the Brownists But beside all which the Brownists can like of the Anabaptists proceed to a further reformation as they account it they become Antipaedobaptists Hereby they ingage themselves in these practises and Tenets They avow the nullity of our Baptisme first they refuse to Baptize any infant they refuse to admit to the first Sacrament any who gives not a confession of their own faith they esteem paedobaptism a great sin which according to their temper they expresse in harder or softer terms the meekest of them count it a nullity and will-worship A Secondly They presse on us a rebaptization they make it necessary to baptize over again all who in their infancy were baptized and from this they carry the name of rebaptizers It is true they deny with passion all rebaptizing for infant baptism they call a nullity so when they baptize in riper age them who before were baptized in their infancy they esteem this their action to be but the first baptism which they repeat no more B But we who know paedobaptism to be no nullity but a true and valid Sacrament cannot but call their action a second Baptism and repetition of the first So with great reason the name of rebaptizers is given unto them But to put the equity of this reproach out of doubt their great patrons now are come to defend the lawfulnesse of baptism not only twice but if ye will ten times yea so oft as you repent for sin which ought to be oftner then once a day so of Anabapâ—â—â—ts they become Hemerobaptists and more C Thirdly they exclude all infants from any interest at all in the Covenant of grace D They exclude all infants from the Covenant of grace and make circumcision a seale only of carnall promises they grant that the Jewish infants had interest in some earthly priviledges which Circumcision did seal unto them but they deny that any children whether of Jews or Gentiles have any promise of grace made to them till they come to age and beleeve so they will not have Circumcision a seal of the Covenant of grace E to any of the children of Abraham while they are infants but only of temporall benefits F By this means they make the infants of faithfull Christians and of the Turks and Pagans all equall G some of both to belong to eternall election but none of either to have any interest in the Covenant of grace till they become actuall beleevers This makes them uncertain what to say of infants dying before conversion some save them all H others incline to the damnation of them all I others professe the uncertainty of the thing whether infants before their conversion be within the kingdom of Satan or that of God K Many of them deny originall sin and assert all the articles of Arminius Fourthly many of them stumble upon originall sin some deny it altogether as if infants were not born with any sinfull corruption L or what ever sin they are born in they will have it taken away by vertue of Christs universall redemption in all mankinde as well Pagans as Christians M making baptism no more needfull in the one nor in the other for the removing or sealing of the removall of that which is removed without the means either of Word or Sacraments by vertue of a generall Covenant made with all mankinde in Adam after the fall From this ground they are drawn away to all the Tenets of Arminius Others of them flie out to the contrary extremity avowing that Adam before the fall in his very creation was corrupted with sin N and by a huge blasphemy make the very humane nature of Christ to be sinfull O and God to be the Creator of sin both in the first and second Adam P They separate from all who renounce not paedobaptisme Fiftly by their rejecting of infant Baptism they fall into the errour of rigid Separation they baptize none but actuall beleevers such as give them satisfaction of their actuall faith and holinesse thus far going along with the rigid Separatists Q But hence they proceed to another ground whereupon they leave the Separatists and 〈◊〉 who follow them not to Anabaptism R they take Baptism fâ—â— a Sacrament of initiation for a door and mean of entring into the Church these who are not baptized they count not Church members infant Baptism they pronounce a nullity and such a disobedience to the Gospel as infers Antichristianism and a reall deniall that Christ is yet come in the flesh S So the Separatists who are all baptized in their infancy and refuse to be rebaptized to them are no better then unbaptized and Antichristian rebels not capable of Church membership or of any Church communion Upon this ground as their great Patron acknowledgeth they are forced to declare the Independent and Brownistick Congregations how dear otherwise soever to be but Antichristian Synagogues and no true Churches T But here self-love does much blind them Yet they admit into their Churches many much worse then these from whom they separate for they who are so precise as to separate with the Brownists from all the reformed Churches because of their impure admissions and from the Brownists also because of their infant Baptism are notwithstanding ready to receive into their Churches those who for life and doctrine are much more impure then many from whom they separate if so be they are willing to renounce their paedobaptism as they call it and to receive of them a new true Baptism V In this they stick not to their own principles nor to the practise of their fathers for so strict were they that a small scandall in life or a little difference in doctrine would have quickly procured a cutting off from the Church by the censure of excommunication but now the world abroad may hear both of adulteries and thefts and the grossest heresies of their members without any ejection from their Churches Sixtly they esteem sprinkling no Baptism at all Sprinkling to them nullifies baptisme they will have the whole body to be plunged over head and ears in the water X this circumstance of plunging they account so necessary and essentiall to Baptism that the change thereof into sprinkling makes the Baptism to be null That such a plunging draws upon some sicknesse and death and upon women great shame and scandall while they are stripped and must stand altogether naked in the presence of men and of the whole Congregation these and other inconveniences they do not much regard Y Seventhly M. Tombs new way of those who impugn paedobaptism some go a new way of their own wherein as yet they have very few followers if any at all for to this day I have heard of â—one M. Tombs a learned and very bold man at this time when so many new ways are in hand hath thought meet to make a hotch-potch of many of them together first He is a rigid Antipaedobaptist yet
not against sprinkling with all his strength and greater diligence then any before him he impugnes paedobaptism Z Secondly though as yet I have marked nothing to fall from his pen neither from any of the old Anabaptists for the rite of dipping or against our custome of sprinkling yet in spoyling of Christian infants not only of Baptism but of all interest in the Covenant of grace He spoiles all infants of all interest in the Covenant of grace as much as the children of Turks and Pagans in making Circumcision a seal to the Jews only of earthly and temporall priviledges in denying to Jewish infants all right to the new Covenant AA He is a friend to the worst Anabaptists injurious to all who oppose them till in their riper years they became actuall believers in giving a power to persons unbaptized to baptize others BB in making apologies for the worst of the Anabaptists even those of Munster CC and invectives against the best that oppose them the first reformers DD the Assembly at Westminster EE the Church of Scotland FF M. Marshall GG M. Goodwin HH and others HH 2 he flies as high as any civill and discreet Anabaptist I have met with but in those things he goes far beyond all the Anabaptists I have heard of He makes baptisme a rite needlesse either to young or old First he esteems Baptism so unnecessary a rite that men who are meet to receive it may very well be without it as Constantine Ambrose and others did delay to their old age that Sacrament II and as it seems himself is carelesse to this day to be baptized for his infant Baptism according to his arguments must be null and another Baptism as yet it seems he has not received for he professeth an unwillingnesse to joyn himself as a member to any of the Anabaptists Churches KK I suppose they are unwilling to baptize any who will not joyn in cōmunion with them Secondly when a man is baptized according to his own minde he allows him to be oft thereafter rebaptized He allows of a frequent rebaptization even so oft as he repents for sin which by the godly is done at least ought to be done every day oftner then once LL He admits unbaptized persons to the Lords Table Thirdly he makes it lawfull for persons before they be baptized to partake of the Lords Supper MM Fourthly to shew how little inclinable he is to joyn with the Anabaptists he declares himself a compleat Erastian He is a grosse Erastian avowing that no scandalous professour ought to be kept from the Lords Table NN also that there is no such thing as any censure of excommunication OO further that Christ in Scripture has not appointed any particular government for his Church PP but that the governing of the Church belongs to the Magistrate only and to such whom he appoints to that service by vertue of a commission flowing from himself QQ The third head we proposed to speak of is the Tenets which too many of the Anabaptists are pleased to borrow from the Arminians Antinomians Antitrinitarians Familists The most of the Anabaptists are Arminians Antiscripturists and blasphemous Atheists For their Arminianism M. Marshall gives abundant testimonie RR Some years ago when Anabaptism did begin under M. Mortons Ministery to spread at London the most of them did turn grosse Arminians SS and published that hereticall Dialogue against which M. Ainsworth a little before his death did print an answer and after him M. Robinson another It is true The second Edition of their Confession is not so free of Arminianisme as the first the late Confession of the seven Churches seem to reject clearly enough all the five Articles of the Arminians but as our former witnesses testifie thousands of them care not for that Confession yea I professe I cannot conjecture at the reason why the second Edition of this Confession which alone was offered to the Parliament does change so many materiall passages of the first which point-blank did militate against Arminianisme unlesse it be their farther declination to Arminianism at the penning of their second Edition For instance the seventeenth Article in the first Edition stood thus He hath fully performed all these things by which God might reconcile his elect only In the second the word only is put away as if Christ by his sacrifice had reconciled to God all mankinde as well as the elect This our suspicion is increased by finding the same alteration acted over again in the Article twenty first where the first Edition reads it thus Christ by his death did bring forth salvation and reconciliation only for the elect in the second Edition the words reconciliation only are omitted Also in the nineteenth Article these words which are the reprobate in the second Edition are scraped out and in that same Article The execution of Gods determinate counsell whereby he delivers up his enemies to a reprobate minde to be kept unto judgement are scraped out in the second Edition Likewise in that same Article I finde two more alterations In the first among the fruits which the elect have of Christs Priesthood are set down their justification adoption regeneration and sanctification all those are omitted in the latter Edition In the first Edition it is said of the Spirit that he is never taken away when once given but doth still abide begetting and nourishing faith unto immortality this is omitted in the latter Edition I grant it is put in the 23 Article which is clear enough against the Arminian errour of perseverance had not the addition of one little word cast it all loose for in the former Edition the 23 Article did run thus Those that have this precious faith can never totally nor finally fall away but in the latter all is added all these cannot fall away c. which is very true if some few persevere albeit many and the most part of these who have justifying faith should fall away totally and finally If the ground of these and many more alterations in the second Edition of that Confession proceed from any farther inclination to Arminianism in any of the prime Leaders of these seven Churches at the time of the second subscription more then appeared at the first I cannot affirm only M. Spilsberry the chief penner as it seems of that writ does now finde the Arminian errours so troublesome among his friends that he is forced to publish a particular Treatise against them VV The chiefe Churches of the Anabaptists are grosse Arminians But what ever be the condition of the seven Churches certainly M. Lambs Congregation the greatest as they say and most fruitfull of all their Societies without comparison is pestered with this gangren the great Preachers in that flock M. Oats and M. Den make it their ordinary Theme that Christ died for all for Judas as well as for Peter XX That all the sins of the first Covenant are
and Elders the Independency of every Congregation from Presbyteries and Synods the thousand years of Christs visible raign upon earth All this new light did shine first and still burns most brightly among the Anabaptists Although many of the Tenets mentioned in the former Chapter be dissembled and denied by divers of this Sect Their Antipaedobaptisme and dipping shall here bee briefly and plainly considered yet all of them will acknowledge as their own what ever almost is practised either by the Independents or Brownists and besides two Tenets more Antipaedobaptism and Dipping all who carry the name of Anabaptisme though through ignorance they know not or through better instruction they dissent from many positions of their Brethren yet will avowedly and oft with passion professe their minde against the sprinkling of infants paedorantisme to all of them I ever heard of is an abomination It will not therefore be amisse before I leave them to speak something to those two points which all of them are content to take upon themselves as a Characteristick distinction from any other Sect. Let us then consider First whether it be lawfull to baptize any infant Secondly whether sprinkling be sufficient or if it be necessary to dip over head and eares all who are baptized Concerning the state of the first Question The state of the first question we need not controvert the quality of the infants to be baptized Whether they must be the children of true beleevers or onely of professors without scandall whether of Church members only or if it be enough that their Parents be Christians in the largest signification all this belongs to another place The onely point pertinent here is Whether any infants may be baptized The champions for the Anabaptists side in their Declaration of the publick Dispute intended by them with the City Ministers for their Tenet set down their These in these expresse terms No infants ought to be baptized The formall contradiction hereof is Some infants ought to be baptized for this Position I propone some few Scripturall reasons Who have leisure to see this point debated at length may look upon the worthy and judicious Writs of M. Marshall M. Black M. Geere M. Ainsworth also in his last Writ and M. Cotton in his latest learnedly and zealously maintain this truth against the Anabaptists The first reason for the affirmative My first reason I frame thus Who ever have a good right to the first Sacrament of the New Testament ought to be baptized But some infants have a good right to the first Sacrament of the New Testament Ergo Some infants ought to be baptized The major is naturally clear it needs no more for its proof but the explication of the terms of the Proposition for Baptism and the first Sacrament of the New Testament are one thing and ought to be baptized is nothing else but to have a good right to Baptism Who have right to the chief promises have right to some of the seals which God has appointed to be a means of assurance of these promises unlesse the Lord himself have made a speciall exception All the question lies in the minor which thus I prove Who ever have right to the chief promises of the New Testament they have right to the first Sacrament of the New Testament if the Lord have not put some impediment to their participation of that Sacrament But some infants have right to the chief promises of the New Testament and the Lord has put no impediment to their participation of that Sacrament Ergo. About the major I see one and but one makes some velitation all the rest give it for granted for it is grounded likewise on the nature of the terms of the proposition the chief promises of the New Testament and the first Sacrament this is the sign and seal that the thing signified The reason proceeds not from every thing signified to every sign but from the chief thing signified to the first sign some of the blessings which Circumcision did seal belonged to Melchisedek to Lot to Job and others who were not so farre as we reade circumcised but the main promises sealed by Circumcision In thy seed all the Nations of the earth shall be blessed The Messias comming of the posterity of Abraham Isaac and Jacob the Covenant of grace as it was administred under the figures of the Ceremoniall Law did belong to the people of Israel alone and to the proselytes who joyned themselves to their body Nor do we speak but of the first sign for unlesse there be a right to this there is a right to none and where the Lord has appointed signes to seal up thereby the assurance of his promises to deny to them whom God wil have to be assured of the promise the use of all the seals which he has instituted to be the spirituall means of that assurance were on mans part a great unjustice except the Lord himself have put a barre to the participation of these seals as in the Sacrament of Circumcision of old he did to women and to male infants before the eighth day and to all born in the Wildernesse during the time of their fourty years wandering therein But it is upon the minor that our Adversaries bestir themselves to purpose they deny stoutly both its parts Infants have good right to the promises of the Covenant of grace all the Scripturall objections which they can make against infants baptism they count impediments put by God to paedobaptism and upon this ground they deny the last part of the minor this we shall consider when we come to answer their objections it were not so pertinent in this place The first part likewise of the minor they deny affirming that no infants have right to any promise of the New Testament before the time of their actuall faith which they say cannot possibly be in them before the years of their discretion This is the greatest and most dangerous knot in the whole debate for we do not so much contend for the outward Sacrament to infants as for their spirituall right in God and his promises all our adversaries deny to all infants all right in God all interesses in his promises and Covenant as much as they do to Turks and Pagans Some of both say they may be elected and saved but neither of both have any place in the Covenant of grace or any Gospel promises till they be called by the Word and by an actuall faith have embraced the Gospel If therefore we make good the right and interest of any infants in the chief promises of the New Testament we establish the main hinge of this whole controversie For this end we will endeavour to clear from Scripture these four propositions First that the infants of the Jews had reall and true interest in the Covenant of grace even before the comming of Christ Secondly that the infants of the Jews had that same right in the Covenant of
Testament where the administration is much changed the new covenant wants not both its sacramentall ceremonies and the promises of this life but none of those adjuncts doe change the state and nature of the principall it remains ever a covenant of pure grace without any mixture it is neither in the whole nor in any substantiall part turned into a covenant of works it may not lose its denomination if it keeps its nature it may neither be counted wholly a covenant of works nor a mixed covenant of grace and works For the other part of the similitude that Circumcision and Baptisme as they are seals of the same covenant so they are both initiating seals Both Circumcision and Baptisme are initiating seals ceremonies whereby the first solemn entry into this covenant is made is scarce controverted by any of circumcision the thing is evident whatever covenant it sealed it was an initiating seal thereof for it was the very first ceremony exercised about any person they of age at their profession of the faith were circumcised and infants in the eight day of their life no uncircumcised person might enter the Tabernacle or Temple or eat of the Paschall supper The same is true of Baptisme upon those of age who professe faith Christ immediately puts Baptisme Goe preach and baptize none may participate of the Lords Supper who is not before baptized this was the order of the Apostolick Churches Acts 2.38.41 42. The Apostle exhorts his hearers first to repent and be baptized this being done thereafter they goe to the breaking of bread M. Tombs the over-turner of this order is deserted herein as in many other of his notions by all the Anabaptists I know Thus the parts of the analogy which we touch upon are made good as for our inference that Baptisme being an initiating sign of the same covenant in which Circumcision initiates therefore as Circumcision was administred to infants in their solemn admission to the covenant under the Law so baptisme ought to bee administred to infants in their solemn admission to the same covenant under the Gospel The main things objected against this conclusion are two first that neither under Law nor Gospel infants were admitted to any covenant of grace I grant if this exception were made not to the conclusion which is an informal way of answering but to the consequence or antecedent or some proposition it is very relevant if it were true but in the former argument I have demonstrated from divers clear Scriptures its falshood Their other exception is There needs not a particular command for the application of a sacrament to the divers ages and sexes and conditions of persons that the parallel were it most harmonious in never so many things yet if it be to the purpose it must hold also in this that as Circumcision had an express command for its application to infants so must Baptism We answer that this exception is the very point in question which this whole argument and the former and all that follows intend to prove that for the application of Baptism to infants there is so much of a divine commandment as is requisite in such a case That expresse cōmands are not required for the application of ordinances to the diverse ages sexes and conditions of subjects is clear in a number of instances Who ever did require a particular command or expresse institution for admitting of women to the Lords Supper for the baptisme of old men the baptisme of Kings of Queens of Merchants and so forth If the premises therefore be granted as we have proved them from Scripture that infants are in the covenant of grace that Circumcision was and Baptisme is a Sacramentall seal initiating and solemnly bringing into this covenant all who are admitted thereto and that Circumcision did initiate infants therein it will not in reason be avoided but Baptisme must still do the same and that to deny Baptisme the initiating seal of the covenant of grace to infants is nothing else but the excluding of them from the covenant of grace it self It is Mr Tombes remark that under the very Law Baptism was in use Infants Baptisme under the Law and Mr Marshall addes very judiciously from the Talmud from Maimonides and other Authors that who ever were circumcised among the Jews were also baptized infants as well as their parents women as well as men That this custome of baptizing all who were added to the church children as well as parents did constantly continue in all ages of the Christian church is proved by many without any satisfactory reply but we intend here to dispute from Scripture alone Our third argument we take from Mat. 28.19 The third argument from Mat. 28.19 Goe ye therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father of the Son and of the holy Ghost Hence we reason thus To whom that commission of the Apostles to baptize did extend they are commanded to be baptized But to some infants that commission of the Apostles does extend Ergo. The minor only is questionable we prove it by these reasons first To whom the chief matter of that commission does belong to them the commission does extend But to some infants the chief matter of that commission does belong The promises of the Gospel belong to infants for the chief matter thereof was the glad tidings of salvation in Christ the holy covenant and mercy promised to the Fathers the oath sworn to Abraham as Zachary expounds it Luke 1.72 73. Now that the covenant and promise in the very tearms of it concerned infants as much as any appears by the words of God to Abraham Gen. 17.7 I will be thy God and the God of thy seed and Peter Acts 2.39 does preach expresly that this promise did belong as well to his hearers children as to themselves Infants are not in a worse condition under the Gospel then under the Law A second proof if this commission of the Gospel of salvation and its initial seal extend not to any infants then the extent of the covenant of grace should be much straiter among the Gentiles then it had been among the Jews for infants are a great part of every Nation and among the Jews the covenant in the promise of grace and of glory and in the seals of both was extended to infants as well as to any others so if among the Gentiles now under the Gospel infants were excluded it would be a very sensible and pitifull restraint of the covenant but a very absurd one for every christian Nation has the covenant of grace communicate to them in no worse but in much better tearms then the Jews of old All who are baptized needs not be capable of teaching The great objection against al this is this argument None are the objects of baptisme but who first are the objects of teaching But infants are not the objects of teaching Ergo. We answer that both the
have all their children excluded not onely from the seals but from the covenant it self and all its gracious promises either of grace or glory and from every spirituall blessing It must be a very clear Scripture that ought to perswade so great a change of Gods administration of his covenant and its seals so much to the worse of that which is confessed was before his usuall practise and command A fifth reason Arg. 5. from Christs laying of his hands on infants and blessing them Whosoever by Gods expresse direction and practise is admitted to his favour and blessing and to the outward signs and seals thereof may be baptized But by Christs expresse direction and practise some infants are admitted to his favour and blessing and to the outward signs and seals thereof Ergo. The major is grounded upon the nature of baptisme which is a seal of Christs blessings they to whom the blessing of Christ and the outward seal thereof belongs why should they not be admitted to baptisme when once the Lord has solemnly declared his will to initiate all to whom his blessings belong by the seal of baptisme The minor is clear from Mat. 19.13 Mat. 19.13 Then were there brought unto him little children that he should put his hands upon them and pray and the Disciples rebuked them but Jesus said Suffer little children and forbid them not for of such is the kingdome of heaven and he laid his hands on them also Mar. 10.13 14 15 16. Mark 10.13 14 15 16. And they brought young children to him that he should touch them and his Disciples rebuked those that brought them but when Jesus saw it he was much displeased and said unto them Suffer little children to come unto me and forbid them not and he took them up in his arms put his hands upon them and blessed them Here the Lord commands children to be brought to him he is much displeased and reproves his Disciples for stopping of them he laid his hands upon them and blessed them declaring that of such was the kingdome of heaven Exceptions against these places tâ—ken off To this argument three things are answered First that the children mentioned were not infants but grown to such years as made them capable of instruction Secondly that their blessing was not spirituall but a temporall health Thirdly that the sign and seal mentioned is not baptisme but imposition of hands To the first we reply that the children were not of so many years as made them capable of instruction for the text cals them expresly young and little ones Secondly they were so young that they could not walk they were brought to Christ they did not come but in the arms of their parents Christ also took them up in his own arms Thirdly if they had been capable of instruction the Apostles could not have been offended for they knew that it was their masters office and delight to instruct all who were capable and the comming of such to the great Doctor could have given no offence To the second the text gives not the least hint that any bodily cure was either required or given Secondly the blessings given were such as Christ is desired to seek from the Father by prayer and these could not but be the best blessings even spirituall and everlasting Thirdly it 's expressed in the place that the greatest of all blessings was theirs even the very kingdome of heaven While this is denyed by the adversaries affirming that the kingdome of heaven belongs not to infants but onely to those who are like them the text refels this their shift for the kingdome of heaven must belong much more to themselves then to such who were onely like them The scope and intention of Christ in this place is not to speak of the condition of others like to infants but of infants themselves who were unjustly stopped by the Apostles to come to him and the Lord is pleading for the admission onely of infants to him upon this reason that heaven belonged to such which had been an impertinent argument for his conclusion if heaven had not belonged to infants at all who upon this reason are required to be admitted to him Farther if infants were to be admitted to Christ because heaven belonged to these who resembled them in some qualities it would follow that doves lambs serpents stones and trees might have been brought to him upon this reason as well as infants for men resembling these creatures in their good qualities are to goe to heaven As for their third answer it is very true that the signe in the place alledged was not baptism this was never alledged for we read nothing of the baptism of the parents of these infants who were presented to Christ as yet the command of baptism was not made so publick as afterward when the Lord at his ascension sent out his Disciples in the power of the holy Ghost to gather a formed Church and to baptize beleevers and their children the reason proceeded not from baptisme but to baptisme and that à loco disparatorum since imposition of hands a seal of Christs grace and blessing and of the kingdome of heaven belonged to infants that therefore baptisme a seal of that same kind when once the Lord had solemnly at his ascension appointed it to be the ordinary seal of initiation into his Church ought not to be denyed unto them A sixth reason Arg. 6. Infants under the Law were baptized Infants were baptized as well as their parents by Moses baptisme Ergo Infants as well as their parents ought to be baptized by Christs baptisme The antecedent is the Apostles 1 Cor. 10.1 2. 1 Cor. 10.1 2. M râ—over brethren I would not that ye should be ignorant how that all our fathers were under the cloud and all passed through the sea and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the Sea The Father 's baptized in the cloud and in the sea were the whole people as well young as old for no doubt the infants went as well through the cloud and the sea as their parents The consequence is proved thus the reasons which may be brought for the exclusion of infants from being baptized with their parents by Christs baptisme militar as much against their being baptized with their parents by Moses baptisme Therefore if notwithstanding they were admitted to the one baptisme they may as well be admitted to the other If it be said that the infants did with their parents in the wildernesse eat of the Manna and drink of the rock yet may they not now be admitted with their parents to eat and drink at the Lords Table We answer there is no such necessary evidence of the infants eating of the Manna and drinking of the rock as of their passing through the cloud and sea this necessity was simple and absolute the other not so for infants may live on their mothers breasts and the milk of cattle without
Church visible but reprobates The argument to the contrary that only Jews are Abrahams seed according to the flesh is not good for these very Scriptures Gal. 3. 4. which they cite for its ground do distinguish the children of Abraham according to the flesh and according to the promise the children of Sarah and Hagar these that were born of the free-woman the Jerusalem above and the bondwoman Sinai and Jerusalem upon earth all this is applied to the Galatians who were Gentiles the one part of the distinction to those of them who were justified by faith the other to those of them who pleaded for a justification by the works of the Law and thereby lay under the bondage and curse of the Law If both parts of the distinction may not be applied to the Gentile Galatians the ground of the Apostle his argument and of his whole discourse is overturned This Arg. many ways absurd The other part of the minor is far more absurd That only actuall believers are the children of the promise for if so then first at one breath all Christian Infants are blown out of heaven none of them have any more interest in Christ in grace and in salvation then Turks and Pagans Thus farre the most of the Anabaptists wont not to goe but the Disputants professe it is their reall meaning their retortion here upon us is very silly that we do put Christian infants in as evill a condition as they by granting all infants to be born in originall sin for they know that we joyn to this a second assertion That the elect infants of believing Parents though born in sin and the children of wrath by nature as well as others yet by supernaturall grace and mercy are born under the new Covenant and have their right and interest both in the Covenant of grace and the seals thereof Secondly by this Doctrine the Disputants cut off all Jewish infants from any interest in the promises of grace Isaac himself Jacob and Joseph cannot be children of the promise in their childhood but according to the Disputants they must be children according to the flesh totally flesh without the Covenant of grace that so they behoved to remain till they came to those yeares wherein they did actually believe and by this actuall faith became children of the promise which promise before their actuall faith did no more belong to them then to any other of mankinde Thirdly by this argument Circumcision is made to be a seal only of a Covenant of works So Isaac and the rest of the Patriarchs by their Circumcision had no promise of grace sealed unto them all of them except Abraham at the time of their Circumcision and many years after were under a Covenant of works only all of them to the years of their discretion and actuall faith were incapable of any interest in the Covenant of grace strange absurdities Fourthly by this argument they must professe that none but true believers justified sanctified and elect persons are under the Covenant of grace that such onely have right to participate of the Sacraments the seals of that Covenant and that such only can be lawfull members of any true Church They reject our distinction of an outward and inward Covenant of grace We teach that the Covenant of grace in the outward administration thereof both in preaching the promises and applying the seals of the Sacraments is to be proponed by Gods appointment to all the outward visible members of the Church But the inward saving grace of this Covenant whether in preaching of the word or administring the Sacraments is by the holy Ghost conferred onely upon the true living invisible members of Christs mysticall body By this common and necessary distinction we escape easily that blot of Arminianism which they would lay upon us for although we put all whom we baptize and all to whom we preach as to Church members under the outward administration of a gracious Covenant yet do we not grant any true saving grace to any but the elect and regenerate who do never totally and finally fall away But the most of our adversaries are full grosse Arminians yea their refusing to distinguish betwixt the outward and inward Covenant or something equipollent does draw them to all these and greate absurdities Thâ— 7 8. and 9. Arg. are but repetitions Their seventh argument is a meer Battology Infant Baptism say they is unlawfull and will-worship because not administred according to the rule of the word having neither precept nor example nor rule for it Ans We need not repeat what was said before to the same thing only we observe that they insist upon the baptizing of true believers only for they speak here in terminis that they only of the Gentiles might be baptized who did sincerely believe and they prove this from Acts 8.37 so then it shall be as unlawfull to baptize the fairest professors if hypocrites as to baptize infants Their eighth argument is another Battology to wit that infant Baptism is unlawful because Christ did not command his Apostles to preach and practice it Their ninth argument is of the same nature That infant Baptism is unlawfull because it is no part of the revealed will of God to those tautologies our former answers need not be repeated The absurdities of every one of the nine arguments These be the nine great arguments wherewith the Ministers of the City were to be confounded their mouths for ever to be stopped and the peoples eies to be opened so clearly that with chearfulness they might renounce their old receive a new Baptism yet I am in the opinion that the keeping of those arguments within doors had served much more for the honour of the Authors for every one of them is clogged with its own proper absurdity The first makes example alone a full and compleat rule of practice in all ordinances The second is grounded upon a wilde logick notion of such an essentiall difference as makes a man in his riper years differ essentially from himself in his infancy The third cuts off all reasoning from Scripture but in terminis were the consequence never so clear The fourth makes Christ and the Apostles ordinary practice of clearing their doctrine from the Law and the Prophets to be no lesse a wickednesse then Antichristianisme and the deniall of the comming of Christ in the flesh The fifth makes the personall example of Christ a full and compleat rule of all Gospel ordinances The sixth denys Isaac Jacob Joseph or any of Abrahams elect seed when they were circumcised to have had any right at all in the covenant of grace also it imports that no infant either of Jew or Gentile had ever any interest in God more then a Turk or a Pagan before they come to so ripe years as actually to beleeve and repent The seventh eighth and ninth are meer repetitions of the third and import clearly the unlawfulnesse of the baptisme and
New Testament p. 34 They deny angels and devils and souls They deny heaven and hell and eternall life They cast away all the Ordinances of God p. 35 David George to them was spirituall Christ much more excellent then Christ crucified Many people were ready to seal with their bloud all these abominations The monster David George did live and die in plenty and peace The best of the Anabaptists have very grosse errors The Mennonists deny originall sinne p. 36 In the points of election redemption grace free-will perseverance justification perfection they are grosser then the Arminians or Iesuites They are yet more absurd They deny the omnipresence of God They deny the Trinity And the truth of Christs humanity p. 37 They refuse all consequences from Scripture They refuse reasoning from the Old Testament The covenant with Abraham they make carnall They exclude all infants from the covenant of grace CAP. III. The modern tenets of the Anabaptists in England THe spirit of Anabaptisme clearly devillish p. 47 The fair profession of many English Anabaptists not to bee trusted What errours may be charged upon all what onely upon some of them p. 48 The confession of the seven Churches is a very imperfect and ambiguous declaration of their judgement Let no errour be charged upon any man which he truly disclaims A brief sum of all the Anabaptists errors Every Anabaptist is at least a rigid Separatist p. 49 Though the Independents offer to collude with the Anabaptists yet they separate from the Independents no lesse then from the Brownists as antichristian p. 50 They avow all their members to be holy and elect and some of them are for their perfection p. 51 After they have separate from all other Churches they run next away from their own selves They charge one another with Antichristianisme They are Independents They put all Church power in the hand of the people They give the power of preaching and celebrating the Sacraments to any of their gifted members out of all office p. 52 Even unto women They must not preach in a Steeple-house p. 53 All Tithes and all set Stipends are unlawfull their Preachers must work with theit own hands and may not goe in blacke cloathes They celebrate the Lords Supper in any common Innes after another feast All the new light of the Independents and Brownists is borrowed from the Anabaptists The anointing of the sick with oyle the rejecting of the Lords Prayer of all set Psalms of Vniversities and humane learning are the Anabaptists inventions The Independent Apologists are for liberty to most of the Sects 54 And some of their prime friends are for a generall liberty to all 55 The Anabaptists deny all power to Magistrates in any thing which concerns Religion Turkisme Popery Atheisme the greatest blasphemies they would not have punished with so much as a discountenance They presse a liberty for preaching and propagating openly all errours imaginable Yet they grant that errour is a soul-murder and a greater crime then the destruction of a King of a Parliament of a whole Nation p. 56 They hate the Covenant They are injurious to the Scots p. 57 All punishing of errour with them is persecution They presse liberty of conscience much out of policy p. 58 The granting of all this liberty will not assure the Magistrates of the Sectaries civill obedience p. 59 The tenets and practise of the Sectaries destroy Magistracy They professe their design to overturn from the ground the government of our State as now it stands Kings and Lords are no more tolerable Neither is the House of Lords any longer to be endured p. 60 The poorest begger in the land has a share of the Soveraignty above the King and Parliament All former Laws and Acts of Parliament must be abolished p. 61 The will of the multitude must stand for the Soveraign Law hereafter p. 62 The three fundamentall Laws of our new Vtopian Republick p. 63 According to reason and experience the present distemper of the Sectaries is posting on fast to a Dictatorship and absolute Tyranny in the hand of one The State in danger by the Sectaries principles p. 64 The greatest purchase which the overturners of States usually make is a late repentance p. 65 CAP. IV. Their Antipaedobaptisme Arminianisme Arrianisme Familisme and other wicked errours ALL Anabaptists are for Antipaedobaptisme They avow the nullity of our Baptisme p. 89 They presse on us a re-baptization They exclude all infants from the covenant of grace and make Circumcision a seal onely of carnall promises Many of them deny originall sin and assert all the articles of Arminius p. 90 They separate from all who renounce not Paedobaptisme Yet they admit into their Churches many much worse then these from whom they separate p. 91 Sprinkling to them nullifies Baptisme M. Tombes new way He is a rigid Antipaedobaptist yet not against sprinkling He spoils all infants of all interest in the covenant of grace p. 92 He is a friend to the worst Anabaptists and injurious to all who oppose them He makes Baptisme a rite needlesse either to young or old He admits of a frequent re-baptization He admits unbaptized persons to the Lords Table He is a grosse Erastian The most of the Anabaptists are Arminians p. 93 The second Edition of their confession is not so free of Arminianism as the first The chief Churches of the Anabaptists are grosse Arminians p. 94 Many of them are Antinomians laying aside all care of morall duties Making all grief for sin unlawfull p. 95 Denying Christs satisfaction and reconciliation of God to men The best of them are inclineable to Libertinisme The Antinomian controversies are not as the prime Independents doe make them onely about words and methods of preaching p. 96 Many of the Anabaptists are become Seekers denying all Churches all Officers all Ordinances Many of the Anabaptists are become Antitrinitarians p. 97 Richardson one of their prime leaders a blasphemer of the Trinity p. 98 Divers of them are abominable bl sphemers of Christs Person Others of them are become perfect Atheists They evert and reject the whole Scripture p. 99 Many of them are turned Familists denying the immortality of the soul Denying Heaven and Hell Angels and Devils Some of them make the world eternall others all creatures to perish p. 100 Some deny all resurrection others make the beasts rise to glory They teach abominable obscenities They follow David George in his greatest absurdities The divine light of their new Prophet The fall of Adam and the clearest Scriptures are but allegories The whole Divinity suffered in the Person of Christs humanity p. 101 The great light which this Prophet brings from heaven is that all the Devils and all the Reprobates shall be saved by his Gospel Randall his grosse Familisme p. 102 No resurrection no heaven no hell after this life The Saints in this life become as perfect as God The clearest Scriptures are false in a literall sense That God is
old Anabaptists were farre from embracing divers of the fore-mentioned abominations yet it cannot be denied but the best of them did cast open their heart to more foul errours then any Protestant Church could ever allow of Take me the Mennonists themselves the ill best of all who have carried the name of Anabaptists although they anathematize the Georgian Heresie yet they approve so farre of the Monasterians that they do much excuse all their wicked practices and put no doubt of their Saintship and acceptation with God notwithstanding of all the crimes which the world charges upon them NNN The Mennonists deny originall sinne Generally they deny originall sin for all of them dispute so passionately against the baptism of infants that many before they be aware do drive themselves into the gulf of Pelagianisme denying all originall corruption and making infants without all iniquity that so to them baptism may be in vain for to what purpose is washing to those who are not defiled OOO In the points of election redemption grace free-will perseverance justification perfection they are groster then either the Arminians or Jesuits From hence they are carried not only to the possibility but the facility of fulfilling all Gods Commandements avowing that among them divers men become perfect without all sin who ought not to crave from God a remission of any transgression because there is none PPP this brings on justification by inherent righteousnesse QQQ Also the Doctrine of freewill of the great power of nature without speciall grace to act much towards salvation and of the absolute power of the will to reject the most efficacious grace and to apostatize totally and finally from all grace received RRR being come this length they step easily over to the universality of Christs redemption SSS and so to the intention of God to save all and every one without any previous eternall immutable Decree of election or reprobation TTT In all these conceits of Pelagius the most sober of the old English Anabaptists were much grosser then the absurdest either of the Jesuits or Arminians as may be seen in the late Tractates of Robinson and Ainsworth against them They are yet more absurd This Pelagianism brings them on to the late Atheisme of Vorstius and the madnesse of Manes against the Divine essence and nature also to the old and late Antitrinitarian Heresie of Photinus Arius Socinus Swenckfeldius and others against the three Persons of the Godhead against both the natures of Christ and his Priestly Office They make God to be of a mutable nature They deny the omnipresence of God and so not of an absolute simplicity but to have some composition yea somthing of a body also in his essence not to be infinite nor omnipresent VVV For the three Persons They deny the Trinity they deny the truth of Christs Divinity XXX and all the subsistence of the holy Ghost YYY As for the price of Christs death they count it not of an infinite value nor his blood being but of a meer creature to be properly satisfactory to the Divine Justice ZZZ They make him a Saviour not by way of any proper redemption And the truth of Christs humanity but by the example of his holinesse and the impetration of his prayers Neither do they permit him to enjoy without injury his humane nature they deny that he took any flesh of the Virgin Mary but they make his body to be created without all consanguinity with the first Adam denying really that he was either the seed of Abraham or the son of David or the son of Mary AAAA They refuse all consequences from Scripture When in their debates against the baptism of infants they are straited with consequences from the circumcision of infants and the promises of the Covenant made with Abraham and his children many of them do run out so far as to deny all scripturall consequences refusing with the Jesuit Veron in their reasonings all deductions though never so necessary and clear requiring for every thing they will admit expresse and syllabicall Scriptures BBBB They refuse reasoning from the old Testament When they finde that this poor shift does not the deed they arise a little higher and deny that any thing from circumcision can conclude us the Books of the old Testament being now cut off from being any more a rule of faith or manners to Christians CCCC I do not speak of those who proceed to reject all Scripture and in place both of Law and Gospel set up their own dreams and revelations for divine and infallible verities The Covenant with Abraham they make carnall Upon the same argument they come to two other absurdities for first they change the nature of the new Covenant of grace with Abraham and his seed making all the promises thereof to be of things carnall and temporall DDDD and when this shift is not sufficient to elude our arguments they come to a second They exclude all infants from the covenant of grace whereby they exclude all infants from the Covenant of grace and any interest in Christ or his promises making no difference between the children of Pagans and Christians of godly and ungodly taking from both all the ordinances and means of salvation and yet putting both in the state of salvation without Christ by vertue of their own naturall inherent originall righteousnesse The Testimonies of the second Chapter A Bullinger p. 17. At the first they aimed chiefly at separation to have a separate Church of their own wherefore who ever assented unto that separation and who did leave the Popish the Protestant and all other Churches that they might live in the new society of the Anabaptists which they did call the true and acceptable Christian Church those the chief leaders of the Sect did receive into their Church by Anabaptisme in sign of their separation B Vide supra Cap. 1. Also Clopenburgs Preface p. 5. However after the trouble of Munster the Anabaptists have casten away corporall arms and by them troubles not Common-wealths yet they do not permit the purer reformed Churches to be builded without dayly combats C Bullinger lib. 1. p. 11. In their separate Congregations they did cry mightily against pride against gluttony and drunkennesse blasphemy and other crimes they led a life in appearance spirituall they sighed oft and did not laugh in reproofs they were vehement they spoke excellently by this means they purchased admiration and authority to themselves among simple and pious people who did speak thus Let other men say of the Anabaptists what they please I do see nothing in them but gravity I do hear nothing but that we should not swear nor do wrong to any but live piously and soberly so I see no evill in them Ibid. p. 52. The most part of the Anabaptists and at the beginning these of Munster themselves were lowly and humble farre from all greatnesse and splendour for they did inveigh
remedies provided for this monstrous evill but it is a pity to see the strange stupidity and feneantise of the most even of them whose interest in God ought to make them upon all hazards much more diligent agents for the relief of his strangely contemned and pitifully trod down truth I speak not of temporall punishments if the Magistrate will employ none of his power for the honor of that God who has set him in his place and preserves him therein nor for the relieving of the perishing souls of the people over which he rules let him prepare to answer for it as he may for it will be the principall Item of his great account onely let him be content to want the compassion of all beholders when God little to his honour shall vindicate his own glory and when Divine Justice lets the seduced multitude fully loose to pull out of his hand all power no lesse about civill then spirituall objects which easily might have kept the people in order and obedience both to God and him if it had been in any season or even yet were in any wisedome or courage imployed towards them But that which I most regrate is to see sundry unto whom God has committed the keeping of his truth and whom he has indued with very notable parts above many so sparing and coldriffe so sober and temperate so calme and wise in managing the Battels of their Master against the Enemies of his dearly beloved truth as if all their zeale were no more mixed but totally overmastered and well-near drowned in their moderation and prudence It is the opinion of many that the enemies of the truth have been assisted in their evill work of seducing millions of the Sheep of Christ by no one means more then the tepidity of some gracious and orthodoxe yet too wise and somwhat fearfull and faint-hearted Divines How desperate soever the faults as well of good as of evil men have made the disease of the Church this day yet it must never be altogether too late and unseasonable for the servants of Christ to get up from their sleep and with some peece of more zeal towards their Masters honour and of pity towards their perishing Brethren to set upon their too too long neglected duties The Testimonies of the fourth Chapter A Treatise of Baptism p. 356. There may be many great fails in an action which may not make it null or nothing but these essentiall fails which may be said to nullifie it can never be repaired by any act afterwards such are the fails of infant Baptism as enter into the very essence of it namely the formall and materiall causes so as if you ask what I lay to the charge of infant Baptism I say that it is nothing as the Scripture saith an idoll is nothing of what act soever ye may justly say this is a nullity no act can repair that to give it a being I may affirm with more equity and reason that infant Baptism is not a Sacrament but a rash mockery for deceiving by no means to be endured in the Church The vanity of childish Baptism second Part p. 30. That administration of Baptism which overthrows the very nature of the Covenant of grace and whole Gospel of Christ is Antichristian and abominable It is most certain that the Baptism of infants is the greatest delusion and a thing of as dangerous a consequence as ever the Man of Sinne brought into the world and therefore the greatest maintainers thereof are justly to be esteemed the greatest deluders pag. 30. B Treatise of Baptism p. 36. If this be not to be repeated because neither in precept nor example you finde it so then must this be the first because in precept and example you finde it so and never otherwise In a word Baptism of old hath been called and not without reason Sacramentorum Janua C Tombs examen p. 23. Because it goes so currant that rebaptization is not onely an errour but also an heresie let me begge of you one good argument to prove it unlawfull in se or intrinsecally I mean without respect to scandall or in the like cause by accident for a man that hath been baptized rightly to be baptized again We are regenerated by Baptism and a man is born but once but are we not born again by the word and must that be but once preached is not sin mortified the Church sanctified by Baptism and are not these often and for example if there were as good for paedobaptism as that Acts 19.5 6. for rebaptizing the controversie were at an end with me M. Marshall challenges him upon this new errour but he still defends it p. 53. As for M. Marshals arguments they are not convincing to me nor is the holding rebaptization such a new opinion as he would make it D Richardson against Featly p. 6. Paedobaptism tends to make Gods holy Ordinance a lying sign to confirm that which visibly is not secret things belong to God and revealed things to us Deut. 29.29 And seeing such infants appear not to have any right in the Covenant they are not to have the seal of the Covenant it being against the light of nature to set a seal to a blank and that any should have a visible right to the seals c. and yet not godly is strange Doctrine E Declaration concerning the publick dispute by Knols c. p. 16. Beleevers onely themselves and not their infants are accounted the spirituall seed of Abraham or his seed according to faith Vanity of childish Baptism p. 18. None of Abrahams children nor the naturall seed of any other in the world are to be accounted the seed unto whom the promise and Covenant is made untill they beleeve Ibid. p. 21. Circumcision was not by God ordained nor by Abraham understood to be to the persons circumcised a seal of their being in the Covenant and much lesse of their being regenerated F Cornwels Vindication p. 5. This Popish consequence of Baptizing the infants of beleevers doth instate all the infants of the beleeving Gentiles to be born in a Covenant of grace and to have a right of a promise of life in Christ Jesus The vanity of childish Baptism second Part p. 4. The children of beleevers are not in the Covenant of grace G Ibid. But here they object and say Hath the children of beleevers no more priviledge then the children of Heathens Turks and Infidels Answ In respect of the Covenant of grace and salvation none at all Ibid. p. 19. Beleevers are Fathers of their own children no otherwise then they are Fathers of Jews and Turks children which is when they beleeve and not before Declaration by Cocks p. 17. But some may think that this will put the children of beleevers into as bad a condition as the children of Turks Heathens and any other wicked men and this they are perswaded is a horrible thing and a dangerous opinion we put not the children of beleevers into as bad a
condition as the children of Turks c. It was Adams disobedience in eating the forbidden fruit that put all his posterity equally into a sinfull and miserable condition H Storming of Antichrist p. 53. This opinion puts all infants of beleevers into the same condition with Turks and Indians Answ As the infants of Turks and Christians dying infants are all alike free from actuall sin being onely guilty of originall why may they not partake of the same benefit of free grace why may we not have charitable thoughts concerning the salvation of Turkish infants seeing we know nothing of their damnation and we reade not of any one in Scripture damned meerly for originall sin the innocency of all infants so dying is the same in respect of actuall sin I Bakwels Answer p. 2. Here I doubt they exclude all infants that die in their infancy from salvation because they are not capable of such knowledge of God and Christ you answer saying you know not what is this knowledge neither hath the Scripture revealed any such that were saved K Tombs Apology p. 64. The truth is I neither leave infants in the Devils nor Gods visible Kingdome for I conceive they are in neither Kingdome visibly till they declare by their profession to whom they belong visibly Ibid. p. 66. I suppose in reference to the present point this is the truth that however every infant is either in the invisible Kingdome of God or Satan that is elect or reprobate yet no child till he make profession doth visibly belong either to the one or to the other I acknowledge that in the visible Church of the Jews the infants were reckoned to the Church and the reason was from the peculiar Church State of the Jews L Gangren first Part p. 20. There is no originall sin in us only Adams first sin was originall sin M Ibid. p. 1. of the second division Henry Den in a conference with M. Strong delivered that Christ did satisfie for the sins committed against the first Covenant Being urged that the Heathen then must all be saved because their sins against the first Covenant were pardoned and they had never sinned against the second which was never revealed to them he answered the Heathen had Christ preached to them in the creatures Sun Moon and Stars N Ibid. p. 110. The Independent Churches in Somersetshire deliver that a Minister baptizing Infants is a false Prophet also that Adam was created in sin and that he was as sinfull before his fall as after and that Christ was a sinner his nature being defiled with sin as well as the nature of other men is O Vide supra N. P Gangren first Part second division p. 24. Nichols in Moore-fields maintained that God was the Author of all sin Q Treatise of Baptisme p. 148. It is not a hope you must goe upon for the giving of Ordinances and holy seals but a judgement Paul called the Saints positively faithfull and elect when we come to admit members if they give but onely ground of hopes we let them stay for their own profit and the discharge of our duty till they can give us the ground of a judgement the Apostle says positively they are holy you ought to assure your self they are so Ibid. p. 252. A male infant is the subject of circumcision but a beleever is the subject of Baptisme R The vanity of childish Baptism first Part p. 29. They of the separation grant that no children save onely beleevers children are in the Covenant or have right to Baptism their Parents by their own acknowlegement being ungodly whence it will follow that they themselves being baptized in their infancy had not the baptism of Christ and so by consequence are yet unbaptized persons Garner of Baptism p. 14 15. Beleevers by Baptism do orderly enter into the body or congregation of Christ hence I may take occasion to satisfie such if the Lord please as are opposite unto beleevers baptism and their entrance into the Church by baptism and contend much for their entrance into a Church estate by Covenant or contract without baptism S Declaration by Cocks c. p. 13. The baptizing of infants doth deny Christ to be come in the flesh T Tombs Apology p. 66. I confesse that they who hold that members are added to the Church by baptism and not otherwise and hold a nullity of paedobaptism must needs say the Churches that have no other then infant baptism are no true Churches nor their members Church members but those points of the necessity of right baptism not onely to the right order but also to the beeing of a visible Church and Church member and so voluntary separation barely for the defect of it I have ever disclaimed V Gangren second Part p. 8. A godly Minister related that Oats an Anabaptisticall Emissary was followed in Essex by many loose persons he spoke it upon his knowledge that notorious whoremongers and drunkards follow him such as have been convicted by witnesses and taken notice of by the Countrey and are such still yet go after him where he preaches from place to place X Vanity of childish Baptism p. 8. The institution of Christ requireth that the whole man be dipped all over in water whosoever is not dipped is not baptized and he that is only sprinkled or hath water onely imposed upon him is not dipped whence this consequence clearly results That all those that have the administration of Baptism either by sprinkling or by any washing without dipping have not the Baptism of the New Testament and by consequence are unbaptized persons Y Vide Gangren first Part second division p. 5. Z M. Tombs exercitation presented to the Chairman of a Committee of the Assembly of Divines and an Apology for the two Treatises against the unjust censures of Doctor Homes M. Geere M. Marshall M. Lee M. Hussey M. Black M. Calamy M. Vines AA Tombs Apology p. 64. Why doth he make my opinion odious as if I put all the children of the whole Church out of the Covenant of grace as I do the children of the Turks and acknowledge no more promise for the one then for the other whereas when he hath said as much as he can for them he can bring no more promise for them then I doe nor dares reject the limitations I restraine them by M. Marshals defence pag. 85. To my understanding you here clearly yeeld the infants of beleevers to be in the same condition in reference to the Covenant of grace which the infants of Turks and Indians are in no more promise for the one then for the other which so oft as you consider me thinks your Fatherly bowels to your own children should be moved within you Ibid. p. 98. I confesse I suspect you have a further meaning not onely because you here mention the temporall blessings before the spirituall and call the land of Canaan the Covenant made with Abraham but especially that expression which you own from Cameron
grace after the comming of Christ in the New Testament Thirdly that the infants of the Gentiles under the old Testament when their Parents became proselytes had right to the Covenant of grace Fourthly that the infants of the Gentiles under the New Testament had that same right continued The first we prove from Genesis 17. ver 7 12 13. The infants of the Jews had reall interest in the Covenant of grace before the comming of Christ Gen. 17.7 12 13. I will establish my Covenant betwixt me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting Covenant to be a God unto thee and to thy seed after thee And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you and my Covenant shall be in all your flesh Here God enters in Covenant and promises not only things temporall but the chief of all spirituall blessings that he will be a God to Abrahams seed as well as to himselfe and this his seed is understood of infants as well as others for with all these this Covenant is made who carried the seal of it in their flesh and some of these are expresly said to be but eight days old this gracious Covenant was the ground of their Circumcision and of all the legal ceremonies exercised about them as true members of the Jewish Church The first males were holy to the Lord Christ as was the custome of other infants was brought to the Temple Luke 2. Luke 2. to be presented to the Lord and to have a sacrifice offered for him in the second command the Lord promises mercy to the children of faithfull parents not only in the third and fourth but in the thousand generation and although the Parents were wicked yet the Lord acknowledges his interest in the Jewish children and theirs in him Ezek. 16.20 21. Ezek 16.20 21 Moreover thou hast taken thy sons and thy daughters whom thou hast born unto me and these hast thou sacrificed unto them to be devoured thou hast slain my children Here the Jewish infants burnt by their idolatrous Parents and sacrificed to Molech are called Gods children and are said to be born to God The second proposition the continuance of this right to the Jewish infants under the Gospel some deny it but absurdly for Christ when he came was a Mediator of a better Covenant Heb. 7.22 Also after Christs comming under the new Testament Heb. 7.27.8 6. By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better Testament and 8.6 He is the Mediator of a better Covenant which was established upon better promises The Covenant of grace for the substance was ever the same but for the manner of its administration it was the longer the better and after Christs incarnation best of all but it had been evidently worse after that time in a very great and main particular if all Jewish infants which before were Church-members and partakers of the sacrifices and Sacraments as the elect ones of them were of the spirituall promises should have lost these priviledges after the comming of Christ and have been so far then unchurched that neither Covenant Sacrament Promise nor any such benefit could belong to them before their years of discretion But they who are resolute to controvert this point I hope will be content to be silenced by the Apostles determination Acts 2.39 The promise is unto you and to your children It is a vain elusion to say the Apostle is speaking of the promises of the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost for infants are lesse capable of those then of any graces and gifts in controversie also it is evident that the Apostle is speaking of the great promise of making Jesus crucified and risen from the dead Lord and Christ v. 36. the Author of remission of sins v. 38. of salvation v. 31. as well as of the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost Neither is their evasion better who would have no other children here understood then these who are called for so neither remission of sins nor salvation nor Christ nor any gracious promise should belong at all to any child of Abraham before he were called no not to Isaac nor Jacob the children of the promise in the time of their infancy which is expresly contrary to the former Scripture and to the common sense of all well advised Christians As for the third proposition the right of proselyte infants under the Law to the Covenant and the Sacrament which then did seal it it is clear from Gen. 17.12 The Infants of proselyte Gentiles under the old Testament had right in the Covenant of grace Gen. 17.12 He that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you every man-child in your generations he that is born in the house or bought with money of any stranger which is not of thy seed The infants of strangers bought with mony though not of Abrahams seed are commanded to bear the sign of the Covenant of the Lord in their flesh Exod. 12.48 49. Ex. 12.48 49. When a stranger shall sojourn with thee and will keep the Passeover to the Lord let all his males be circumcised and then let him come neer and keep it and he shall be as one born in the Land one Law shall be to him that is home-born and one to the stranger that sojourneth among you Here the stranger Gentile who is desired to joyn is admitted to the same Law and priviledge with the Jew The Infants of believing Gentiles under the New Testament have right in the Covenant of grace For the fourth that the infants of beleeving Gentiles have right to the promises of God under the New Testament it is clear from what is said for if it were otherwise then their condition after Christs incarnation should be much worse then before which may not be admitted but however this may be many places in the New Testament will decide the quarrell I cite but two Rom. 11.24 Rom. 11.24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature and were graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree how much more shall these which be the naturall branches be graffed into their own olive tree Here the whole Church of the Gentiles is graffed into the root of the naturall olive and that the more room might be left for them the Jews are broken off Before the breaking off of the Jewish branches some of the Gentiles were ingraffed with them in the root Christ and then the infants of the Gentiles as well as their Parents enjoyed the priviledges of the new Covenant when the body of the Jews is broken off to this end that the Gentiles may grow in their place shall not the Gentiles then enjoy the Jewish priviledge at least their own priviledge which themselves enjoyed in worse times for as we have shewed under the Law the infants both of Jews and Gentile proselytes did live by the fatnesse of the root
them for he only admonishes us to be sparing cautious in our reasoning from proportion in positive and institute worship his advice we mind to follow as very reasonable for we doe not from analogy infer the institution of Baptisme or any other positive worship onely the application of Baptisme a worship instituted by an expresse command to a certain subject to wit infants and to reason thus far yea farther from proportions and analogies is the frequent custome both of Christ and his Apostles thus the Lord proves it lawfull for his Disciples to pluck the ears of corn on the Sabbath from Davids eating of the shew-bread and the Apostle proves the necessity of maintaining the Ministers from not muzling of the mouth of the Oxe that treadeth out the corn and their living by the Altar who serve at the Altar 1 Cor. 9.9 But the greatest stick is upon the antecedent Baptismes succession to Circumcision we therefore prove it from Col. 2.11 12. Baptisme succeeds to Circumcision Col. 2.11 12. In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands in putting off the body of the sinnes of the flesh by the Circumcision of Christ buried with him in Baptisme wherein also you are risen with him The Apostle here shewing our compleatnesse in Christ tels us that we have in him the main thing signified by Circumcision the spirituall Circumcision of the heart not made with hands the putting off of the body of sin also that in place of the abolished rite of Circumcision we have the new rite of Baptisme whose substance and signification was the very same with Circumcision a buriall with Christ and a resurrection with him a killing of the body of sin and quickning of the new man in the life of every grace The Apostle in this his parallel and comparison of the two Sacraments is clear in making the substance and signification of both to be really one In this also that Circumcision is put away and accomplished by the comming of Christ the body of all the old shadows but that Baptisme yet remains in the Christian church in place of Circumcision having the same ends and significations therewith Many dissimilitudes are here brought by some to hinder all proportion analogy and parallel betwixt these two Sacraments but how many soever can be brought they will prove no more but that those two are not one which was never affirmed by any things that are like and agree onely in some third cannot possibly be one for identity destroys analogy and similitude But if two concordances betwixt Baptisme and Circumcision be made good the third for which we reason will of its own accord follow if it be clear that Circumcision and Baptisme be both of them seals of the same covenant and both of them initiating seals it follows that if infants were capable of the one they are also of the other If the first two doe not clearly enough appear from the last passage of the Apostle there be many more Scriptures beside to make them evident The first similitude betwixt Baptisme and Circumcision is their sealing of the covenant of grace Circumcision did seal the Covenant of grace and the blessings therein contained this of Baptisme was never questioned but of Circumcision the Anabaptists did ever deny it we prove it first from Gen. 17.11 Gen. 17.11 and it shall be a token of the covenant between me and thee what covenant was this whereof Circumcision is here called a token or as the Apostle speaks Rom. 4.11 a sign and a seal Moses expresses it in the 7. v. calling it an everlasting covenant wherein God promised to be a God to Abraham and to his seed after him this covenant must be of grace since the Lord the fountain of grace and glory promises therein to communicate even himself to Abrahams posterity It is true according to the wise and wonderfull dispensation of the grace of God both under the Law and Gospel the promise is preached to the whole seed and all the members of the visible church whether elect or reprobate but what is offered to all in the Word and Sacraments is conferred onely upon the elect by the efficacy of his grace who works all in all according to the good pleasure of his will It is clear also from Deut. 30.6 Deut. 30.6 that Circumcision was a seal of the covenant of grace and the Lord thy God will circumcise thy heart and the heart of thy seed to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul that thou mayest live here the thing signified by the rite of Circumcision is the sanctification of the Spirit and the planting of the love of God in the mortified heart which without all doubt are two of the principal promises of the covenant of grace Likewise Rom. 4.11 Rom. 4.11 is so clear that in reason it ought to stop all mouths from farther debating in this point and he received the sign of Circumcision a seal of the righteousnesse of faith Whence we reason The covenant that brings to Gospel justification to the righteousnesse of faith to remission of sins and happinesse is the covenant of grace But the Apostle there affirms Circumcision to have been a seal of such a covenant Ergo. It 's true the covenant of grace The covenant of grace has been diversly administred but ever the same and never mixed in its administration before Christs comming in the flesh was cloathed with many shadows of now abolished ceremonies and had adjoined to it upon mount Sinai the old covenant of works to be a severe paedagogue for the pointing out the way to Christ unto the very unruly children of Israel and for keeping them in awe and terrour by its threats and curses also for alluring them to obedience by its temporall promises we grant because of those adjuncts the covenant of grace is sometimes spoken of as an old covenant and is distinguished from its very self as it was administred by Christ after his incarnation the old dresse of Sinai being changed as of an old garment but that the thing was ever the same advised Christians must be loath to doubt for if the covenant which the Lord made with Abraham and his seed under the Law be not truly and substantially the new covenant of grace we desire to know by what means they obtained either grace or glory and to put all the Fathers of the Old Testament in so beastly a condition as excludes from grace and glory who dare be so insolent Now if we grant them a covenant which did bring them to a state of grace in this life and of glory hereafter how can we deny it to be gracious That which they speak of a mixed covenant is not much to the purpose we did never deny the adjunction of ceremonies and temporall promises and the whole covenant of works unto the covenant of grace under its first administration yea under the very New
either eating of bread or drinking of water but however there is a positive precept that hinders them from participation of the Lords Supper they cannot remember the Lords death they cannot examine the state of their own heart no such impediment is put in their way by the hand of God to keep them from baptisme M. Tombes observes it that long before John the Baptists days baptisme was in use among the Jews and M. Marshal adds from the Talmud Maimonides and other Authors that it was a very ancient custome to baptize all that were circumcised infants as wel as their parents women as well as men and that this custome of baptizing all that were added to the Church as well children as others did continue in all ages among Christians is proved at length by many without any satisfactory reply but we intend here to dispute from Scripture alone 7. Argument Infants are partakers of remission of regeneration of life eternal Wee shall bring but one other reason and so passe on To whom the Lord gives the whole signification of baptisme from these men ought not to withhold the outward sign thereof But to some infants the Lord gives the whole signification of baptism For the proof of the major we need not alledge the equity of giving the lesse to them that gets the more of not denying the shell and the cask to them who enjoy the kirnell and the pearl for the Apostles words prove it sufficiently Acts 10.47 Acts 10.47 Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the holy Ghost as well as we and he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord the Apostle here reasons from one part of the signification of baptisme and that but a temporary blessing the extraordinacy gifts of the holy Ghost to the outward sign of baptisme how much more may we conclude it from its whole ordinary signification The ground of this reason is granted by the principall of our adversaries who profess their willingnesse to baptize any infants of whom they were certain that they had the saving graces of the holy Ghost avow their exclusion of infants from baptism upon this ground mainly that they beleeve they are excluded from the covenant of grace remission of sins the saving graces of the Spirit till in the years of discretion they be brought actually to beleeve The minor that some infants have the whole signification of baptisme is thus proved Who have remission of sins regeneration and right to eternall life they have the whole signification of baptisme But some infants have all these The major is clear I prove the minor None enters into heaven but they whose sins are remitted who are regenerate and to whom life eternall belongs But some infants enter into heaven Ergo. The minor is not questioned for the words of Christ of such is the kingdome of heaven and the confession of the adversaries puts it out of doubt The major also is clear from Revel 21.27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth Nothing comes into heaven but what is perfectly purged justified sanctified glorified also Ioh. 3.5 Iesus answered Verily verily I say unto thee except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God and Rom. 5.19 As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one man many shall be made righteous As Adam makes all that are descended of him sinners infants as well as others so Christ communicates his righteousnesse to all who are in him to all whom he receives and acknowledges to be his without any distinction of Jew or Gentile male or female young or old who ever have interest in Christ are justified and sanctified by him Now that some infants especially these elect ones who die before the age of discretion have interest in Christ and his covenant hath oft been proved If it be said that infants by this argument may be admitted to the Lords Supper we deny it for the Lord himself hath put a barre to keepe them off from that Sacrament also they are not capable of the whole signification of the Lords Supper for the thing signified therein is not the Lords body and blood simply but his body to be eaten and his blood to be drunken by the actuall faith of the communicants of this active application infants are not capable but in baptisme no action is necessarily required of all who are to be baptized for as the body may be washed without any action of the party who is washed so the vertue of Christs death and life may be applied in remission and regeneration by the act of God alone to the soul as a meer patient without any action from it CHAP. VI. The Antipaedobaptists Objections answered M. 〈◊〉 c. M. â—omâ—s and M 〈◊〉 Oâ—jectiâ—â— THE exceptions which use to be taken to infant-baptisme goe about in a number of late Treatises the principall are as I take it in the three last which I have seen upon that subject the declaration of the publick dispute intended betwixt sixe of the prime Preachers of the Anabaptists and some City Ministers Mr Tombs exercitation and the namelesse Treatise of Baptisme In the first are nine Arguments in the second eight and some more in the third Who desire to see large and solid answers to all these and to what else is brought to any purpose by any other of their companions let them look upon M Marshals Sermon and its vindication M â— Blacks three Treatises and M. Cottons Dialogue for the time they who are in haste may have this short reply to the main arguments of the three named Authors They are in effect but few all invented by the old Anabaptists Take upon all these two generall observations First that what ever any of them has is all borrowed from the old Anabaptists in whom the spirit of the worst heresies did rage who will be at the pains to compare the writs of the Authors in hand with that which Zuinglius Bullinger Guy de Bres Ainsworth and others have set down in the name and words of the old Anabaptists shall finde that our late opposers doe adde little that is considerable to the arguments of their Fathers Secondly that all the arguments which either the elder or later Anabaptists bring against Paedobaptisme are but two or three at most when they are increased to a greater number it 's but the same body put in many diverse habits by a needlesse variation of shapes M. Cox first Argument 〈◊〉 makes examples alone a full rule The nine Arguments of the publick disputants have not as yet so far as I know been honored w th any answer neither do I think was there any necessity of it for the Disputants do so insolently out-bragge the City Ministers and the matter of their Arguments has so often been answered in divers
formally the life and subsistence of all creatures p. 103 That Christ had not a particular soul nor a particular body Creatures in their very sins are acted onely by the Spirit of God There is no such spirits as Angels Devils or Souls Nothing remains for ever but God Scripture is but a false shadow and no ground of faith They deny both the first and second comming of Christ They cast away all Ordinances The certain truth of these imputations p. 104 The English Anabaptists are generally more erroneous then the Dutch Amongst the English Sectaâ—â—es there is no zeal at all against any errour CAP. V. The lawfulnesse of Infants Baptisme THe extream malignity of the Anabaptistick spirit It s enmity to the salvation of men p. 129 Its dishonouring of God by setting up a liberty first for all errours and next for all vice p. 130 Their Brownistick and Arminian tenets I have refuted in other Treatises p. 131 Their Antipaedobaptisme and dipping shall here be briefly and plainly considered The state of the first question The first reason for the affirmative p. 132 Who have right to the chief promises have right to some of the seals which God has appointed to be a means of assurance of these promises unlesse the Lord himself hath made a speciall exception Infants have good right to the promises of the covenant of grace p. 133 The infants of the Iews had reall interest in the covenant of grace before the comming of Christ Gen. 17.12 13. Also after Christ comming under the New Testament Heb. 7.27.8.6 The infants of proselyte Gentiles under the Old Testament had right in the covenant of grace Gen. 17.12 Exod. 12.48 49. p. 135 The infants of beleeving Gentiles under the New Testament have right in the covenant of grace Rom. 11.24 How infants are holy 1 Cor. 7.14 p. 13 The second argument is from the Circumcision of Infants p. 138 It is safe to reason from Scripturall consequences yea proportions p. 139 Baptisme succeeds to Circumcision Col. 2.11 12. Circumcision did seal the covenant of grace Gen. 17.11 p. 140 The covenant of grace has been diversly administred but ever the same and never mixed p. 141 Both Circumcision and Baptisme are initiating seals p. 142 There needs not a particular commanâ— for application of a Sacrament to the diverse ages and sexes and conditions of persons Infants Baptisme under the Law The third argument from Matth. 28.19 p. 143 The promises of the Gospel belong to Infants p. 144 Infants are not in a worse condition under the Gospel then under the Law All who are baptized need not be capable of teaching ibid. Infants are Disciples p. 145 Infants have interest in the Trinity ibid. Infants may be lawfully baptized p. 146 The fourth argument from the baptisme of whole families ib. The fifth argument from Christ laying of his hands on infants and blessing them p. 147 The sixth argument Infants under the Law were baptized p. 149 The seventh argument Infants are partakers of remission of regeneration of life eternall p. 150 Mr Coxe Mr Tombes Mr L. Objections p. 152 They are in effect but few and all invented by the old Anabaptists ib. Mr Coxe first argument makes examples alone a full rule ib. The second makes one and the same man to differ from himself essentially p. 153 The third ties God in the revelation of his will to precepts and examples alone p. 154 It everts the principles of all reasoning and turns men into stones p. 155 The fourth makes it an heresie to make any use of any thing in the Old Testament to clear any thing in the New p. 156 The fifth argument making the actions done by or to Christ the full rule of our practise is a wilde phansie p. 157 The sixth argument will have none baptized but who beleeve and are elect p. 158 The seventh eighth and ninth arguments are but repetitions p. 160 The absurdities of every one of the nine arguments ib. M. Tombes 8. arguments answered by others there is no truth in any of them p. 161 M. L. Treatise of Baptisme needs no answer p. 162 The pressing of dipping and exploding of sprinkling is but an yesterday conceit of the English Anabaptists p. 163 Sprinkling is sufficient and dipping is not necessary in Baptisme p. 164 The first arg for the affirmative Baptisme in many Scriptures signifies sprinkling and not dipping as Mark 7.4.8 Heb. 9.10 1 Cor. 10.1 Rev. 19.13 Mat. 3.11 p. 164 The second arg The thing signified by Baptisme is oftner expressed in Scripture by sprinkling then dipping p. 167 In Scripture sprinkling is made a sign of the application of Christs bloud to the soul p. 167 Also of Christs Spirit p. 168 Sprinkling under the Law a figure of the thing signified in Baptisme ibid. Sprinkling serves as much for purging as dipping can doe p. 169 A third arg In many Scripturall Baptismes there was no dipping ib. A fourth arg Dipping is hurtfull to the life of man p. 171 Also to his chastity ib. A fifth arg Dipping makes Baptisme insupportable No Preacher will be able to baptize p. 172 Dipping brings in Se-baptisme p. 173 The first Object That the originall word Baptizing does signifie always dipping and never sprinkling removed ib. The second Object No evidence in Scripture that any were ever dipped over head and ears in Baptisme p. 175 The third Object That Baptisme is a sign of the Buriall of Christ hath no reference at all to Immersion A generall answer to the testimonies for dipping p. 178 The Authours out of which the Testimonies of the first two Chapters are taken concerning the old Anabaptists of Germany CAssandri opera last Edit fol. Bullingerus adversus Anabaptistas Historia Davidis Georgii conscripta ab ipsius genero Nicolao Blesdikio Guy de Bres contre les Anabaptistes Sleidani Commentaria Argentorati 1621. Conradi Heresbachii Historia Anabaptistica una cum notis Theodori Strackii Lamberto Hortensio Amsterodami 1637. Cloppenburgii Gangraena Anabaptistica una cum Spanhemii disputationum Anti-AnabaptisticaruÌ„ prima generali Apocalypsis Haeresiarcharum All faithfully translated into English The Authors out of the which the Testimonies of the third and fourth Chapters are taken concerning the modern Anabaptists of England THe Confession of the seven Churches the first Edition also the second with additions and alterations dedicated to the Parliament The Declaration of the publick dispute by M. Coxe M. Hobson c. M. Tombes Exercitation Also his Apology M. Richardson against D. Featley M. Blackwoods storming of Antichrist M. Spilberries Saints priviledge William Kiffin his answer in Ricrafts Looking-glasse for the Anabaptists M. Cornwels Vindication The Treatise of Baptisme The Vnity of childish Baptisme John the Baptist Divers Treatises of M. Saltmarsh The Compassionate Samâ—ritanâ— Divers Treatises set out with great confidence and passion for a libâ—rty to all Sects especially the Anabaâ—tists Such as Liberty of Conscience Toleration justified Englands Birth-right Conscience câ—utioned Innocency and truth justified The just mans justification A Pearl in a Dunghill A Letter to a friend The just man in bonds An Alarum to the House of Lords The Remonstrance of many thousands to their own House of Commons The last warning Iohn Goodwins Theomachia M. Williams Bloudy Tenet Little Non-such Mâ—ns Mortality Divine Light Also the Treatises of some gracious and learned Divines that have â—pposed those ways Suâ—h as M. Marshals Sermon â—nd defâ—nce M. Gattakers ans to M. Saltmâ—rsh M. Blacks birth priviledgâ— â—nâ—â—nswer to M. Tombes A discovery of Familism Benjamin Burns description and confutation of Familismâ— Especially M. Edwards Gangrena first and second part To which â—s yet I have seen nothing replyed to â—ny thing that is considerable though many with great passion have essay d c. FINIS
Israel KKK Historia Dav. p. 45. Whosoever will reject so clear a light of truth so powerfully manifesting it self in the ministery of David George by adhering too much unto the imperfect state of the Prophets and Apostles Doctrine shall sin as much as they of old who preferred Abraham to Christ and the Law to the Gospel and properly this is the sin against the holy Ghost which could not be committed in former ages when this so great light was not yet revealed LLL Vide supra MMM Vide supra NNN Heresbachius Preface Menno in his Book of fundamentalls speaking of the Anabaptists of Munster I doubt not saith he but these our beloved Brethren who lately did sin a little against God by defending their faith with Arms are in the favour of God OOO Clopenburg p. 123. The Anabaptists contradict this truth and do ascribe unto infants in their first birth without any regeneration the purity of innocency wherein they do please their Creator affirming also that onely by actuall sinne men become sinners p. 131. They say that Adam did obtain not onely to himself but to his whole posterity propitiation and remission of sins so that none of Adams posterity is born in sin or guiltinesse of eternall death but all men are born partakers of the grace of God in Christ Also Bullinger p. 26. These men did not acknowledge originall sin and affirmed that infants were born pure from sin PPP Vide supra QQQ Bullinger p. 117. In the great article of justification by faith and not by works the Anabaptists do grosly erre Also Clopenburg p 158. The Anabaptists say that in the matter of justification faith and works are so strictly joyned that the one without the other is nothing so that good works are necessary means of obtaining justification RRR Clopenburg p. 124. Concerning free-will the Anabaptists teach that Adam in the state of corruption was not so evill but that he was able by the use of reason left to him by God to hear and to receive the promise of redemption offered to him in Christ yea that Adam did really make use of that liberty and power for the use of his restitution that the posterity of Adam did keep that same free-will which is placed in the use of reason not only for the discerning but for the free choosing of good and evill Ibid. p. 198. Vnto this Tenet another Heterodoxy is conjoyned concerning the uncertainty of the Saints perseverance for the Anabaptists affirm plainly that the truly faithfull children of God may become the unfaithfull children of the Devill and lose their salvation SSS Clopenburg p. 131. cited before TTT Ibid. p. 155. They do destroy the eternall election of single persons to salvation which they say is only done when the faithfull embrace the benefits of Christ and do faithfully keep them that there is no eternall election or decree to give salvation unto certain persons but that which is made with consideration of faith and chiefly of perseverance in faith VVV Clopenburg p. 18. cited before Ibid. p. 37. They deny the immutable immortall Deity of Christ XXX Clopenburg p. 56. Their Tenet here in blasphemous that while Christ did die in the flesh the very Deity of Christ did suffer end die YYY Clopenburg p. 10. cited before Also p. 12. cited before Also Bullinger p. 62. Among the abominable Anabaptists Michael Servetus has the first place his blasphemies against the holy Trinity were abominable ZZZ Clopenburg p. 145. I will not in this place refute their latent Socinianisme whereby they make Christ only an exemplary Saviour AAAA Clopenburg p. 83. cited before BBBB Bullinger l. 3. p. 119. They say that they will hear the word of God but the interpretation and the words of the Ministers upon it they cannot take for the word of God neither will they hear or receive it CCCC Bullinger p. 74. Among the abominable Anabaptists we place these who reject the old Testament and who receive me the Testimonies that are brought thence for the clearing and confirming of the Doctrines of our Christian faith or for the refuting of Errors saying that the old Testament is now abrogate DDDD Clopenburg p. 235. The Anabaptists covered that the Covenant made with Abraham sealed by Circumcision does not belong any thing to the Church in the new Testament for they make the Covenant it self as carnall as circumcision CHAP. III. The modern Tenets of the Anabaptists in ENGLAND WHAT is set down in the former Chapters of the old Anabaptists over Sea The spirit of Anabaptisme clearly devillish was in relation to their present off-spring in England with them chiefly it is that I intend to deal desiring if possible to draw some of them from their evill way or at least to hold off others who yet are free from running too rashly into their errour before they have a little considered it I hope I have made it so clear that no ingenuous knowing reader will hereafter call it in question that the spirit which was the author of Anabaptisme in Germany and carried on all its principall leaders along their whole course could be no better Angel then Satan who under the colour of a more then ordinary zeal to the smallest truths and of a vehement affection to the highest degrees of all holinesse was palpably found to set on foot the most grosse and damnable Errours the most abominable obscenities cruelties robberies that ever the Sun from its first creation to this day did shine upon in any part of the earth How much of his nature that spirit has laid down since his late appearance in England it cannot yet with confidence be pronounced He was an Angel of light in Germany for a longer time then yet he has dwelt among us in any considerable visibility for till of late he did but lurk it this Land in the habit of an Incognito Since the time he began to appear in publick there is nothing which he would more gladly disclaim then these crimes and that face wherewith he did walk over Sea when he took the boldnesse to lay aside his mask and to shew his true visage as it was without any disguise Tell the English Anabaptists now of the Doctrine and practises of their fathers in Munster and elswhere The fair profession of many English Anabaptists not to be trusted they are ready with passion to deny all affinity all consanguinity with such monstrous Hereticks They will be nothing lesse then Anabaptists the furthest they will professe to maintain is but a simple Antipaedobaptisme How ever this will be found a very grosse and dangerous errour yet we wish that all our questions with that generation of men were come to so narrow an issue we are loth to force upon any man the errours which he is willing to disallow the fewer the differences be a full agreeance is the more easie and near the multiplication of controversies makes peace the more difficult and desperate yet for many
p. 13. I am assured if I whose eyes God hath opened to discern this Popish corruption if I should hold my peace and so justly perish with the Antichristian Synagogue that denieth Jesus is the Christ I Turners heavenly Conference p. 41. Question What if any deny children of beleevers in a Church estate baptism of water Answer They make void the promise of God made to children of beleevers by that their Tradition Q. May such as deny children baptism be permitted members of a true Church A. No they ought to be cut off from all Christs congregations K Apologeticall Narration p. 9. Excommunication should be put in execution for no other kinde of sins then may evidently be presumed to be perpetrated against the parties known light as whether it be a sin in manners and conversation such as is committed against the light of nature or the common received practises of Christianity professed in all the Churches of Christ or if in opinions then such as are likewise contrary to the received principles of Christianity and the power of godlinesse professed by the party himself and universally acknowledged in all the rest of the Churches and no other sins to be the subject of that dreadfull sentence L Gangrena part 2. p. 13. For the present the best Independent Churches are mixed assemblies consisting of persons whereof some are Anabaptists some Antinomians some Libertines others hold Arminian and Socinian Tenets M. Symonds Independent Church at Roterdam is overgrown with Anabaptisme and he hath written into England that he is so postered with Anabaptists that he know not what to do M Tombs Apology p. 66. I confesse they that hold that members are added to the Church by Baptism and not otherwise and hold a nullity of paedobaptism must needs say the Churches that have no other then infant Baptism are no true Churches nor their members Church members Cornwels Vindication p. 15. They who enter not into their Church fellowship by teaching the Gospel and dipping as Jesus and his Disciples entered are thieves and robbers N The confession of faith Artic. 29. All beleevers are a holy and sanctified people the beleever is in truth and really separate both in soul and body from all sin and dead works whereby he also presseth after a heavenly and Evangelicall perfection in obedience to all the commands Storming of Antichrist pag. 3. There hath been a mistake in the matter of the Church for many hundred years men taking mixt multitudes for the matter thereof when the Scripture makes Saints in profession the matter thereof Also p. 8. Beleeve it we are beholden for the recovery of this truth to our Brethren nick-named Independents which is as precious a truth about Church order as ever was recovered from the spoyls of Antichrist for if the matter of Churches be wrong let the wisest and holiest do what they can they shall never bring things into a comfortable order O Gangrena second Part p. 126. Being urged in point of prayer for forgivenesse of sins with the Lords Prayer the Lievtenant said that the Lords prayer when Christ gave it to his Disciples was spirituall unto them but is not so to us The same Lievtenant being urged with Davids practise of bewailing sin and craving pardon answered David was under a double Covenant of the Law and of grace we only under that of grace and though a beleever should commit as great sins as David murther and adultery there was no need for him to repent and that sin was no sin to him but a failing Also p. 120. One of the followers of M. Sympson the Antinomian said it in the hearing and presence of divers M. Sympson being then also present that if a child of God should commit murder he ought not to repent of it and M. Sympson never reproved him for it though by one present in the company he was spoken unto to do it P Benjamin Bourns description and confutation p. 53. The seventh errour is divided into two branches the first handled in this chapter by way of question whether perfection in the highest degree both of grace and glory be attainable in this life yea or no. Q Saltmarsh Smoke p. 15 16 17 18. These places commonly taken for the commission for Christs Baptism as Matth. 28.18 have no such thing in them baptizing in Mat. 28. cannot properly be understood of baptizing by water but farre more probably of the Spirits Baptism or Baptism of the holy Ghost Christs institution of water as his own Baptism in his own person cannot be made appear out of all the New Testament none ought to give Baptism now because there is none can give the gift of the holy Ghost with it Baptism by water and by the holy Ghost being joyned together both in institution doctrine and practise are not to be separated nor given in such a time wherein that of the holy Ghost is not given for what God hath joyned together let no man put asunder That the fulnesse of time is not yet come for ordinances for as there were severall seasons for the givings out of truths before so now R Saltmarsh Free grace p. 140. A beleevers glorious freedome the Spirit of Christ sets a beleever as free from hell the Law and bondage here on earth as if he were in heaven nor wants he any thing to make him so but to make him beleeve that he is so S The Confession Vide supra N. T Confession second Edition Artic. 29. The beleever presseth after a heavenly and Evangelicall obedience V Kiffins Answer to Ricraft p. 18. If your eyes were opened to peruse your own ways you would than see that we could better free our selves from the guilt of schisme from these reformed Churches then you your selves from the notorious guilt of schisming from Rome X Tombs Apology Vide supra M. Y Spilsberry in his Preface to the Saints interest I intended not the title of adversaries to all that do not fully close with us in judgement but to those that so oppose us as that they deny us to preach any Gospel to hold forth any true faith or to administer any true Baptisme who have openly called us the gates of hell their open enemy c. Z Vide supra Y. AA The Confession Artic. 47. And although the particular congregations be distinct and severall bodies every one as a compact and knit City in it self yet are they all to walk by one and the same rule and by all means convenient to have the counsell and help one of another BB Declaration concerning the publick dispute p. 12. We dare affirm that the Presbyters have nothing else whereby to perswade the people to subject their consciences unto their Synodicall and Classicall authority c. CC Confession Artic. 42 43. Christ has also given power to his whole Church to receive in and cast out by way of excommunication any member and this power is given to every particular Congregation and not one particular person
either member or officer but the whole and every particular member of each Church how excellent great or learned soever ought to be subject to this censure Also Saltmarsh Smoke in the Temple p. 14. The Anabaptists hold that the Church though but of two or three yet may enjoy the word and ordinances by way of an administrator or one deputed to administer though no Pastor that these commonly called Church Officers as Pastors c. are such as the Church or body may be without DD Confession Artic. 45. Such to whom God hath given gifts being tried in the Church may and ought by the appointment of the Congregation to Prophecy according to the proportion of faith and so teach publickly the word of God for the edification exhortation and comfort of the Church EE Kiffins answer to Ricraft Among the causes of their separation he sets down this as one The quenching of the Spirit and despising prophecy that no man may speak in our publick exercises but one FF Confession Artic. 41. The persons designed by Christ to dispense this ordinance the Scriptures hold forth to be a Preaching Disciple it being no where tied to a particular Church officer or person extraordinarily sent the commission enjoyning the administration being given to them under no other consideration but as Disciples Also the Treatise of Baptisme p. 407. It cannot reasonably be objected that he that baptizeth should necessarily be himself a baptized person though ordinarily it will be so yet it is not necessary to the Ordinance no more then it is simply necessary to a Church State that the members be baptized for not the personall baptism of him that administers but the due commission he hath for baptizing is alone considerable to make him a true Minister of Baptisme GG Gangren second Part p. 3. Oats hath dipped many in Bocking River and when that is done he hath a feast in the night and at the end thereof the Lords Supper Also Gangrena the first part p. 44. The 12. of November last there met the matter of 80 Anabaptists in a great house and had a Love-feast their Supper was dressed for them by a Cook when Supper was ended before the cloth was taken away they administred the Lords Supper HH Tombs Apology p. 54. Nor do I think the thing either such a new opinion or practise for besides that it may be doubted whether all the Apostles were baptized as suppose Matthew which is as probable for the negative as the affirmative yet were they all admitted to the Lords Supper by Christ himself When Constantine the great and others did deferre their Baptisme so long it is not likely they never received the Lords Supper afore their Baptism II Storming of Antichrist p. 6. Suppose the power of all ordinances and the keys in a time of universall defection should resolve it self radically in the Church yet there being no Church right for the matter which is part of the essence this power could not resolve it self into a Church and therefore if it be any where on earth as doubtlesse it is it must be in beleevers who joyning themselves together in Assemblies may stirre up and take again that power which was committed to the Churches and after cheated away by Antichrist The Treatise of Baptism p. 389. The power of the keys originarily and primarily is given to the Church where the power of admitting receiving and casting out is there is the power of administring and communicating all ordinances to the edification of the same body and they which have power of administring the Kingly office of Christ consisting in casting out and receiving in have also power of administring his Propheticall office of which the Sacraments are a part and therefore to the Christian Churches as to the Jews of old pertaineth the publick dispensations and services of God Rom. 9. KK Confession Article 41. The dispensation of Baptisme is no where tied to a particular officer the commission to administer it being given to them under no other consideration but considered as Disciples Treatise of Baptism p. 391. A man becomes a Prophet by vertue of a gift but no gift renders a Baptizer but a call as being a thing of publick commission teaching out of a gift hath its foundation in nature which ariseth from a personall gift and grace of the spirit but Baptism Censures Ordination and the like depend not upon a speciall gift but are acts of power conferred authoritatively upon a speciall person LL Gangren first Part p. 32. Mistresse Attaway gave an answer to the men present who brought an argument for Infants Baptisme MM Confession second Edition in the preface to the Reader Some are offended at us for meeting in houses to preach So we are blamed because we frequent not their Temples Kiffens Answer to Ricraft p. 10. You are enraged against these who worship any where save in your high places NN Ibid. You continue tithes and offerings of people as if Christ were not yet come in the flesh OO John the Baptist p. 1. The claiming tithes or any thing in stead thereof appears to be contrary to the Gospel through the whole Gospel there is not one word to countenance a forcing of the people to contribute unto the poor or unto the Minister any thing but what they please themselves PP The vanity of childish Baptism second Part p. 27. There is no more hope to see that Tribe stoop so low as to bear witnesse to this truth then there is to see them allow the doctrine and practise of blessed Saint Paul working with his own hands Acts 20.34 to be now of use and imitation in our times John the Baptist pag. 7. It were farre more Apostolick and Christian-like for Ministers to work with their own hands then to force or require a subsistence in such a manner PP 2 The power and office of the Ministery by which it is there administred is received from the Bishops who received their power from the Antichrist The vanity of childish Baptism p. 12. Ib. p. 15. The unlawfulnesse of the calling of the Ministery of the Church of England is acknowledged by many of themselves who have therfore forsaken and cast off their Ministery they received of the Bishops and departed the Land and became as Lay-men untill they were authorized anew by the election and appointment of such a Congregation as they conceived to be a true Church Ibid. p. 31. The worth or honesty of a man in a false office cannot make the office any truer or lawfuller then it is in it selfe the better the man the worse the Bishop the very same is the case of the Ministery and Priesthood here QQ Vide supra GG RR Gangren first Part p. 6. I had it from eye and ear-witnesses who were present at Kiffen and Patience Visitation of one of their Members whose name is Palmer living in Smithfield who layed hands upon her and anointed her with oyle the woman recovering came unto
theft told him how sorry they were that such a man as he should doe these things he replied That he was troubled for them to see them sorry but as for himself he was not troubled ZZZ Ibid. The Maid said unto the Gentleman tempting her How dare you offer to do this wickednesse and sin against God He replied that God saw no sinne in his children that these were but sinnes of the flesh which Christ had satisfied for with other words to that purpose AAAA Gangren first Part division second p. 116. Three women of Lambs Church makes it their ordinary to work on the Lords day and being spoken to about it they said They knew no Sabbath nor no such day every day was alike to them and one as good as another BBBB Gangren second Part p. 126. The Lievtenant Preacher being urged with Davids practise of bewailing sin and craving pardon answered David was under a double Covenant of the Law and of Grace we onely under that of Grace and though a beleever should commit as great sins as Davids murther and adultery there was no need for him to repent and that sin was no sin to him but a failing CCCC Gatakers shadows p. 62. Nor have we any cause to wonder that all sorts of loose people do by whole shoals flock to and run after these that teach it in many of whom what dreadfull and dismall effects it hath had though I could give hideous instances yet I forbear to relate DDDD Bloody Tenet p. 20. Concerning Baptismes and laying on of hands Gods people will be found to be ignorant for many hundred years and I yet cannot see it proved that light is risen I mean the light of the first institution in practise Ibid. p. 166. But as there seems yet to be desired such constitution of the Christian Church as the first constitution and pattern cals us for so also such a câ—lling and converting of Gods people from Antichristian Idols to the Christian worship and therefore such a Ministery according to the first pattern sent from Christ Jesus to renew and restore the worship and Ordinances of God in Christ M. Williams concerning the name Heathen p. 18. Having not been without through the mercy of God abundant and constant thoughts about a true commission for such an embassie and Ministery I must ingenuously confesse the restlesse unsatisfiednesse of my soul in divers main particulars as first whether since the Law must go forth from Sion and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem I say whether Gods great businesse between Christ Jesus the holy Son of God and Antichrist the Man of Sin and son of perdition must not first be over and Sion and Jerusalem be rebuilt and re-established before the Law and word of life be set forth to the rest of the Nations of the world who have not heard of Christ the Prophets are deep concerning this EEEE Gangren first Part division second p. 20. Laurence Clarkson of an Anabaptist turning a Seeker hath put out a Pamphlet called The Pilgrimage of the Saints wherein he endeavours to free himself from the reports divulged on him in the Anabaptists assemblies concerning his laying down the ordinance of dipping as erroneously practised FFFF Ibid. p. 31. Mistresse Attaway disclaimed that she took upon her to preach but onely to exercise her gifts for she could not be evinced that any in the world this day living had any commission to preach GGGG Saltmarsh smoke p. 17 18. None ought to give the Baptism of water now because there is none that can give the gift of the holy Ghost with it Baptism by water and by the holy Ghost being joyned together both in institution doctrine and practise are not to be separated nor given in such a time wherein that of the holy Ghost is not given what God hath joyned together let no man put asunder the fulnesse of time is not yet come for ordinances for as there was severall seasons for the giving out of truth before so now HHHH Gangren second Part p. 11. The Sect of Seekers grows very much and all sort of Sectaries turn Seekers many leave the congregations of Independents Anabaptists and fall to be Seekers and not onely people but Ministers also and whosoever lives but few years if the Sects be suffered to go on will see that all the other Sects of Independents Brownists Antinomians Anabaptists will be swallowed up in the Seekers alias Libertines many are gone already and multitudes are going that way and the issues of these Sects and Schismes will be that all will end in a loosenesse and licentiousnesse of living IIII Spilsberries Saints Interest to the Reader Vnder pretence of seeking the truth by cunning and crafty enquiries they undermine the same they deny unto such as beleeve in Christ Church-fellowship and communion with Christ and his ordinances of the New Testament for want as they say of a Ministery with power from God to call and fit a people for ordinances and to administer the same this opinion much oppresseth and disturbs the godly for whose sakes I have endeavoured to hold forth my portion of light KKKK Gangren first Part division first p. 33. See there a number of horrible blasphemies against the Trinity Ibid. division second p. 26. In one of the Churches of Bell-alley in Colemanstreet the Divinity of Christ was openly disclaimed M. Nie said that to his knowledge the denying of the Divinity of Christ was a growing opinion and that there was a company of them met about Colemanstreet a Welchman being their chief who held this opinion Ibid p. 111. The Anabaptists in Somersetshire denied the Trinity of Persons in the Deity and affirm that there is but one Person in the Godhead for if there be three Persons there must needs be three Gods and that Athanasius in his Creed doth blaspheme LLLLL Gang. second Part p. 5. The Lievtenant being asked about the third Person of the Trinity denied there was such a thing as a Trinity of Persons but affirmed them to be three offices MMMM Richardsons considerations against Featly p. 16. The name Anabaptist came first from the Devill and he will own whatsoever is written against them NNNN Ibid. p. 2. How can Christ as he is God be the Son of God in respect of his eternal generation any more then the Father is his Son by eternall generation Secondly if the Spirit of God be God as he is equall with the Father and the Son all three infinite without beginning each having the whole Divine essence and yet there is but one essence how can the Spirit proceed from the Father originally any more then the Father from the Spirit and how can the Spirit of God have any more dependence upon the Father and the Son then they have upon him seeing whatsoever is infinite can have no dependence upon any thing Therefore the Doctors words contain in them the nature of blasphemy and to define how one can be three and three but
life SSSSSS M. Bourn to the Reader I shall in the Treatise following lay open to the view of all men not at the second hand but by experience having often heard them both preach and dispute what is that which commonly goes under the name of Familisme what I shall say concerning it is not out of malice to any person neither shall I speak at randome TTTTTT Gangren first Part second division p. 27. There is one Clement Wrighter in London an Arch-heretick and fearfull Apostate sometimes a professor of Religion and judged to have been godly about seven or eight years ago he fell off from the communion of our Churches to Independency and Brownism from that he fell to Anabaptism and Arminianism thence to Mortalism holding the soul mortall after that he fell to be a Seeker and is now an Antiscripturist a Questionist and Skeptick and I fear an Atheist CHAP. V. The lawfulnesse of Infants Baptisme I Have at some length in the preceding Chapters set down the way and Tenets of the Anabaptists both here and over Sea The extreame malignity of the Anabaptistick spirit both of the present the former times wherby it may appear to all who are willing to see how malign a spirit has ruled in that Sect from its first beginning to this very day a spirit carrying to the greatest errours and the grossest vices that ever any who were called Christians have stumbled upon a spirit as much opposite to the honour of God and to the salvation of men It s enmity to the salvation of men as any that ever troubled the Church since its first foundation It s favour towards the salvation of man appears in its great zeal to cast out of the Church and deprive of the means of grace almost all mankinde with the exception of a very few if of any at all When the most reformed of the Protestant Churches come before the fan of their censure at the first shake they blow away that largest and most innocent part of them their infants all children who have not attained to the acts of faith and repentance are to them in the flesh under the power within the verge of the Kingdom of Satan as well as Jews Turks Pagans and others who are not so much as entred within the hedge of Christs sheepfold and lest the spoiling of children of all the grace and gifts of God had not been a sufficient vastation they are carried on by the spirit that leads them to make as great havock and desolation among those of riper years they Unchurch the most of those whom otherwise they love as their best friends they charge all the Independents and the Brownists and the most rigid of the Separatists for their baptizing of infants with no lighter a burthen then Antichristianism and a clear deniall of Christs Incarnation Neither here does their rashnesse stand the small remnant of Christians the Anabaptistick Societies which alone they will honour with the title of true Churches seem to them too many to be saved therefore new separations are run into and those so severe that there lives not an Anabaptist upon earth who by multitudes even of Anabaptists is not condemned with all who adhere to his subdivision as a man in a false way not only without but in opposition to the true Church In its di honoring of God be setting up a liberty first for all errours This their extream cruelty against the souls of men wont to be coloured with the shew of zeal to the truth and honour of God but this varnish is now almost quite wiped off Behold whither their zeal to the truth and honour of God is now evanished They for some times were so eminently zealous against errors and vices that very small ones were wont to draw from them an ejection out of the Church a deliverance to Satan and where the Civill Sword was in their hand a putting out of this life a publick execution by the hand of the Hangman when their Princes and Prophets were not at leisure to administer Justice in their own persons Notwithstanding the loudest note that this day sounds in their song is liberty and freedom from all punishments for what ever crimes when all abominations imaginable are publickly proclaimed when many more and much viler errours walk in our streets then ever any one place in any time did hear of the great zeal of these religious men breaks out daily in all the discourses they please and actions they dare for the safeguard of the cursed instruments of these errours passionately denying all power in any on earth to restrain in the least measure the open propagation of the most abominable lies which Satan is able to utter by the tongue of any creature no matter of Religion say they can fall under the cognisance of any State the false Church has no right to censures or any Church Ordinance the truest Churches can meddle but with their own members they who never were of them or have renounced membership with them are without their Jurisdiction so neither State nor Church can put any barre of the smallest censure upon the propagation of any errour And next for all vice And lest vice the neer kinsman of errour should finde any harder measure any greater stop from the hand of superiour powers this Sect with all the speed it can is posting back to its first principles the overthrow of the civill State as much as of the Church That when ever they are found in the practise of their Doctrine of the lawfulnesse of adultery and incest robbery and murder there may be none upon earth to controll them For this end they cast down the King and Parliament Commons as well as Lords all Incorporations all Judicatories in Burgh and Land that an absolute Monarchy a full liberty for every man to do all his pleasure without any fear of punishment may be set up That the Crown and Scepter the Kingship and absolute Soveraignty may at last be restored to the onely true owners the free-born people of England the individuals as they love to speak of the whole Nation All this much more have they set under their own hands as may be seen in the former Chapters Their Brownistick and Arminian Tenets I have refuted in other Treatises I have neither time nor minde to dispute all their positions in my little Antidote against Arminianism I have in a short and popular way impugned it their Tenets against the Protestant Churches in the heads of election redemption grace free-will and perseverance In the first Part of my Disswasive I have debated at length enough the chief of those errours which they have taught their children the Separatists The reall holinesse of all Church members the necessity of separation for want of satisfaction in this point alone the power of every member of the Church to preach the word to ordain and to excommunicate when there is cause their very Pastors
actually taken away from all mankinde That the common doctrine of election and predestination is false YY That the Sun Moon and other creatures do sufficiently preach Christ to all the world ZZ That the will of man has power to reject the most efficacious grace AAA That our Doctrine of perseverance is false BBB These men be the chief Apostles and Evangelists of the Anabaptistick Churches who are sent out by the rest to the adjacent Counties to preach and baptize CCC For this their false Doctrine laid to their charge long ago in Print we never heard that either of them has been so much as rebuked by any of their Churches or that M. Spilsberry though he writ against the Tenets did ever yet refuse communion and the right hand of fellowship unto any person whom he knew to professe them Unto the Arminian many of them do joyn the Antinomian Errors these are the chief charms whereby multitudes of people are drawn to their company as M. Weld doth well remark DDD Nothing is more attractive of people then the Doctrine of licentiousnesse gilded over with the pretences of the most eminent piety It is not only Oats Den Lamb Clarkson and the like who preach against the Law and all duties telling us that the morall Law does not binde any Christian to obedience EEE That Magistrates may not punish murderers if they be Church members for the sixth command Thou shalt not kill doth not concern Christians FFF they have nought to do with Moses nor any of his Laws GGG That all the sins of the Saints that either they have or shall commit are so taken away by Christ that they ought not to be grieved for any of them HHH That all Preachers who presse repentance and sorrow for sin are Legall III That God is not displeased with any sins of the Saints and will not have them be displeased with any of their own iniquities KKK That God requires no duty from those whom he will save not so much as faith That faith it self is a work a Legall condition LLL That all our duties are done for us by Christ That he has repented for us and beleeved for us MMM That no more under the Gospel is required of any but to be meer patients NNN This is the new glorious light wherein not only the common Antinomians do glory but their most precious and spirituall men have too many strains of the same kinde M. Hobson proclaims all his wonted religious exercises to be but legall duties which he professes to give over OOO He avows that Christ hath satisfied Gods Justice for no mans sin nor done any thing for the reconciling of God to men with whom he was never offended and to whom if once he had been offended he could never again have been reconciled PPP he makes it Christs only labour to reconcile man to God and to manifest not to procure Gods love to man QQQ M. Saltmarsh so great a Champion for the Antipaedobaptists that he rests not till he have exploded the Baptism as well of old as of young makes it now his greatest work to write against our orthodoxe Divines in favour of the Antinomians SSS The Author of that neatly printed Treatise of Baptisme from whom I should have as little expected as from any other an apostasie from the Independents to the Anabaptists and a transition from Anabaptism to any point of Antinomianism does tell us that all anxious labouring about sins and the pardoning of them is a great impediment to holinesse of life TTT The Confession of their seven Churches does not so flatly contradict these errours as the former of Arminianisme but rather countenances them it sets down such a justification as acquits us before God of all sin past present and to come VVV The second Edition omits that sentence of past present and to come I wish this correction did proceed from a dislike of the conclusions which the Antinomians draw from the words omitted but in both Editions they expresly exclude the necessity of the Laws Ministery to bring the soul to any repentance before or in the time of its calling and conversion to Christ XXX The Antinomian controversies are not as the prime Independents doe make them only about words and methods of Preaching I should be glad that all the question here were onely about words and phrases or methods of preaching as some would make it but expâ—rience proves the difference to be too too reall for we see that their words phrases and method of preaching does carry their hearers to the grossest crimes without any remorse of conscience or thought of repentance When some of them are catched in theft they scorn either to be grieved or ashamed for it YYY others encourage themselves to commit adultery upon their Doctrine ZZZ some of them do constantly work in their handy-trade every Sabbath day AAAA others make all repentance and prayer for pardon of the grossest sins to be sinfull and a fruit of misbeleef BBBB finally if the report of those who pretend to be acquainted with their carriage hold good too many who have been noted for strictnesse of life have fallen evidently after the embracing of these Tenets into a loosenesse of conversation CCCC Many of the Anabaptists are become Seekers denying all Churches all Officers all Ordinances We have already demonstrated a farre enough progresse of this Sect into the ways of errour yet the spirit that reignes in Anabaptism carries many of his followers beyond all we have spoken Their injury not only against infants but all the Churches in the world that dissent from them in spoyling the first of all interest in the Covenant of God and comfort from the holy Sacrament in depriving the other of all the priviledges of true Churches closing up all these blessings within the narrow bounds of their own seduced companies this their unjustice is recompenced by God upon many of their spirits giving them over to stronger delusions Very many of the Anabaptists are now turned Seekers denying the truth of any Church upon earth for many ages past denying that there are any Pastors now on the earth that there may be any preaching of the word any joyning in prayer any celebration either of Baptism or of the Lords Supper any Church discipline at all or any Church Act Church state or Church ordinance whatsoever while God from heaven send new Apostles to work miracles and set up Churches which for the space of fourteen hundred years at least have totally failed in the whole world Hitherto M. Williams DDDD M. Clarkson EEEE Mr. Attaway FFFF are come from their Antipaedobaptism Hitherto also it seems M. Saltmarsh does drive while he not only defends the Seekers as well as the Independents and Anabaptists but himself also positively avows that there is no lawfull Baptism this day in the whole earth and that there has been none rightly baptized since the days of the Apostles also that to lawfull Baptism and
propositions may be denyed there is no necessity of the major for although the commission of teaching and baptizing goe together yet this infers not any necessity of applying these two commands to the self same persons be it so that these two acts are ever conjoined and that teaching must ever goe before baptizing for the parents ought to be instructed before the children be baptized and in the right administration of baptisme the nature of the covenant is always declared before the seal of the sacrament be appended yet it follows not that the same persons who are to be baptized are at that same time to be taught as in the commission for Circumcision Gen. 17. all the precepts concern not the self same persons but some the parents onely some the infants only and some both v. 12. he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you this belongs onely to infants but the 11. v. ye shall circumcise the flesh of your fore-skin this belongs onely to the parents and those of age for no other could obey this injunction and v. 10. every man-child among you shall be circumcised belongs alike both to old young Even so that in the Law of Baptism some of the injunctions should belong only to the Pastors as the act of preaching and baptizing and others onely to the elder people that are to be baptized as that of being taught and others as that of being baptized to the younger also who are not able to bee taught there is no absurdity The minor also is denyed upon divers grounds Infants are Disciples I speak not of that which divers maintain of the actuall faith of children and of the application to infants of that of Isaiah they shall be all taught of God from the least to the greatest But I desire that to be considered which many more affirm and divers of the Anabaptists themselves doe presse that the word which Christ uses in his commission to the Apostles is matheteuein which signifies say they not to teach but to make Disciples now infants may very well goe under the name of Disciples for they are brought to the School of God the visible Church and there they are dedicate to Gods discipline and have their names given up to be the Lords subjects and scholars Sundry scriptures also are produced where infants are counted Disciples as Act. 15.10 why tempt ye God to put a yoke upon the neck of the Disciples Circumcision is the yoke whereof the Apostle is speaking now they on whose neck ordinarily that yoke was put were onely infants A third reason for the proving of our first minor is this Infants have interest in the Trinity To whom the form and end of Baptisme expressed in the place in hand does belong to them the commission set down in Mat. 28.19 does extend But to some infants the form and end of Baptisme expressed in that place does belong Ergo. The minor is grounded upon the words of the text for they make the form and end of Baptisme to be a dedication of the person baptized to the Father Son and holy Ghost and an interessing of the three Persons in the baptized party now the necessity to dedicate christian infants to their Creator Redeemer and Sanctifier and the interest of all the three Persons in the infants of their servants so dedicated unto them is evident A fourth reason for the probation of that first minor whosoever may lawfully be baptized to them Infants may be lawfully baptized the commission in hand does extend for the baptism of women of old men of Kings of Beggers and of all sexes ages and conditions is grounded upon this command though neither their names nor their qualities be therein expresly set down nor can be fetched frō thence but only by consquence Now we assume that some infants may lawfully be baptized this both the present argument and the two former and these that follow doe prove and the Apostle Peter Acts 2.39 does evince by this argument To whom the chief ground of Baptisme does belong they may lawfully be baptized But to some children the chief ground of baptisme does belong to wit the promises of the new covenant those says he belong to you and to your children and upon this as a principall foundation he builds his exhortation to them to be baptized Arg. 4. from the Baptism of whole families Our fourth main argument is this The blessing which God bestows on whole families without exception of any infant ought not to be denyed to all infants But baptisme is such a blessing Ergo. The major is grounded on that laudable conformity which ought to be in all men with God when hee is good our eye without reproof may not be evill the minor is proved from divers Scriptures where the Apostles did baptize not only them who are declared to beleeve but with them their whole household whose actuall beleeving is not at all expressed Acts 16.15 Acts 16.15.31 when she was baptized and her houshold ibid. v. 31. thou and thy house shall be saved and v. 33. he and all his were baptized and 1 Cor. 1.16 1 Cor. 1.16 I baptized also the houshold of Stephanas No exception here is made of infants and if any should except them because they cannot hear the Word and beleeve they must exclude them also from the other spirituall benefits mentioned in these places even from salvation it self for as our Saviour speaks to Zacheus Luke 19.9 This day is salvation come to this house and the Lord shewed by the Angel to Cornelius that Peter should tell him words whereby he and all his house should be saved Acts 11.14 So Paul tels the keeper of the prison that upon his faith himself should be saved and his house Act. 16.31 How great a wrong it were to exclude infants either from the promise or from the seal of salvation when both are conferred upon whole housholds whereof infants are the most innocent parts may be seen in all the preceding practises of God from the first institution of any initiating sign to that day What ever man either Jew or Gentile was moved by God to joine himself to the visible church as himself did hear and make profession of his faith and receive the seal of Circumcision so also all his male infants were circumcised though they could neither hear nor beleeve This bounty and kindnesse God did never afterward retract and for any man to doe it it were a great presumption for so the Jews in the New Testament where their comforts are enlarged should be in a more sorrowfull condition then the very Gentiles were in the Old for then the Proselytes upon the profession of their faith had all their infants though unable to beleeve taken within the covenant and all their children admitted to the seals thereof but according to our adversaries position the Jews themselves in the New Testament though never so zealous of the faith must