiam Reprobi Infideles sive occulti sive manifesti peccatores verae Christi Ecclesiae membra sint Pontificii affirmant Nos negamus Rationes nostrae Ex natura subjecti 1. Qui nec Spiritum sanctum nec sidem habent verae Christi Ecclesiae membra non sunt Reprobi infideles nec Spiritum sanctum habent nec fidem c. 2. Qui non sunt ex sive de Ecclesia non sunt vera ejus membra Reprobi infideles non sunt ex sive de vera Ecclesia ergo 3. Qui sunt membra Diaboli non sunt membra verae Ecclesiâ c. Ex natura Praedicati 1. Omnia membra verae Ecclesiae vocantur secundum propositum Dei c. 2. Omnia membra verae Ecclesiae sunt membra Christi c. 3. Omnia membra verae Ecclesiae sunt Oves Christi agnoscunt audiunt sequuntur ipsum c. See the proofs and the confutation of the Papists reasons drawn from the Parables of the Field the Net the Wedding Feast from Baptism from the Example of the Apostolical Churches the uncertainty of Members c. Idem in Explicat Cateches Palat. Part. 2. pag. 255. Item proprie Univoce competit veris sinceris ejus membris quae sunt vere sideles Improprie Aequivoce membris simulatis qualia sunt omnes hypocritae qui ut paleae inter triticum zizania inter bonum semen pisces putridi inter bonos versantur in Ecclesia propter externae confessionis gloriationem ejusdem membra censentur 27. These Salmuriens Vol. 3. de variis Ecclesiae partibus Thes. 28. Equidem mihi dici velim quid sibi voluerit subtilissimus Disputator qui partes veras appellavit membra arida atque mortua Illa autem forma quae in corporibus viventibus anima appellatur semper vitam comitem habet neque potest ab ea separari haud magis quà m à seipsa Ideo neque rami in arbore demortui partes ejus censentur neque in animantibus quae loco sunt excrementorum quaeque vitam non participant ut pili ungues ab ea parte qua sunt privati sensu habentur pro corporis partibus neque in corpore humano crus aut brachium quod ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã penitus occupavit membrum ejus censetur ampliùs haud magis quà m homo pictus pro homine judicatur ideoque extirpatur tanquam nihil cum corpore commune habens 28. Lucas Trelcatius senior in Opuscul Theol. Loc. Com. de Eccles pag. 430. Ob hoc enim ipsum Ecclesiae nomen singulis coetibus fidem Christi ex illius Verbo profitentibus rectè tribuitur quòd scilicet Ecclesiae invisibilis ibi membra esse verè credantur nam propter electos propriè coetus aliquis vocatur Ecclesia etiamsi sint minima illius pars A potiori enim non autem saepè majori fit hîc rei denominatio scilicet ab eo quo res est quod est ut acervus tritici tritici tamen dicitur non palearum Pag. 429. Visibilis verò Ecclesiae membra sunt hominibus nota sed judicio Charitatis saepe non Veritatis propter vocationem professionem externam sed saepe hypocriticam Pag. 427. Visibiles inquam non ab illâ formâ internâ quae dat proprie esse rei sed à formâ externâ c. See more there Pag. 448. Resp. Neg. Nec enim mortua membra corporis vivi sunt membra nisi homonymôs vivae Dei Ecclesiae nullum est membrum mortuum Vid. L. Trelcat jun. Instit. lib. 2. page 254 255. 29. Th. Cartwright contr Rhem. in Joh. 15.1 Branch in me Rotten branches and dead members branches and members in shew and not in truth And therefore that which they have not indeed and yet seem to have in their own and other mens opinion shall be taken from them 30. Bucer and Marlorate citing him on Joh. 15.2 Quomodo ergo zizania sunt in regno Dei putres pisces in reti Evangelico carens veste nuptiali in nuptiis Christi ita in Christo est qui non fert fructum Nomine tenus scilicet secundùm externam speciem tantùm non etiam verâ fide 31. Joan. Camero Praelect de Eccles. pag. 246. 3. Negandum est posse sciri distinctè certò qui sint verae Ecclesiae membra quae sit vera Ecclesia at concedendum est tamen posse id sciri distinctè probabiliter quae scientia vulgò dicitur Judicium Charitatis ergo Ecclesiae dicitur quemadmodum homo Nam homo pictus coloratus à Philosopho dicitur homo verus homo dicitur homo homini picto vero quedam sunt communia secundùm quae tam hic quà m ille homo dicitur attamen nemo cavillabitur constitui sic duo genera hominum Et pag. 258. Negamus in ullâ re externâ sitam esse Ecclesiae Essentiam ideoque nulla vis est quae cogat ut fateamur Essentiam Ecclesie eandem Notam esse c. Consequens est ut quaecunque Deus pollicetur Ecclesiae suae seu ea pertineant ad fidem seu ad mores intelligenda sint eâ de parte quae proprie sine tropo Ecclesia dicitur neque convenire Ecclesiae illi quae synecdochicè Ecclesia dicitur nisi per accidens respectu scilicet illius partis quomodo vivere is dicitur cujus aliqua pars computruit quanquam pars putrida quod Aristoteles nos docuit non est proprie pars sed homonymos propter similitudinem figuram nam reâpse non est pars quando non est formae totius particeps Were it not that I think the labour needless I should add many testimonies collected and at hand from Zuinglius Bullinger Piscator Paraeus Bucanus Rivet with many more yea many score I doubt not might be added But I shall spare my self and the Reader that labour till I perceive it necessary and shall only conclude with two of our own One in a book not past a month old that it may appear that we yet hold to the old Protestant Doctrine as easie as it is to turn some from it by specious pretences Mr. H. Jeanes in Scholast practic Divinity pag. 18.19 saith thus Vse Inform. Is the Church the outward fulness of Christ considered as Head we may then be informed what is the nature and quality of the true members that they are effectually called and truly sanctified linkt unto Christ with an internal union by the bond of the Spirit on his part and of faith on theirs Indeed
as in the body natural there are hairs nails evil humors and many other things which yet belong not integrally thereunto as proper members So if we regard not the inward and invisible Essence but the visible state or outward manner of the Churches being there adhere unto her many uncalled unjustified and unsanctified persons but it is only as excrements or ulcers For every true member of the Church is a part of Christs fulness and therefore must receive of his fulness grace for grace must be endowed with all saving and sanctifying graces otherwise how can it concur to the making of Christ full and compleat Vse 2. Refut Whence secondly may be inferred the gross Error of the Papists in avouching that external profession and conformitie outward subjection to the Pope of Rome are sufficient to constitute one a true member of the Catholick Church although he be a Reprobate an unbeliever an hypocrite so gross as Judas or Simon Magus a professed and notorious impious wretch that is utterly devoid of all spiritual life and grace whatsoever If he take up a room in the Church it matters not with them though he neither do nor can perform vital actions yet he shall pass for a true part thereof Pag. 19. He confesseth that they are united to the Church but by an outward Conjunction And was ever any man so deprived of common sense and understanding as to call a woodden leg a part of the body to which it was annexed as to term wens warts and moles sores and botches members of the body in which they were 33. The other is Mr. Perkins in whom the Judgement of other English Protestants of his time may be discerned Expos. on the Creed in Vol. 1. pag. 308. Hence we learn 1. That the Church of Rome erreth in teaching that a wicked man yea such a one as shall never be saved may be a true member of the Catholick Church c. But lest you should say that he speaks this only of the Invisible Church though our Divines say that there is but one Church which is Visible and Invisible in several respects I shall desire you to consider what he saith of the Visible Chuhch expresly pag. 303 304. The visible Church may be thus described It is a mixt company of men professing the faith assembled together by the preaching of the word It is called a Church of the better part namely the elect whereof it consisteth though they be in number few As for the ungodly though they be in the church yet they are no more parts of it indeed than the superfluous humors in the veins are parts of the body Again because the profession of faith is otherwhiles true and sincere and otherwhiles only in shew Therefore there be also two sorts of Members of the visible Church Members before God and members before men A member of the Church before God is he that beside the outward profession of the Faith hath inwardly a pure heart good conscience and Faith unfeigned whereby he is indeed a true member of the Church Members before men whom we may call reputed members are such as have nothing els but the outward Profession wanting the good conscience and the Faith unfeigned the Reason why they are to be esteemed members of us is because we are bound by the Rule of Charity to think of Men as they appear unto us leaving secret judgement unto God so far Perkins And so much for these testimonies By what hath been said it is evident that it is the judgement of the Protestants that reprobates and wicked men are not properly members of the Church but only Equivocally and that the Church is but one which in some respect is visible and some invisible and that it is denominated Invisible because its Essential form is Invisible and denominated visible only from an External Accidental form and therefore that those members that are only visible or have only the Accidental form of Members or are only of the Church as visible are but Equivocally members of the Church properly so called as from its essential form This they commonly maintain against the Papists I confess I think that somewhat more should be said for the explication of this point which is fullyest done by the Thes. Salmuriens vol. 3. but though I am not now delivering my own apprehensions but the words of others yet that the true Church as also Holynes Faith Christianity Adoption are Equivocal as applied to the Regenerate and unregenerate I wholly agree with the common judgement and am past doubt of it though Mr. Blake contradict it with Abhorence Bellarmine confesseth that many of their own as Johan de Turre cremata Alexander Hales Hugo Thomas c. did take the wicked to be but Equivocally called members of the Church And our Divines as Dr. Sutlive pag. 23.24 mention also Peter à Soto Melchior Canus and divers others et p. 29. And Bellarmine himself saith they are but Membra Mortua And for the judgement of the Fathers herein other Divines against the Papists have produced them at large See Dr. Sutlive de Eccles lib. 1. c. 7. fol. 28. c. 6. fol. 22.23 Now let us hear Mr. Blake Mr. Blake p. 150. Then it seems there is no Reality in such separations Camero tells us otherwise that there is a Reality in this Saintship by separation Ans. This is the first time that ever I heard that Equivocal terms express not Realityes Is there no Reality in a picture or a corps It sufficeth that the Reality is not the same that in a man and a corps is expressed by the same word Man Camero's judgement of our controversie is declared before in his own words Mr. Blake And it seems the Scripture is still under the charge of Equivocal speeches all over Ans. This anger flyes too high I beseech you make not the undeniable Equivocal terms which you finde in Scripture the Matter of a Charge It s is ill judging the Law that must Judge us Is there a Divine on earth that will deny that there are Equivocal terms in Scripture or that there are hundreds if not thousand numerical words that are such And do you not fear to make these the Grounds of a charge Scripture shall not go uncharged except it speak so as to please us In the highest matters about the Attributes and Works of God how common are Equivocal terms But do you indeed think that all Equivocal terms are Culpable yea or unnecessary or not intelligible I pray you distinguish between Jesuitical dissembling Equivocation and the laudable yea necessary use of Equivocal words when either the transcendencie of the matter the incapacity of men the paucity of terms the custom of speech c. hath made them fit or needfull Let God have the forbearance and justice in your interpretations as every writer and Speaker is allowed without any accusation the Scripture hath accusers enow already Mr. Blake I would know
to be inconsistent if reduced into practice with the Purity of the Church and such as is unworthy the patronage of Godly learned men Yet in this I perceive his writings have success For I hear that some Reverend Godly men of his acquaintance are so confident that he is in the right that they marvel that ever I should hold the contrary and blame me as defending a principal point in the Independent cause The Lord enlighten us and pardon it to us which soever of us it be that is mistaken and doth wrong the Church of God There are four several Titles that are or may be produced to Baptism The first is sincere Saving Faith The second is the profession of such sincere Faith The third is a Dogmatical Faith short of Justifying Faith The fourth is a profession of that Dogmatical Faith I say that only they that have the Justifying Faith have a Promise-Right to Baptism properly so called which I called a Right Coram Deo but that the professors of such a Faith and their seed have an Analogical Consequential Right which followeth on Gods Precept to a Minister to Baptize them This I called Right Coram Ecclesiâ and is less properly a Right And that the bare word Right might be no occasion of quarrel I distinguished of Right and shewed how far I affirmed or denyed it But such distinctions and conclusions are nothing to the business with Mr. Blake but fittest to be passed by I conclude in a word that every professor of a Justifying Faith that doth not invalidate his own profession hath such a claim to Baptism for himself if unbaptized and his seed as the Church must admit But only the sincere Believer hath a Right from the Promise and shall be taken by God for one to whom he is actually as it were obliged by his Covenant But for the two later pretended Titles viz. A Dogmatical Faith not Justifying and the Profession of such a Faith I say they are no just Titles at all Not but that a man who hath meerly a Dogmatical Faith within may have a Title in Foro Ecclesiae but this Faith is not his Title but the profession of a Saving Faith so that if he profess only his Dogmatical Faith and not a Saving Faith the Minister ought not to Baptize him This is the brief of the state of the Controversie between Master Blake and me And did I think that any such Reverend Brethren would ever have approved his Judgement in such a cause Yea and some of them plead from the same effectual mediums which are alone sufficient to prove the contrary It s the course of Hilary and others against the Arrians Hierome Augustine and many more against the Pelagians and other hereticks to call them to the constant practice of the Church in Baptizing for the proving of the nature of that Belief that we are Baptized into and the quality of the subject I appeal to Christs institution of Baptism and the uninterrupted practice of all Churches that ever I read of on the face of the earth to this day and to the continued practice of the Churches in England and all the Reformed parties and all the rest of the Christian world If they do not generally Ethiopians Greeks Papists Protestants with one consent require the profession of a Justifying Faith I will quit this cause and tell Mr. Blake that I have been mistaken and cry him mercy Nay if Mr. Blake himself do not require the profession of a Justifying Faith in the Parent of all that he admits to Baptism I shall think him the only singular man I know alive in this business But if he practice contrary to all his confident Argumentations which shall we have respect to his opinion or his practice Where is the Church on earth that doth not Baptize into the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and require in the adult or the Parent of Infants that they profess themselves at present to Believe in the Father Son and Holy Ghost and to renounce the World the Flesh and the Devil And therefore they commonly cause them to profess the Articles of the ancient Creed before they do Baptize them which though it hath been lately disused by some I gladly heard some Reverend Ministers in London yet use which Creed as Parker de Descensu hath learnedly shewed is the exposition of the words of the Baptismal Institution and the sum of it is I Believe in the Father Son and Holy Ghost I think not only Perkins but our Divines commonly against the Papists have proved sufficiently that the words I Believe in God the Father in Jesus Christ in the Holy Ghost do signifie Affiance as well as Assent And I should hope that I need not be put to maintain it that to Believe with Assent and Affiance in God the Father Christ the Redeemer the Holy Ghost the witness and Sanctifier renouncing the Devil the World and the Flesh is certainly Justifying Faith at least If they that say they thus Believe do so indeed I dare not be he that shall tell them they are yet condemned and deny them to be the justifyed members of Christ. If they will not so much as profess thus to Believe yea and to Repent I will never Baptize them or theirs upon theâr account Will Mr. Blake himself Baptize them that will not thus profess would ever the Church of Christ Baptize any but such and yet some Reverend Brethren tell us that the Church universally hath gone Mr. Blakes way against that which I insist on Now the Lord have mercy upon all our infirmities and pity his poor Church and bring his servants to so much Unity that the universal practice of the Church in all ages and Nations even among our selves which we daily hear and see and our own selves practise may not be among us a matter of controversie for then what are we likely to be agreed in Again I must crave pardon of this confidence but if it seem to them to come from self-conceitedness and pride of my own judgement or a loathness to let go what I have once received as I willingly confess that I find such sins within me and am no Christian if I blame them not and hate them not in my self so I will be bold to tell Mr. Blake and the world the very truth in this business which is that the partiality that I have felt in the study of this point hath been for Mr. Blakes opinion against my own and I had rather a great while till the light convinced me have found his opinion true than my own As I knew I should be taken for a defender of the Independants which is a censure that I little regard so I thought that I should the better comply with some Texts of the old Testament which Mr. Blake much urgeth and some other reasons did cause Mr. Blakes opinion sometime so far to smile upon me that I strove against the contrary truth and studied
all that I could to have confuted the Arguments for it and was very willing to have found the truth on Mr. Blakes side but it was too hard for me and overcame me after some such reluctancy For besides many other Reasons which I have mentioned I find that there is no footing for a man in his way He that will not take up with the bare name of a Dogmatical Faith knows not for ought I can find what to take up with I despair of ever prevailing with Mr. Blake let him write never so much more on the subject to give us a true Definition or Description of that Faith short of Justifying which entitleth to Baptism and to prove it from Gods word or to agree with himself Commonly he calls it a Dogmatical Faith one would think now you might know the truth by this plain Name but when I tell him that if it be meerly Dogmatical then it is only in the understandings Assent and importeth no consent of the Will and that this is in the Devils and may be in those that say We will not have this man reign over us nor be our Saviour because he will not let us have our lusts And would he Baptize those that should say so Hereupon Mr. Blake will take some consent of the Will or else it cannot become a covenanting but sometime he only describes it negatively that it is not such as comes up to Justifying Faith but who knows by this what it is though he tell us what it is not sometime he makes the expression of it to contain those two parts 1. Confession of the necessity of justifying Faith 2. An engagement or promise to Believe with a Justifying Faith But when I interpret this promise to be that he will so believe de futuro he asketh me how comes de futuro in as if every promise were not de futuro Is it de praesenti Doth he promise that he doth at the present so believe why this is not to promise but to profess and is the thing that I plead for as necessary which Mr. Blake resisteth sure then it is de futuro or it is not intelligible by common capacities Well if it must be de futuro either it s at the next moment or some time at longer distance To say I consent not now but I will the next moment or tomorrow is ridiculous partly because as I have proved to him such a person is not capable of making such a promise so as should be rationally accepted in a covenant and partly because we may end the controversie by forbearing his Baptizing one moment longer or one day till he do indeed Believe and consent as he promiseth But what time soever it be as I told him upon these terms a man may say I believe the Creed and Scripture to be true but because I know that I cannot serve God and Mammon nor have Christ to justifie me and live in my sins I will not yet have God for my God or Christ for my Lord and Saviour nor the Holy Ghost for my Sanctifier because I will not yet leave my sins but hereafter I will would Mr. Blake Baptize such a man as this In answer to such a question he saith pag. 133. I think it will be nothing hard for any honest Christian to say that a man not justified may believe every fundamental Article as to Assent and that he may be convinced of the necessity of such Repentance and accordingly to make profession of it as Johns Converts were Baptized into c. And pag. 147. he saith Seeing Mr. Baxter calls upon me further to declare my self further in this thing I do believe and profess to hold that he that upon hearing the Gospel preach't and the truth of it published and opened shall professedly abjure all other opposite waies whatsoever and choose the Christian way for Salvation promising to follow the Rules of it is to be Baptized and his seed c. And are these Descrptions of his Dogmatical faith the same with the former Is not Repentance ever concomitant with Faith John's Baptism was the Baptism of Repentance for Remission of sins and if our Divines mistake not when they maintain to be the same with Christs sure Faith was to go with that Repentance and that Repentance which is for Remission of sins is not common but saving and special If therefore saving Repentance must not only be promised de futuro but professed de praesenti then doubtless so must that Faith which is inseparable 2. And would Mr. Blake have us so Censorious as to say that those men that Abjure all other waies whatsoever and choose the Christian way for Salvation promising to follow the Rules of it if they do this sincerely are not yet justified or have not justifying faith and that if they do it not sincerely that is not yet justifying faith which they profess For my part I am past doubt of it If this be Mr. Blakes Dogmatical Faith he and I are not much at distance about the Qualification of the Baptized but about the nature of justifying Faith For that 's justifying in my judgement which is but Dogmatical in his Christ is the way to Salvation the Sanctifying work of the Spirit and the holy Love and Obedience of the Saints in this way in subserviency to Christ all these are the Gospel way to Salvation the false belief of Erroneous men and the many by-paths of the unregenerate are the contrary which Satan perswades them to and makes them believe may serve the turn That man that Abjureth all other waies than that are opposite to the Christian way and doth choose the Christian way for Salvation is certainly a true Penitent and believeth to justification or else I can have no hopes of being saved Election is that term by which Amesius will needs express the proper formal act of justifying Faith Not one of all these acts that Mr. Blake mentions either 1. To Abjure all other opposite waies whatsoever 2. To choose the Christian way of Salvation 3. To promise to follow the Rules thereof I say not one of these can be uprightly and unfeignedly done by the unregenerate by any that hath not true Repentance and justifying saith Much less altogether Judge then whether the profession of this be not the profession of saving faith and whether Mr. Blake know where to fix himself and how to describe his Dogmatical faith and whether he do not yield the cause that I am maintaining And whereas he takes it for an egregious piece of affected nonsence to say that Justifying faith is a promise and still saith that Justifying faith with him is the thing promised or the thing whereto we do restipulate pag. 171. I say that he can never prove that the Church of Christ did know such a Baptismal covenant wherein the first justifying faith was the thing promised though the continuance may And should I so Baptize any person at age or an Infant in
Eternity The latter is not properly in God at all For he changeth not his minde nor Remitteth any Punishing Purpose or secret Resolution or thoughts which he had before and if he did that would not dissolve the Guilt that is the obligation to Punishment without an outgoing word from God But yet after the manner of weak man this last sort of Mental Pardon may from the Effect to the Affect be ascribed Denominatively to God But then as it is but Denominatively so that Denomination must then begin when the Law of Grace or Promise doth Pardon and Absolve for then only doth the ground of that Denomination begin though nothing Real do begin in God And it is worth the noting also how angerly this man doth tell us that neither Dr. Twiss nor any that ever was taught or Catechized understandingly in the Church will deny or is ignorant of this kinde of Pardon or Justification in Law-sense which we maintain And yet that Mr. Blake will not be perswaded of any such thing to this day but disputeth confidently against that which we are so chidden by Mr. Robertson for imagining that any well Catechized will deny Again tell me what a man should do to be of every learned good mans minde or to escape their censures And as these Brethren deal in the Press so do some others privately by words and Manuscripts The last week I received a creeping Paper against my directions for Peace of Conscience written by a Minister about the midway between Mr. Blake and me Though a Neighbour I know not that I ever heard his name before but once about 16 years ago who with the spirit and pen of Mr. Robertson and his like doth furiously fall on me to conjure out of me the Devil of Pelagianism because I say to doubting souls that If Christ be not yet theirs he maybe when they will or they may have him when they will whereupon to his Councils and Fathers he goes against Free-will This is a Minister of the Gospel and yet knows not that this is a Truth that almost all the world of Christians are agreed on and that Austine purposely defendeth and if it be not true what a case is the world in And his Reproaches are cast in the face of the Scripture that saith the same Whoever will let him take the water of Life freely Rev. 22.17 And Dr. Twiss maintains it at large that velle Credere is Credere but doubtless velle Christum oblatum is a great act of saving Faith And this man might read that I add withall as Austine doth that Though whoever will have Christ as offered may have him yet no man will so have him but by the work of special Grace But is it not a sad case when the Preachers of the Gospel shall defame and reproach the very substance of the Gospel as zealously as if mens salvation lay upon it I have given you now I think reasons enough to excuse me from wording it with such inconsiderate men To which I will add one other I am conscious of so much frailty in my self that I am likely to be drawn also to injure some of them And also I am not able to speak so cautelously but some words will be very liable to misunderstanding on which they may plausibly fasten their accusations To give you one instance In the Preface to my Confession I noted a sort of empty men that will not speak to men nor give them any reasons to convince them but only secretly behind their backs will carry it abroad that such or such a man is erroneous half an Arminian a dangerous man and if they speak to us we shall hear but these general charges of Error To these I said I might expect they should be more Judicious studied impartial illuminate sincere or at lest the chief of these before I should value their bare Judgements and Censures without their Reasons professing withall that as I doubted not but there are multitudes of Labourers in Gods harvest with whom in these respects I am unworthy to be named so the Judgement of these I would value that is so far as to suspect anything which they are against and silence it at least till Evidence be very cogent So that I never mentioned the Qualifications of men that write or dispute against me but only of those that look I should be swayed by their Censures without Arguments This was my very mind of which I desire you to observe the words themselves But no where doth Dr. Owen and Mr. Blake so take me up as here mistakingly supposing that I spoke of those that should Write or Argue against me and that I require all these Qualifications in them No I will hear Scripture and Reason from a Childe but I will not be swayed by the Judgement and Censures of a Childe Yet here the one of them talks of the terrible conditions that I impose upon my Answerer and the other Mr. Blake comes on with intimations as if my words implyed that I take my self for more judicious experienced holy c. than all those from whom I manifest my dissent the Assembly and I know not how many feigning me do dissent from men even contrary to my profession These answers will seem as good to Readers that will not by collation make trial as if they were as good as any So will his citations out of the Fathers when among the several points in difference I desired one line from one Ancient to prove that his opinion was ever known to the ancient Church and for one of them the instrumental efficacy of Faith to Justification he doth perform it at large but how By a bare citation of Passages from others gathered up and that without the words and that only affirming that we are justified by Faith and not by Works So that if Mr. Blake bring testmonies of the Ancients sense that we are Justified by Faith and not by Works he will take these as testimonies that the Ancients speak for the Instrumental Efficiency of Faith in Justification And by such consequences he may make them say many things more that they never said indeed But we have shewed him a tertium another sense in which a man may be said to be justified by Faith without Works Sure I am that if I should maintain such a Justification by Faith without Works as many of those Fathers whom he quote's do assert in terms and sense even in the words before and after and in the places cited I should be more clamorously called a Papist than yet I have been at least there were more shew of reason for it Moreover the very naming of untrue Reports and Affirmations would be offensive to the guilty As pag. 664. he saith that I say Obedience is only the modification of Faith in the first act of Justification when I never spoke or thought such a thing but deny it to be existent as its distinct from Faith in that first act of
of that will say that wicked men may come to Baptism for these advantages But the most Learned of them conclude that no man ought to come that hath not a purpose to forsake all his mortal sins at least and that they are not to be Baptized that profess not this and that others get into the Church praeter intentionem Ecclesiae as Bellarmine saith so that in this the chief of their Doctors own the cause that I maintain Aquin. 3. Qu. 68. ar 4. doth purposely dispute it Vtrùm peccatores sint Baptizandi And resolves it negatively that though Peccator quoad reatum may be Baptized yet not Peccator ex voluntate peccandi proposito persistendi in peccato he gives three good Reasons 1. Because such are unmeet to be incorporated into Christ which Baptism doth 2. Because Baptism with them cannot attain its end to take away their sin and in the works of God and the Church nothing must be done in vain or that cannot reach the appointed end 3. Because else there would be falshood in the sacramental signs which must not be And one would think by his Answers ad 2 m 3 m that he saith as much as I is for the necessity of a fides formata and Conversion it self before Baptism Saith he ad 2. Ideo sacramentum baptismi non est exhibiendum nisi ei in quo interioris conversionis aliquod signum apparet sicut nec medicina corporalis adhibetur infirmo nisi in eo aliquis motua vitalis nature appareat And ad 3 m answering those objectors that I intended p. 51. he saith Dicendum quod Baptismus est fidei sacramentum Fides autem informis non sufficit ad salutem nec ipsa est fundamentum sed sola fides formata quae per dilectionem operatur ut Aug. l. de sid oper Vnde nec sacramentum baptismi salutem conferre potest cum voluntate peccandi quae fidei formam excludit Non est autem per impressionem Characteris baptismalis aliquis disponendus ad gratiam quamdiu in eo apparet voluntas peccandi he here plainly speaks de fide formata ut afferendâ and not ut recipiendâ per baptismum So that he is here fully for me in the main cause of these Disputations and so must they all that do affirm a true death to sin to be one of the prerequisites if they will not contradict themselves and that 's common For it 's a vain conceit that preparatory grace kills sin and special grace afterward giveth a new life that which expelleth death is life and that which expelleth darkness is nothing else but the light it self Add also what Aquinas saith sup Qu. 2. a. 3. c. Nullum peccatum dimittitur nisi quis justificetur sed ad justificationem requiritur contritio And what he saith 3. Qu. 49. a. 1. ad 2 m Per fidem applicatur nobis passio Christi ad percipiendum fructum ipsius Fides autem per quam à peccato mundamur non est fides informis quae potest esse etiam cum peccato sed est fides formata per Charitatem ut sic passio Christi nobis applicetur non solùm quantum ad intellectum sed etiam quantum ad effectum Yet I know they here confound themselves by their sophistry telling us that Contrition is before Charity materially and after it effectively and that Contritio se habet ut ultima dispositio ad gratiam consequendam and that Poenitentia quae est sacramentum is before Poenitentia qââ est virtus and is the instrument of effecting it as though a dissembling Ceremony or false profession would work grace so that there is no hold of them at the best for they have lost themselves in contradictions I know also that they make the Sacrament of Baptism to justifie and sanctifie infallibly all Infants that are offered by the Church on their allowed Titles let the Parent be never so bad because they think the Churches Faith may serve instead of the Parents as the Churches Intention may serve instead both of the Ministers saith Aquinas and the Infants yea and the Church it self need not lend an Infant any Contrition for they are agreed that neither other mens sins nor our own Original sin which is all that the Infant hath are the Object of Contrition but only our own actual sin Yet one would think that the ordinary doctrine that the votum vel propositum may save without Baptism should imply that before Baptism the desires of it are supposed to have Charity or special Grace The Roman Catechism saith Par. 2. pag. 142. Baptismi suscipiendi propositum atque consilium malae acta vitae pâenitentia satis futura sit ad gratiam justitiam si repentinus aliquis Casus impediat quò minùs solutari aquâ ablui possint And they confess that none can be saved without Charity therefore those that die before Baptism must be supposed to have Charity But ordinarily they make Attrition sufficient and by the Sacrament give to the attrite justification and so Charity is conferred And thus by an outward act a man that hath but common grace may get special grace Yea if they Counterfeit Attrition it self yet they receive the foresaid indelible Character which gives them the jura Ecclesiae and as the Roman Catechism saith Par. 2. qu. 19. pag. 125. by this Character ad alia sacramenta percipienda redduntur idonei And then the other Sacraments at least by the help of Attrition will sure justifie and save them And thus they make a common grace sufficient to let them into the Church by Baptism yea the meer Baptism it self without any grace at all and so make their Character and Church-state the way to justification which is the thing I charge them with Pag. 50 51. And those that do seem exceedingly to comfort and encourage their proselytes by telling them of the certain efficacy of the Sacraments and that they surely put away all sin and guilt open heaven to them so that one would think there were assurance of Salvation or exceeding comfort reached forth yet they take it all away again and do but Tantalize and delude the people For they that with us require Contrition before the Sacrament do withall tell us that no man can know by any ordinary means but only by Revelation whether he be Contrite or not and consequently whether he shall be justified pardoned or saved ever the more for all the Sacraments And those that take up with Attrition do both confound themselves and their followers with their many degrees of Attrition and quarrels about it and also assure them that they cannot know whether they have the necessary degree and so after all Sacraments they cannot tell whether they be justified This much I thought meet to add for further explication of the Papists doctrine and the state of our Controversies with them herein Which I shall conclude in the words
As to the Antecedent Christ Commanded and Required Iudas his Profession as a sign of his mind and so of the thing professed that is as True And he neither Required nor Accepted any other profession But only he Permitted him to remain in his familâ though his profession was false and not such as he required 2. As to the Consequence No man therefore can hence argue that we may Require or Accept a profession which is not a sign apparent of the thing professed for that Christ did not nor yet that we must permit a known false professor because Christ did But this will be proved under the next points to which it leads us The other two depending on the same grounds may be dispatcht together And so I conclude that it cannot be gathered from the example of Judas that we must not excommunicate or keep from the Lords Table such as we can prove to the Church to be unregenerate or to be such as Judas was For 1. There may be Reasons to suspend the performance of that which ordinarily is to be done And so Christ had special Reasons to forbear the excommunicating of Judas till the last because he was to be the Instrument of his suffering that the Scripture might be fulfilled When we are sure that we have as good a Reason to suspend an act of discipline yet that will not be an excuse for our ordinary suspense or a Rule for our ordinary practice 2. The Lord Jesus would have Ministers lye under a double obligation for their safe proceeding The one is to take seeming Believers and Penitent persons into the Church and to the Sacraments The other is to take a Credible Profession for the Evidence of that Faith and Repentance And accordingly he would teach us no more by his example And therefore no wonder if he did not excommunicate Judas or keep him from the Sacrament for it was by his Divine heart-searching power and omniscience that Christ knew Judas to be an hypocrite while he made a Profession that was Probable or Credible to a meer man All therefore that can hence be gathered is that if by heart-searching omniscience we knew a man to be an Hypocrite we might not keep him back or excommunicate him and yet that will not be proved from the Text neither till you can prove that Christ might not have cast out Judas as well as that he did not for as is said he might forbear him for some special Cause Though I grant that on other grounds it may possibly be proved that we might not do it because we cannot communicate our evidence to the Church But there is no place for this arguing till men are omniscient Christ is our pattern as he acteth as a man and not when he exerciseth Divine omniscience 3. Christ knew what was in man and need not that any man should tell him John 2.25 And yet he questioned with men in humane Language he asketh some whether they believed and Peter whether he loved him Did he expect an answer from men for the bare words sake or as a sign of their mind Did he oblige them to a true answer or to a false The case is not doubtfull And if by his omniscience he knew that many of these answers were lyes and yet he silently permitted the answerer to seem a Disciple it will not hence follow that we must accept a profession simply for it self and when it is not credible that is that we must believe a known lye or that we must use those that we have no cause to believe as if we did believe them 4. And if their Argument were of any strength it would not only prove that we must keep in the Church and admit to the Sacrament those that we know to have the Devil in them and to be Traytors to Christ contriving the destruction of his Church as Judas did of his person and to be Thieves and Deceivers as Christ knew Judas to be and so overthrow all Church Discipline contrary to the Scripture Laws but also that it is not Lawfull for a Master to put a known Thief and Traytor out of his Family or to prohibit him familiarity with him at his Table and dipping his morsels with him in the same dish For Christ did this by Judas as well as the other But it is contrary to Psalm 15. and 101. and Mat. 18.17 and 1 Cor. 5.11 and many other Texts that we should hold such familarity with such men But that we may not lawfully do otherwise is a Doctrine that I hope no wise Christian Ruler of a Family will believe 5. The state of Christs Church being then but in gathering and ordering was not so ripe for the execution of excommunication as after his Resurrection and the ordering of the Churches But though I have said all this on the supposition that Christ did give the Sacrament to Judas yet I shall now proceed to shew that it is either certain that Judas did not receive it or not probable that he did My evidence is this 1. There is the Concurrent Testimony of three Evangelists that may assure us that Judas went out before the Sacrament Matthew dispatcheth Christs speeches to Judas before the Sacrament and to those that remained and did partake of it he saith 1. That he will drink of the fruit of the Vine with them new in the Kingdom of his Father which he neither did after his Resurrection nor will do with Judas 2. It s said they went into the Mount of Olives but so did not Judas 3. He saith all ye shall be offended because of me this night But Judas was none of those All. And Mark doth punctually agree with Matthew And Joh. 13. doth clear both the other For ver 30. he saith that Judas having received the Sop went immediately out Now it is utterly improbable that this Sop was after the Sacrament Though it be controverted whether the meat which they then eat besides the Paschal Lamb were before it or after it yet there 's evidence enough that it was before the Sacrament I know a Reverend Divine of ours in his Harmony of the Evangelists thinks that the Supper Ioh. 13. was not the same with that Mat. 26. and Mar. 14. When the Sacrament was instituted But his Reasons seem not cogent to me but may well be answered and there seems to be much evidence of the contrary in the Text to say nothing of the singularity of this exposition And as for the coincident controversies whether Christ did eat a Supper without the Paschal Lamb at the Institution of his Sacrament as Grotius thought or whether he did eat the Paschal Lamb a day before the Jews as Causabone Scaliger Capellus c. think Or on the same day with the Jews as Baronius Tolet Clopenburgius and the said Reverend Doctor think I shall not need on this occasion to enquire especially so much being written on it already See Paul Burgens in Lyr. and what Iansenius
this cannot be his sense For the man is not fradulent and besides his following arguing sheweth the contrary But then I confess that arguing amazeth me again He will prove that he is for the necessity of the profession of a justifying faith to Baptism because he is for the necessity of a Dogmatical faith and that faith must be profess Wonderful Doth he make a justifying and a Dogmatical faith all one No he constantly distinguisheth and opposeth them How then doth he prove that he asserteth the necessity of the profession of a justifying faith because he asserteth the necessity of a professed Dogmatical faith Reader I am at a loss I dare not say Mr. Blake is so perhaps he understands himself make thy best on 't for I can make nothing on 't or worse then nothing But if really he will be of this mind that the Reality of a dogmatical faith is necessary and the profession of a justifying faith I shall not only thank him for giving quiet profession to the truth but I will give him some back again and will come my self a beg lower then he and will affirm that we must give them the Sacraments that profess a saving faith though they have not so much as the Reality of a Dogmatical faith Yet Reader if thou think that there is any parcel of the cause which Mr. Blake doth not expresly give up after all his labour adjoin his words p. 124. and rest satisfied so that I conceit no promise of these Ordinances made to such a faith but an actual investiture of every such believer in them I have made the best enquiry I can into Mr. Blake's sense and I cannot find any reasonable footing for a man to fix upon if we once forsake our present hold and say that it is a profession of some other faith short of that which justifyeth which is the title to the Sacraments For as no man can prove out of Scripture then what faith it must be but we shall there be at a loss so whatever he assert we have evidence enough to prove it insufficient A Real Dogmatical faith cannot be the title For then the Baptizer must know the heart The profession of a bare Dogmatical faith or assent cannot be it For then he that hath the faith of Devils persecutors of Christ and such as are supposed to sin against the Holy Ghost should have title Some consent therefore of the will there must be But to what if not to have Christ as he is offered who can tell A consent to be externally Baptized will not serve A consent to Baptism as Baptism comprizeth saving faith A consent to be a named Christian and to live among them may be without any profession of Christianity No man can tell where to fix nor what we must consent to to procure a Title if once we forsake the present ground If any man will give us yet a more exact Description of a faith short of justifying entitling to Baptism and the Lords Supper I shall be willing to examine it For hitherto I cannot see where I should set my foot if I should leave the ground I stand on I now come to examine the Arguments that are brought for the contrary opinion And I shall begin with Mr. Blake's and then proceed to some which others insist upon In his Treât of Sacr. pag. 161. Mr. Blake beginneth some as he calleth them Additional Arguments that a faith short of that which justifieth gives title to Baptism ARGUMENT I. Mr. Blake They that have right in the sight of God to many and great Priviledges of his gift have a right in his sight to the first and leading Priviledges this I think cannot be denied having a right to those that follow they have right to those that lead If any had in the time of the Law right to the Passeover they had right to Circumcision and if any now have right to the Lords Supper they have right to Baptism But those of a faith that is short of that which âustifies have right to many and great Priviledges in the sight of God This is clear from the Apostle Rom. 3.1 The Jew outwardly where Circumcision of heart was wanting had every way much benefit and advantage he had therefore right to Circumcision and those with him that are short of a faith that justifies have right in the sight of God to Baptism ANSWER I. The question is not in the conclusion If all be granted it s nothing for Mr. Blake's cause or against mine It is not all one to conclude those that are short of a faith that âustifies have right and such a faith gives right or is the qualification condition or evidence of right either A man that is a Burgess of such a Corporation hath right to be Major But his Burgesship gives him not that right but his election A Frenchman hath right to the Crown of France but not because he is a Frenchman The Jew outwardly Rom. 3. had not his right by a faith short of justifying But he had first an actual abode among Ordinances and the offers of Grace and helps to salvation by free providentiall disposal of mercy 2. The claim that he made to Church-priviledges before men must be upon his Professing of saving faith viz. That he took the Lord only for his God and believed in him according to the tenor of the Promise and not upon the having or Professing of a faith of another Species This answer sufficeth as to the present controversie But because Mr. Blake doth seem also to intend these Arguments to the following controversie I shall briefly enervate them as to both that I may not be put to go over them again when I come to that controversie 2. I deny that Baptism is the first and leading Priviledge of Gods gifts It is a great Priviledge to have the Gospel preached to them to have pardon conditionally offered them that is if they will accept of Christ to be converted and made a true believer to be born of Christian Parents c. These and more are Priviledges and before baptism 3. I distinguish at large of the term Right in my Apologie Here let it suffice to say 1. Right is properly so called which in this case must arise from a promise or proper gift 2. Or it is Analogically so called which ariseth 1. indirectly from Gods command to the Parent Priest Pastor c. to do this for all that require it upon a profession of true faith 2. Or from bare permission or providential disposal 4. I distinguish also the Jews case from ours They had some promise of a continuance of Ordinances among them though not for perpetuity yet for a long time which no Church on earth hath now 5. And now I answer to the Minor 1. An Analogical improper right resulting from permission and a command to Ministers to Baptize all that upon such a profession require Baptism this I ever granted to all that profess saving