generall in them but also such words as speak to every Saint in Christ and member in particular as the word all the Saints every Saint in Christ and every one of you and every branch in me c. But for example I shall give you one probable Argument from Mat. 18.15 16 17. in these words If thy Brother sin against thee go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone if he shall hear thee thou hast gained thy Brother if not then take with thee one or two more that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established and if he shall neglect to hear them tell it to the Church and if he neglect to hear the Church let him be to thee an Heathen man and a Publican From all which I argue thus First If it be the duty of Church-members to watch over one another and proceed in order according to this rule then they must be such as understand this rule But little babes of 8 daies weeks or months old cannot understand this rule Therefore they cannot be visible Church-members Secondly If it be the duty of Church-members to tell one another of their fault then they must be such as can both speak and judge what a fault is or else how can they tell one another of their faults But little Babes can neither speak nor judge in such cases Therefore they cannot be Church-members Thirdly If the faults of particular members in such cases may and must be brought before the whole Church for them to hear and judge then the whole Church ought to be such as can judge and likewise declare their minds But little Infants are not such Therefore no visible church-Church-members But it may be the objection against all this will be That this rule doth not reach or concern all church-Church-members because the word all or every one or whole Church is not found in the text But I shall leave it to the judgement of the wise that fear God and are worshipers of him in spirit and truth Many more such Arguments as this might be brought of which the time would fail to relate therefore I shall omit them and proceed to prove in opposition to Mr. Baxters and Mr. Cooks other Arguments that little Children that cannot speak words nor understand the Gospell if they hear it are not nor cannot be Christs Disciples Arguments I. My first Argument is from Mat 28.19 in these words Go ye therefore and teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit The plain English of which Mr. Baxter himself confesseth to be Go make Disciciples baptizing them c. From whence I argue thus If those Disciples which Christ commanded the Apostles to baptize must be first made so then they were not so born if they had they should not have need to be made so Again the word saith Teach all Nations or make Disciples saith Mr Baxter Whence I argue thus If make Disciples all Nations and teach all Nations be all one as Mr. Baxter affirms then it s clear that Disciples are made by preaching the word But Infants that cannot speak words nor understand earthly things if we tell them can much less understand the things of the Kingdom of Heaven declared by the preaching of the Gospell Therefore Here Mr. Baxter and I must have some discourse before we part a for he telleth us of divers waies to make Disciples besides teaching of them which in plain terms is to say There is divers waies to make Scholars besides or without teaching of them which to me is a Paradox Again Mr. Baxter being very willing to prove Infants Disciples saith page 22. line 1 2 3. that its enough to make them Disciples that they are devoted to learning if they live and that they are consecrated to Christ as their Master who can teach them hereafter So that he would prove them Disciples or Scholars first and have them taught afterwards strange doctrine and unheard-of Divinity the which lest any should object against he stoutly backs with a learned Argument as he would have it thus Is it not a common thing to call the whole Nation of Turks Mahometans old and young why then may we not call our selves and our Children Disciples of Christ And then he tells us another story of a man that hired a Philosopher to teach him and all his Children and were they not all then Disciples of that Philosopher Answ But is this Mr. Baxters plain Scripture-proof that he telleth us of in the title of his book I do much admire that a man prosessing so much seriousness in his matters and soundness in his judgement tenderness of conscience and zeal for truth as Mr. Baxter doth in his first chap. page 2 should so turn aside his ears from the truth of the word of God unto such fables as these as if he were resolved to make the Apostles words true upon himself 2 Tim. 4.3.4 which are these The time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching ears and they shall turn aside their ears from the truth and be turned unto fables c. But let me a little speak to Mr. Baxter in his own language lest he be wise in his own conceit and think I cannot answer such learned Questions Suppose I should grant that little Children as soon as they go to Schoole and begin to learn their letters are Scholars doth it therefore follow that they are then fit to learn the things of God and be immediately nay long before that the Disciples of Christ I think not for the Lord Christ saith John 2.12 If I have told you earthly things and you beleive them not how shall you beleive if I tell you Heavenly But such Children that go newly to Schoole to learn their letters you may tell them of many earthly things that they cannot understand nor beleive at all Againe What if we grant Mr. Baxter that little Children are Scholars the first day they are sent to Schoole and having learned but the first letters This would make nothing for his purpose for do we ever know any man so idle and foolish and void of understanding as to send his Child to Schoole to learn its letters befor it could speak or understand would not Mr. Baxter himself say such a man were void of reason but Mr. Baxter doth affirn such to be Disciples of Christ and would have them sent to Chrits Schoole but if this be equity or godly wisdome let the godly wife consider and judge But Mr. Baxter would teach men by parallels and lay aside the word of God he might have made the comparison thus As little children the first day they go to Schoole to learn their letters are commonly called the Scholars and Disciples of Men even so those little Children or babes in Christ 1 John 5.21 the first
Apostles they were no infants and as for thos e scattered they were no infants for they went every where preaching the word which infants that cannot speak nor understand cannot possibly do Therefore no such infants in the Church at Jerusalem Obj. But questionless there were women scattered as well as men and then it must follow they preached also and then we have women preachers I answer Although the Ministers in out days would have neither women nor men a preach but themselves yet the Scripture telleth 1 Cor. 11.4 5. that in those days women did use to pray and prophesie and they did it with their heads covered and Philip had four daughters virgins and they did prophesie Act. 21.9 and the Lord saith he will pour out his spirit upon all flesh upon his servants and handmaids and they shall prophesie Act. 2.17 18. and they that do prophesie do speak to men to edification exhortation and comfort 1 Cor. 14.3 therefore women may preach or declare the mind of God to others to edification exhortation and comfort if they be indued with gifts and abilities provided they do not usurp authority over the men 1 Tim. 2.12 And thus is the objection answered Argument III. My third Argument is from 1 Cor. 1. where Paul saith in the second verse he wrote to them at Corinth which were Saints by calling with all that in every place call upon the name of the Lord Jesus c. and in ver 10. he exhorts and beseecheth them to speak all one thing ver 12. he saith that Every one of them did speak and one said I am of Paul and another I am of Apollo and I am of Cephas and I am of Christ But infants that cannot speak nor understand cannot call upon the name of the Lord Jesus as ver 2. nor speak all one thing as ver 10. for they cannot speak at all neither can they say for their parts who they are of whether of Paul Apollo or Cephas or Christ Therefore no infants that could not speak nor understand were members of the Church of Corinth its evident for every one that was a member there could speak and say they were of one of these Argument IV. My fourth Argument is from 1 Cor. 6.4 If then ye have judgements of things pertaining to this life set them to judge that are least esteemed in the Church That he meant them that are least esteemed for wisdom and judgement is plain in the 5. verse But infants of eight or ten days or weeks of age cannot either judge or speak in such cases Therefore I conclude there were none such members of the Church at Corinth Argument V. My fifth Argument is from 1 Cor. 10.16 17. compared with ch 11.28 29. which words are these The cup of blessing which we bless is it not the communion of the blood of Christ and the bread that we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ for we being many are one bread and one body for we are all partakers of that one bread and Whosoever doth eat of this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord and eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords body c. But infants that can neither speak nor understand cannot discern the Lords body from the world as it is sanctified and separated from it by faith and obedience neither can they discern his body broken nor his blood blood shed for them which is so lively represented and holden forth in this bread and cup to every discerning believer till he come ver 26. Therefore such infants are no visible Church-members or if Mr. Baxter or any will yet have it so then we must needs conclude with the Scripture 1 Cor. 11.29 that they eat and drink damnation to themselves not discerning the Lords body which would be absurd If any object and say that Infants must not nor do not eat of that bread and drink of that cup till they be of riper age Answ They discover abundance of ignorance like those 1 Tim. 7. which desired to be teachers of the Law and yet knew not what they said nor whereof they affirmed for if they be Church-members as Mr. Baxter and Mr. Cook say then they are to partake both of the bread and the cup for the Apostle saith 1 Cor. 10.16 17. that both the cup and the bread are the Communion of the body and also that the members of the body being many are all partakers of that one bread c. Therefore either little infants that can neither speak nor understand are no members or else if they be they eat and drink damnation to themselves not discerning the Lords body as aforesaid let Mr. Baxter Mr. Cook or any man alse avoid this absurdity if they can Argument VI. My fixth Argument is from 1 Cor. 10.17 compared with 1 Cor. 11.28 in these words for we being many are one bread and one body for we are all partakers of that one bread but let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that bread c. whence I argue thus If all that are members of the body do partake of that bread and they that do partake of it must examine themselves and so eat then little infants that can neither speak nor understand are no members visible of Christs body the Church for they can neither examine themselves nor none else for them because they cannot speak nor make answer But all that are members of the body do partake of that one bread 1 Cor. 10.17 and all that do partake of it must examine themselves and so eat of that bread c. Therefore no such infants are visible members of Christs body which is the Church Object If any shall object that we may as well exclude women as children for the Text saith Let a man examine himself c. I Answer first it discovers but a wicked cavilling spirit for conscience telleth them that both men and women did partake of it because its the communion of the body as I have proved and that women are members of the body of Christ which is the Church Eph. 1.22 23. I think none fearing God dare deny but lest any should I shall prove it Gal. 3.27 for as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ There is neither Jew nor Gentile bond nor free male nor female but ye are all one in Christ c. and we read when they believed Philips preaching they were baptized both men and women Act. 8.12 Again that women are members of the body is evident for Paul writing to the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 11.4 5. Saith Every man that prayeth or prophesieth with his head covered dishonoureth his head but every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head and ver 11. he saith the man is not without the woman nor the woman without the
they come to yeers of discretion is sinful I further prove Because they by their tradition of Rantizing or Sprinkling babes before they understand and believe the Gospel do make the command of Christ which is To baptize men and women when they believe and understand of none effect and so in vain they worship God and they which take his name in vain he will not hold them guiltless See Mar. 7.7 8 9. Matth. 15.8 9. and thus they binde two sins together and in the one they shall not go unpunished Now to his Third Argument which is drawn from that which he hath spoken already as he himself confesses which he layeth down thus That practise which goeth upon meer uncertainty and hath no Scripture-Rule to guide it is not according to the will of Christ But the practise of baptizing of children of Christians at age goes upon meer uncertainties and hath no Scripture-rule to guide it Therfore it is not according to the will of Christ Answ Who would think Mr. Baxter could have chopped one Argument into so many pieces to multiply words for this Argument is the same in substance with the two former onely put downe in other words But I further answer thus 1. That to baptize men and women when they believe is not an uncertain rule but very certain both from the command of Christ and example of the Apostles as Mar. 16.16 He that believes and is baptized shall be saved And Acts 2.41 They that gladly received the word were baptized and added c. chap. 8.12 When they believed Philips preaching they were baptized both men and women And vers 37. If thou believest with all thy heart thou mayest be baptized Thus we see that it is guided by Scripture-rule and therefore it is most certain by Mr. Baxters grant But I must needs give Mr. Baxter his owne Argument againe thus That practice which goeth upon meer uncertainty and hath no Scripture-rule to guide it is not according to the will of Christ saith Mr. Baxter But say I the practice of Baptizing little Babes before they come to years of discretion goes upon meer uncertainties having no Scripture-rule to guide it Therefore it is not according to the will of Christ by Mr. Baxters owne confession His fourth Argument is this That practice which will necessarily fill the Church with perpetual contentions as being about a matter that cannt be determined by any known rule is not according to the minde of Christ But the practice of baptizing Christians children at age upon their profession is such as will necessarily fill the Church with perpetual contentions Therefore it is not according to the mind of Christ Answ But the baptizing of men and women when they believe is a matter that can be and is determined by a known rule in Scripture therefore no just cause of contentions because it is acccording to the will and minde of Christ as I have proved by those Scriptures quoted in the a foresaid Argument Again I shall retort his owne Argument upon himself thus That practice which will necessarily fill the Church with perpetual contentions as being about a matter that cannot be determined by any known Rule is not according to the minde of Christ But the practice of baptizing little Babes before they come to years of discretion is a thing which there is no known rule for in all the word of God Therefore it is not according to the minde of Christ and there is just cause to contend against it and that perpetually And thus Mr. Baxter I have thrown your owne Arguments upon your owne head and you are fallen into the same pit which you digged for others and thus is your folly manifested in the fourth Argument Your fifth Argument is thus That doctrine which would turn the Ordinance of Baptisme out of the Churches of the Saints or neer turn it out is contrary to the doctrine of Christ But this Doctrine of theirs that those onely should be baptized that are directly made Disciples by the preaching of men sent according to the text Mat. 28.19 20. would turn baptisme for the most part out of the Churches of the Saints Therefore it is contrary to the Doctrine of Christ To which I answer It seemes it is Mr. Baxters judgement that they which preach and baptise according to the Commandment Christ hath given to his Diseiples Mat. 28.19 20. are those which turn baptisme out of the Church and yet he will not shew us one Scripture to prove that any else ever were baptized but such as were made Disciples according to the will and minde of Christ viz. by the preaching of the Gospel But I confess such a Doctrine doth not almost but altogether turne Mr. Baxters baptisme out of the Church for we have no such custome nor the Churches of God as to baptize little Babes that can neither speak nor understand what the Gospel is 2. I shall give Mr. Baxter his owne Argument at first thus That Doctrine which would turn the Ordinance of Christs baptism out of the Church or neer out is contrary to the Doctrine of Christ But this Doctrine of Mr. Baxters and the rest of the Priests of England which is that all Children should be baptized in their non-age according to their practice doth turne the baptisme of Christ which is to baptize men and women when they believe quite out of the Churches of the Saints Therefore it is contrary to the doctrine of Christ and is to be abhorred as sinful And thus is Mr. Baxters sword turned with the edge against himself To Mr. Baxters sixth Argument which is against the manner of baptizing by dipping the which he makes a breach of the sixth Commandment Thou shalt not kill and therefore no Ordinance of God but an hainous sin and so exhorts the Magistrates pag. 134. and pag. 136. in the conclusion of his Argument to destroy the Anabaptists as well as highway-murderers To which I shall answer in order as followeth First Observe how Mr. Baxter proves it murther he useth not one Scripture therefore none can believe him that desires to make the word of God a ground of their Faith But he laboureth to prove it thus by affirming out of his owne mouth onely that its flat murder being ordinarily used And then insinuates thus It s undeniable to any understanding man for saith he again That which directly tendeth to the overthrow of mens lives being wilfully used is plain murther But dipping men over head in cold water ordinarily doth tend to the overthrow of their health and lives Therefore wilful murder Answ In all this the Reader shall do well to observe that Mr. Baxter hath used many vain words which prove nothing except we grant him that dipping people after this manner doth tend to the overthrow of mens lives which we cannot do because Scripture and experience hath taught us the contrary as I shall shew anon But he proceeds thus I dare say that in Cities like
reign upon a multitude of persons in London or elsewhere that never were dipped in cold water let him or any man deny if they can Now if Mr. Baxter do know none of his own knowledg that have perished or are like to perish by dipping by any of his aforesaid strange diseases and is also convinced in conscience that thousands in the Nation do dye of them that were never dipped in cold water then let all impartial people judge whether Mr. Baxter be a good tree by the fruit he bringeth forth If his intentions seem in his owne eyes to be good and that he aymeth hereby to undelude some souls and keep others from being deluded yet he must needs be one of those Paul speaks of in Rom. 3.8 which do evil that good may come thereof whose damnation is just The next thing Mr. Baxter speaks of is Mr. Tombes his salving up all this with saying that they may be baptized in warm water I answer I am not of his Judgement in that for I believe it s his weakness But then Mr. Baxter saith we cannot agree among our selves and therefore people have no reason to believe us I answer We do not desire people to believe us if we did agree never so well but to search the Scripture to see whether the things we speak be so or no like the noble Bereans Acts 17.11 and therefore to believe we would not have them hanged out of the way because they believe not us as Mr Baxter would have us because we believe not him but we know the Wheat and Tares must grow together in the field which is the world until the harvest according to the commandment of Christ 2. What if we do not agree together in every thing doth it follow therefore that the truth must not be believed and practised I hope not for its easie to prove that the Disciples of Christ in the first Churches did differ in their judgements although it was not their wisdome nor yet to the glory of God when one was of Paul and another of Apollo and another of Cephas and another of Christ 1 Cor. 1.12 c. and I believe that Paul and Barnabas were not of one minde when the contention grew so sharp between them that they parted and walked no more together Acts 15.39 and likewise Paul and Peter when Paul withstood him to the face 3. It is no marvel he telleth us of this because Mr. Baxter and his brethren the Ministers of England agree so well doth not one hold for baptisme with the sign of the Cross and another against it for Baptism in a Font and another in a Bason one for baptizing children of believers onely and others for the baptizing of all one for Railes and bowing at the Altar and others against it one for the Common-prayer-book and others for the Scotch Directory nay do not they persecute one another to Prison Banishment even death it self sometimes If Mr. Baxters Argument be good then let all people take good heed how they believe him and his brethren and so I desire they may do however except they bring plainer Scripture-proofes then Mr. Baxter hath done in his book for Infants Church-member-ship and baptisme The next remarkable thing of Mr. Baxter is denying of dipping of believers to be the custome of the Church in the primitive times and he is not ashamed to give the Scripture the lye before all men saying It is not proved by any Answ And why is it not proved I pray it may be because our Translators have not put the word Baptize into English and called it Dipping therefore he will not grant it but yet I question not the proving of it by the Scripture notwithstanding his subtil evasions of the truth saying They might well be said to go downe into the water because the country was mountainous To which I answer If this be all that Mr. Baxter have to prove it was not dipping in those dayes I think I have more to prove it was dipping and first I shall take what Mr. Baxter and his Brethren have granted me for Mr. Baxter in his 135. page saith the word signifieth as well to wash as to Dip so that by his owne words it signifies Dipping as well as Washing And in the Catechisme made by the learned of the Land when they question what is the outward form in baptisme their owne answer is Water wherein the person baptized is dipped c. thus much as Paul saith to the Atheniens Acts 17.28 their owne Poets confess From whence I argue thus If the word do signifie Dipping as well as Washing then they can no more blame us for practising dipping then we may blame them for practising washing Secondly If the word signifie Dipping and Washing one as well as another as Mr. Baxter and others say it doth then how are they to be blamed that do neither but onely sprinkle a few drops of water upon the face of a child for if the word signifie both Dipping and Washing and sprinkling be neither Dipping nor washing then they have deluded the People all this while and at leaft there quarters of the People of this Nation are still unbaptized And what an horrible thing is this that a whole Nation almost should thus be deceived by a company of learned self-seeking Men who profess themselves to be eyes to the blind and feet to the lame and to teach others that they should not deceive and as yet have not taught themselves Thirdly If the word signifie both washing and dipping then it must needs be washing by dipping or wetting all over for who can wash a thing that is not wet As for Mr. Baxters objection that Christ saith Ye need not but wash the seet and ye are Clean every whit I answer If Christ had spoken that about baptisme as he did about washing the Disciples feet to teach them humility it had been a good proofe but he did not therefore it s none but for to shew their humility and make them clean every whit from pride the washing one anothers feet did shew it as well as if they had washed their whole Bodies but now Christ when he speaketh of baptizing believers Mar. 16.16 he doth not say He that believeth and is baptized on his Feet shall be saved every wit but He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved and Philip and the Eunuch went both down into the water and he baptized him and not his feet only for then they should not have needed to have both gone down into the water Again If the word him or them includes the whole man or men as all that have understanding will confess it doth if they be not partial in this case then whole man or men and women were baptized of John in the River of Jordane confessing their sins and of Philip Acts 8.12 and the Scripture saith Mar. 1.10 that when Christ was baptized he came up out of the water which plainly sheweth that he