the whole saving word is rejected This is that unbeliefe which doth unchristian a man and woman and if it be finall is a state of Paganisme Though it may be there be such parents in the eyes of God yet I thinke few or none are such among Christians in the eies of the church They will all professe to believe in Christ and when they are convincingly moved will lament their sins and promise to doe so no more To the application of the argument to fathers and mothers of bastards in a christian church that they are such is an unsufficient plea. And whether they bee so to the cutting of them off from Christianity in generall and making their bastards unbaptizable judge by what is said and what followeth Secondly they give another reason thus They that have no grace already conferred are not to bee made partakers of the signe and seale of grace But bastards have not grace conferred they neither actually believing nor being borne of christian parents and therefore they are not to bee baptized I answer they meane not I thinke the inward grace of actuall faith such as Abraham had for then why was Ishmael circumcised But they meane the outward grace of having right to the signe and seale of the covenant and thus their application to bastards is false understand their argument thus They that have not the outward grace of right to the signe and seale of the covenant are not baptizable What though Abraham had true actuall faith when hee submitted to circumcision doth it follow that all that succeed him in circumcision should have so also Prove that and turne Anabaptists take away circumcision and baptisme from all infants Therefore I deny the application that bastards of wicked christians have not the grace of right to baptisme They have a right to receive that right whereto their parents have a right to convey and certainely these have a right to convey the right of baptisme to their children both as they are believers of the word of salvation by Christ and as they professe to stand in such a way though they are wicked and ungodly in particular acts They have a right also to the offers of grace in a christian church and so have a right to baptisme for heerein God offereth grace by way of signe and seale of Gods covenant To understand this conceive these two points First the difference of the offer of grace to them within and to them without the church They without have a right to it in the word for I may preach the word to a Iew Turke Heathen if hee come within my limit and will heare But they within have a right unto it in the word and sacraments according to Christs commission Secondly the priviledge they have by it is not to bee graffed into the body of Christ according to the election of grace but according to the profession of the Gospel and the state of the church visible heere Thus their reasons are voide from proving that bastards are not baptizable Now marke what reasons they make and finde against them and what they answer First some of the bastards predecessours Objection 1 have beene believers and this is sufficient to admit them to baptisme according to the promise made to believers and to their posterity This is a poore objection thus propounded For what Iew Turke or Pagan is there who may not pretend that some of their predecessours have beene believers if the Gospell have beene preached thorough the world They must be predecessours in a christian church in outward covenant with God But let us see their answer They give a text to prove the contrary and require a text to oppose them Their text is Saint Paules who speaking of immediate parents saith except one of them are believers their children are uncleane but now by the faith of one they are holy They will not prove I hope that believers children are holy by an infused or derived holinesse from them for from them they are the children of wrath but onely that they have a foederall holinesse by which they have a right to baptiâ—me Neither will they prove that it is necessary to a childs baptisme to have immediate predecessours such believers as doe in all things contrary to such sinnes as doe wound or waste a good conscience It is enough iâ— one be a believet that is a doctrinall christian though like the worst in the church of Corinth If hee bee a Iew the Apostle calls him circumcision and if hee professe faith in Christ hee is a christian for his owne and his childes baptisme What though the Apostle speakes of immediate parents there where hee speakes of a church newly converted to the faith from heathenisme and so to be a church that wanted predecessours before times may wee not therefore make use of other texts more comfortable for us who have had the Gospel a long time and that sealed with such christian bloud If now they require a text to oppose them let them take that The promise is to you and to your children But they answer that the unbeliever and his children are not the posterity of the believer I say yes if they be members of a visible church Those wicked kings of Iudah that were idolaters were the posterity of Abraham and David and had right to the promiâ—es made to them yea and to the ever blessed Messias who descended from them If they repented not they had no inward comfort from him yet had they outward right unto him by vertue of the promises made to Abraham and David But they say can uncleane bastards be the seed of the believing I answer that I approve that in these termes they expresse hatred to the sinne but in that they forget a foederall cleannesse in uncleane christians children by vertue of Gods promise to believers foregoing them they goe the right way not onely to fill he I with bastards but with true begotten children whose immediate parents are too often guilty of greater sinnes then whoredome though that bee damnable enough Secondly they finde another objection Objection 2 God hath promised to shew mercy unto a thousand generations to them that love him and keepe his commandements Therefore bastards of wicked Christians are baptizable The reason should have been put thus God hath promised to shew mercy to a thousand generations of Israelites in outward communion with him for otherwise it followes not that the bastards of christians are baptizable But what answer they They say Solution 1 three things first they say it followes not because bastards are not the generation of them that love God and keepe his commandements Take heed was not Davids child got of the wife of Vrijah the generation of them that loved God at all though in that act David loved him not nor was Ishmael the generation of Abraham that loved God though in
all that came into their communion They would runne into invited and unnecessary dangers This they called martyrdom whether they suffered from themselves or others I am sure also that our forsakers will not owne these for their setters up in all points if for nothing else yet for this they had Bishops Heere was a separation long and irkesom yet surely they will not be of such an episcopall separation Thirdly besides the separatiō of Lucifer who falling at odds with Eusebius Vercellensis about the ordination of honest Paulinus departed in choler from the peace of the church and made a proud breach wee reade about the yeare after Christ three hundred seventy one of one Audeus a Syrian who raised up by the cōmon opinion of his zeal and integrity a company of followers who would not pray with other Christians and Bishops crying these downe as being too rich who also gave this reason of their separation that in the bosome of the church were suffered usurers and impure livers These sometimes dwelt in solitary places by themselves and sometimes in the suburbs of cities They fained also great holinesse and chastity and dreamed God to have mans forme and humane parts But their sect outlived not their persons and I am sure also that our forsakers wil not acknowledge themselves to bee of this condemned breed Fourthly when the thoughts of the best christians were taken up with more weighty matters and the necessity of times had invited them to faith and doctrine or the vaile of darkenesse had covered too many hearts these pettie sidings beganne to vanish and were at last utterly extinct till the light of the Gospel shined upon the church with fuller glorie againe Then as the enemy troubled the wheat with blasted corne our forsakers say they had a church againe In king Henry the eights and Luthers dayes they finde say they some congregations upon their bottome And indeed wee finde in stories that some of their vaine opinions crept into the heads of some right godly persons in other points who were ready to suffer for Christ and did so for it is hard not to fall from one extreamity to another if sound judgement according to the rule given doe not poise the lightnesse of affections But these in Germany were crowned with the name of Anabaptists whose doctrine and practise to overthrow the Church and state are well knowne and as well confuted and condemned by Luther Calvine Zanchius and an whole army of others But our forsakers I am sure will not own these in all points neither will they owne them because they forsake them also in some Fiftly therefore wee must goe lower yet and if wee come to the daies of blessed Queene Elizabeth after divers strugglings for excesses which surely is no friend to the Gospel among variety of judgements which know but in part wee meete with one Browne who first raiseth a new platforme of all the tenets of our forsakers if yet by time and age they have not made them worse This man after hee had infected some by preaching found meanes to poison others by writing of his Estate of true Christians and other pamphlets His conceits within this last age have lived and died by turnes as they have been the objects of discontēted or quiet spirits If humble soules have met with them they have seene in them the poison of peace the renting of the seamelesse coate of Christs church the building upon a covenant of workes and the hindering of the progresse of the Gospell in faith and love But if they have beene cast upon a raging sea of an unquiet and disjointed heart they have bred Barrowes Greenwoods Penries Robinsons Iohnsons Aynsworths and Smiths the onely men so farre as I know of that full straine who have tasted of more or lesse learning ill placed from Christs time downward Seeing therfore Browne is the first full-father of our forsakers who raised up their building to that height they would faine maintaine it at surely they can have no other name of justice then Brownists which they must hold except they can prove that theirs is a newer way Indeed Browne did afterward fall away from them and his owne tenets for the most part But seeing the first authour justly gives the name as that carpenter that builds an house for the building of it though afterward hee burne it down therefore I cannot bee so unjust as to suffer them by mee to bee called by any other then that they received from him in his new christianity If now you aske the issue of this discourse it is to draw to this conclusion that this church of theirs was never heard of till Brownes time and so I argue thus That which never was a true church from Christs time to the daies of Queene Elizabeth was not a true church then nor is a true church now for the gates of hell must not prevaile against it But the Brownists church was never a true church from Christs time to the dayes of Queene Elizabeth Therefore it was not a true church then nor is now as they would have it If they say that some of their opinions were of old I confesse it is true But let them shew but one church which either positively in all points which make their church to them a church or negatively in denying contrary tenets held by the true church and then they shall bee the true church for mee But it may bee they will say that the church of Rome thus disputes against us It is true and so doe wee against them about their church built up by the late councell of Trent affirming confidently that there was never one church but was under the curse of that councel if it had beene of force before But when they plead so against us wee goe to that which made true visible churches in the Apostles dayes and ever since that is professed submission to the rule of faith in the scriptures and a profession of faith in the trinity especially in Jesus Christ our Lord that rocke whereupon the church is built and so long as we have this wee feare not their plea. If they say that they doe thus much to make them a true church also It is true they doe it as wee doe and yet they denie us so doing to be a true church except wee be of their new covenant If therefore they cannot finde a church of that covenant till Brownes daies how can they bee a true church which hath never failed nor ever shall Let them duely consider this issue and God give them understanding in all things SECT 5. Of that name they would have Separatists and how unjustly assumed as a title of honour IT is most true that they are loath to acknowledge the name of Browne their father not sticking to brand him with the livery of a turne-coate if not Apostate and surely deserves to bee soundly
as those that are to be regenerated though not yet actually regenerate are not to be stayed from baptisme but the bastards of christian harlots are in such a covenant of christianity therefore they ought not to bee staied from it That it is thus with christian harlots appeares thus because if a christian church be in the covenant of christianity then all the members and matter of it are therefore the church of Corinth is called the body of Christ in respect of the covenant of christianity though fearfull wickednesse was acted in that church about word sacraments and conversation But such bastards are some of the members of a christian church therefore they ought not to bee staied from baptisme That they are meÌ„bers of a a christian church appeareth thus Because all that are within the Jurisdiction and judgement of a christian church are the members and matter of it for saith Paul What have I to do to judge them that are without but bastards of Christians are within the judgement and jurisdiction of the Church for else why were they circumcised of old and some way censured to certaine generations and why in the Christian Church have susceptors or God-fathers beene appointed for them to undertake for their education Therefore are they members of a Christian Church Secondly the proceeding of Abrahâ—m the father of the faithfull in his house when he was called into the covenant of circumcision ought to bee a president to christian Churches in the covenant of Baptisme But Ishmael was circumcised as wel as Isaack though Agar broâ—ght hâ—m forth unto bondage If then no men ought lawfully so to doe surely such Bastards are not to be denyed baptisme finally or to be suspended from it in due time understanding it as is before said Thus have I answered these questions But I know others have answered otherwise let it therefore bee heard and examined Some have answered negatively that Bastards ought not to be baptized untill their mothers be reconciled to God openly in the Church in the which her child is to be baptized let us therefore 1 Heare their reasons for their opinions 2 How they maintaine it againâ— obâ—ections made Their reasons are two First because all they and onely they may be baptized which either doe actually beleeve or are of beleeving parents but bastards in infancy doe not beleeve actually nor are of beleeving parents therefore they are not baptizable But I answer to the argument and application of it The argument is imperfect for what if bastards bee such as whose parents are unknowne in such a case the learned say well if they shall be borne among christians the law of charity is to repute theÌ„ for the children of christians if there be not a just cause to presume otherwise Therefore the argument should runne thus All they and onely they should bee baptized which either doe actually beleeve or which are of beleeving parents or in charity may bee presumed so to bee To the application of it to bastards I say none will resolutely affirme that Christian bastards while they are infants are neither actuall beleevers nor of beleeving parents nor may bee presumed so to bee will they hold that in the act of adultery there is an utter falling from the covenant of christianity Have they not read of taking the members of Christ and making them the members of an harlot or will they hold that the act of whoredome doth utterly extinguish baptismall grace in the parents I thinke they will not I know they cannot No corporation doth cast off their members from their enfranchisements before triall convictions and judgement much lesse will Christ Yet they say two things in their owne defence First that bastards beleeve not actually Indeede it were too lofty to say that they beleeve as men of yeares who are wrought upon by the word and prayer But were it not very harsh to say they are infidels Are they not members of a Church in the outward covenant of christianity as well as others Have they not read of the seedes of faith in such or that Christ speaking of little ones saith they beleeve in his name It may be he speakes of such as were admitted already into the covenant of circumcision but may not they judge charitably of Bastards in such a case seeing ye see or may see in the issue bastards to live graciously in the bosome of the Church If they know none such yet I doe blessed be God Secondly they say that the fathers and mothers of bastards are unbeleevers because they are unjust they worke from the flesh they are shut out of the Kingdome of heaven and they provide not for their owne and thus they reason They that are unjust bring forth the fruits of the flesh shut themselves out of the kingdome of heaven and provide not for their owne as they ought are unbeleevers But fathers and mothers of bastard are such therefore they are unbeleevers To this I answer two waies First in generall by using their own reason layed otherwise thus They that are unjust live in the flesh shut themselves out of heaven proprovide not for their own are unbeleevers But many christian parents of children lawfully begotten are such therefore they are unbeleevers I confesse there is some difference to be put here betwixt parents of lawfully begotten children parents of bastards because those doe it in an act of justice and goodnesse and that by Gods ordinance if they doe it as they ought and these doe it in an act of impudence and injustice But if an act of injustice and uncharitablenesse doth of it selfe make them unbeleevers as they are such then it reacheth to the one as well as to the other But there is no good religion bids us to thinke that an act of injustice in the parents should put a child both into the state of sinne in the neglect of a sacrament and into the state of punishment in being deprived of it when yet the child hath not followed nor countenanced the parents wickednesse Secondly I answer in particular to the argument and first to the ground of it that such wicked christians are not so unbelievers as to bee quite unchristianed and so to be deprived in themselves and their bastards of the sign and seale of the covenant There are two sorts of unbelievers unbelievers in part rnd unbelievers in whole unbelievers in part and in some particulars when the word of God is not so received of them as the rule of faith and obedience in some particular parts of it as it ought Of these there are to many amongst us and all christian churches From hence proceedes that they not believing the word of chastity are unchaste the word of justice are unjust and the word of care for children are carelesse and the like Vnbelievers in whole when christianity is dead in them at the roote as when
the worthy receiver It doth the first as a signe the bread and wine of the Lord these proclaime to all comers that Christ is to bee had in the use of them if they bee so disposed as they should to take him It doth the second as a seale the bread and wine which is the communion of the Lord. These proclaime to the faithfull that they shall not onely have bread and wine but Christ the Lord as that Mannah that came downe from heaven to feede them to eternall life The wicked Christian hath a right unto it as it offers grace which he hath truely offered to him on Gods part in his invitation if hee will take it on Gods condition The same right that Simon Magus had to baptisme have wicked Christians to the supper of the Lord. He professed himselfe to believe in Christ upon Philips preaching and he had a right to baptisme and was baptized It is true that baptisme is a sacrament of our ingraffing into Christ and the Lords supper of our growing into Christ But he that is a baptized Christian and hath understanding to examine and judge himselfe cannot be denyed his right to this sacrament as wel as to that Both are but the seales of one covenant and whosoever receiveth the word of Christ and professeth to accept it by faith hath a right to the offers of the grace of Christ in both the sacraments but not to the exhibiting of it if the barre of impure unbeliefe lyes betwixt God and his soule If secondly you aske what benefit this wicked man can have by this sacrament I answer hee hath the benefit of profession he doth receive Christs liverie of servants and doth submit himselfe to his ordinance and acknowledge his publick authority for the benefit of his church And this is a glorious benefit in it selfe for a christian to weare Christs badge But hee doth not receive the benefit of the body and bloud of Christ with the benefits of them to life For if he did thus eate his flesh and drinke his bloud hee had eternall life He brings his soule to the sacrament without the conditions of the covenant written upon it and so though he accept of the offer of grace in the signe yet hee carries not away the seale of it no more then Iudas did from the passeover His right and benefit therefore will bring little comfort to him at the last when his reckoning comes Thirdly this wicked man having a right to it and a benefit too such as it is to him you aske what separation Gods word will warrant from such communicants I answer that I cannot finde in the word of God that any separation was made in the sacrament by the godly from the wicked not cast out for their unworthinesse All the â—ewes that were circumcised and not cast out of their synagogues were to eate the passeover or dye the children that could eat as a sacrifice of thanksgiving and growne persons as a sacrament seale of Gods covenant So all christians that are not infants mad-men fooles and excommunicates who cannot examine and judge themselves or are after conviction notorious offenders and so cast out are not repellable if they come from the sacrament of the Lords supper It is true wee reade much in the writings of men of suspensions from this sacrament even of those that were neither children fooles mad-men demoniacks nor excommunicate persons by private ministers but I would see this for the right of it soundly proved by the undoubted rule of Christ I have read also that the blessed Fathers in the wary discipline fit for their times did not onely proclaime before the sacrament by their Deacons depart ye that are novices possessed and under your penance for your crimes but would not also admit any but the believers and the baptized so much as to see the sacrament I have reade also of the cautelousnesse of those holy men in admitting penitents to the Lords table As they first admitted them into the limits of the church next to lye down as humble suiters to forget scandall at the church porch next to heare but not stay prayers next to heare and stay prayers too next to see the sacrament of the Lords supper but not to receive it and lastly when they were sufficiently humbled and edged to those high mysteries they were admitted to the Lords table These courses had high and excellent use in those times when they were to lift up the honour of the sacrament in the sight of infidels and hold close such christians as played fast and loose with Christ as peace or persecution came And though they had not particular warrant from God yet it being done decently in order and for edification of the body had warrant sufficient from that generall rule As I have reade these things of times past and admire them so I know for the present that it were a glorious and comfortable thing if none but holy persons would draw neere unto this holy table as wee deale withall our communicants by way of exhortation and perswasion from the danger of Iudas This certainely is fullest of joy when Christ meetes with none but his faithfull servants and not one unworthy to trouble the day But if wicked Christians that are not lawfully convicted and are not notorious in law though they bee notorious in fact whether these when they will offer themselves to the sacrament as Christs servants professing his name to their owne hurt be to bee separated from by the word of Christ this is the question I know we may by way of admonition before hand tell them of the danger and by way of perswasion presse them better to prepare themselves but wee may not for their sakes discommon our selves from the table of the Lord. If it were the table of devils away we must goe but being the table of Christ if others abuse themselves at it without our fault wee must accept of Christs love and leave it to Christ to punish him or them that doe dishonour them You know many theeves in this christian common-wealth will you therefore separate your selves from the common-wealth because these theeves are in common body with you No you will leave them to the lawes of it to bee punished and as it lies in your lot doe your best to further it but you will not forsake the common-wealth So must you doe to the table of Jesus Christ The blessed Apostle saith we have received power to edifie not to destroy And if wee should fall out with Christs supper for wicked mens sake and separate from Christs ordinance because wicked men will not use it as they should and breake off from many godly persons because more wicked persons are not excommunicate for any thing I know we may more destroy then edifie But say the Brownists holy things must not bee cast to dogs and swine the childrens bread must not be