the Apostles themselves would in all likelihood throw the Power of Ordination out of the Church of God at this day especially if we stand upon the due Election and Qualification of Persons so claiming Succession from the Apostles themselves And because due Qualifications and Election is as necessary to a true Minister of Christ as Ordination seeing it 's most certain that unless God do first make Men Ministers it 's impossible for the Church rightly to make them Ministers We shall here add That besides his moral Vertues and Spiritual Gifts he that is regularly called to the Ministry must first be a true Member of the Church and chosen by a true Church to that sacred Employment And then we may boldly yet modestly suppose that true Ordination at least in some part of it is only found in the Congregations of Baptized Believers at this day For where true Baptism is not Ordination cannot be regular Again due Election is found amongst them whilst neglected both by Papists and Prelatists And further the true Form and Order of Ordination is found in our Churches The first is evident of it self No Baptism no due Ordination is a Truth without exception among all that own Ordination And for the second 't is certain none are ordained to any Office in the Baptized Churches till elected by the consent of the Church or the Major part to whom they are to minister And herein they follow the Footsteps of the Apostles Acts 1. when one must be chosen in the room of Judas the 120 which was the whole Assembly allowed the choice of two and good reason there is that where all are equally concerned they should all be satisfied in the choice of such as to whom they commit the care and feeding of their Souls When the seven Deacons were to be ordained the whole Church is consulted Acts 6. and the Election made by them who knew the qualification of the Persons And as holy Scripture so Antiquity stands with us in this case The Nicene Council writing their minds to the Church at Alexandria concerning some that were to succeed other Bishops gives these Directions If so be they shall seem to be worthy and the People shall chuse them What Rules were to be observed in respect of their worthiness for Ministerial Employment may be gathered from Clement Epist ad Corinth Having saith he made trial of them by the Spirit to be Bishops and Deacons And again Others well approved of should succeed into the Office and Ministry who therefore have been constituted by famous and discreet Men with the good liking and consent of all the Church and who withal have of a long time had a good Testimony from all Men. Leo gives the same direction Epist 84. c. 5. charging That none be ordained against the Wills and Petitions of the People And again Epist 49. The Custom was that he should be chosen of all that was to be over all and wills that the liking of the People and their Testimony be sought That in Ordinations the Rules of the Apostles and Fathers ought to be observed that he that is to be over the Church should not only have the Allowance of the Faithful but the Testimony also of them that are without Cyprian is as clear for us Ep. l. 1. The People who full well and perfectly know the Life of him that is to be ordained Bishop are to be present and to be chosen with their allowance who know the Conversation of every one And he brings Salinius his Colleague for Instance who was chosen by the Voice of the whole Brotherhood and the Judgment of the Bishops which came together Each Church stands free saith Dr. Bilson Perpet Govern by God's Law to admit maintain and obey no Man as their Pastor without their liking and that the Peoples Election dependeth on humane Fellowship and first Principles of humane Society and Assemblies Dr. Field informs us That this Right of the People hath been invaded many ways 1. By great Personages and Magistrates 2. When the Bishops grew to great Pomp and the Clergy began to be enriched by Benefices Elections were and to this day are made according to the Interests of the Rich and Strong whilst the People are not only deprived of but become ignorant that any Right remains in them to chuse their own Ministers or Pastors Now this Privilege tho lost in most National Churches is restored and maintained in the Baptized Churches where none are elected Messengers Bishops or Deacons without the free Choice of the Brotherhood where such Elections are made And after such Election of Persons of known Integrity and competent Ability we proceed to Ordination with Fasting and Prayer and the laying on of Hands according to the Scripture Acts 13. 3. When they had fasted and prayed they laid their Hands on them and sent them away Thus for the Ordination of Messengers which after the manner of some are called Bishops Acts 14. 23. And when they had ordained them Elders in every Church and prayed with Fasting they commended them to the Lord on whom they believed Acts 6. 5 6. And they chose Stephen a Man full of Faith and of the Holy-Ghost and Philip and Prochorus and Nicanor and Timon and Parmenas and Nicholas whom they set before the Apostles and when they had prayed they laid their Hands on them Thus for the Ordination of Deacons All which Apostolical Practices are religiously restored and observed in the Churches of the Baptized Believers without any devised Adjuncts of our own or others By all which it may appear they have a lawful Call to the Work of the Ministry Here I meet with an Objection 'T is doubted by some whether a Man having received Ordination as a Presbyter may afterward have Ordination as a Messenger of the Churches of Christ the Objector supposing that the first Ordination is sufficient only the Church must give him another Commission This Objection I answer three ways 1. By Antiquity 2. By Reason 3. By Scripture 1. Antiquity is directly against this Objection being rather for a threefold Ordination than only one as I shall shew by and by But first I marvel how the Objector would give a Man a Ministerial Commission without Ordination the Church having no other way at all to give Commissions but by Ordination nor can any Man tell us how she can give her Commissions Ministerial but by the very Act of her Ordination and according to the Nature of her Ordination such and no other is her Commission Now our Ancients understood this and therefore did usually bring Men gradually to the degree of a Bishop i. e. a Messenger according to the Scripture Bishop or Overseer being a Name common to Elders in the Primitive Times Thus Chrysostom was first ordained a Deacon then a Presbyter after that he was ordained Bishop of Constantinople by Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria And saith the learned Bilson In the Primitive Church they were first Deacons and upon Trial when they had ministred well and were found blameless they were admitted to be Elders and after that if their Gifts and Pains so deserved they were called to an higher degree so that every one by the ancient Discipline of Christ's Church before he could come from ministring to governing in the Church of God received thrice or at least twice Imposition of Hands 2. Reason tells us that every Man that is called to the Work of the Ministry ought to have a Commission that is an Ordination commensurable to his Ministry It is Christ's peculiar to give Commission by the Word of his Mouth only the Church cannot do so she must confer Ministerial Authority in some solemn Rite or Ceremony This is plain in the case of Deacons it was not sufficient for the Apostles to say of Persons eminently qualified we order or appoint them to serve Tables or look ye to the Poor But besides their great Qualifications and Election they must receive their Commission or Authority by Prayer with the laying on of hands else they have no Commission In like 〈…〉 be solemnly ordained before the Holy-Ghost hath made him an Overseer of the particular Flock committed to his Charge And then in reason if he have a far greater Charge afterward committed to him he has need of a Commission that is an Ordination for other Commission there is none to enable him to take care of many Churches and to plant new Churches in the World We read not of any Messengers that acted as such in that great Trust without an Ordination agreeable to their Work and it is ill venturing to send Men out with a Commission too short for their Employment it being irrational so to do and without any good Example Let us see then what the Scripture will say in favour of our Answers 3. The Apostles had a twofold Apostleship the one limited to the Jewish Nation Mat. 10. the other of extent to all Nations Mat. 28. If they were ordained to either then they were ordained to both and the latter seems to be the more solemn and formal Ordination not only for that when Christ had given them Order what to do he lift up his Hands and blessed them Luk. 24. 50. but also gave them Order to tarry at Jerusalem until they were endowed with Power from on high When their Work was particular or limited they had a limited Commission when their Work was universal they had an universal Commission Sure the Church who hath no way to give Commissions but by Ordination shall do well and wisely to follow Christ the Author of all her Power when she delegates or gives it forth to any of her Ministers This Answer may suffice yet we add Barnabas is confessed to have been one of the Seventy Disciples and had a divine Authority from Christ to preach the Gospel to the Jews but when he is sent to preach to the Gentiles he hath a new Commission even an Ordination as appears Acts 13. FINIS Psal 90. 2. Rev. 4. 10. 1 Tim. 1. 17. Psal 147. 5. Prov. 15. 3. i See the 35th of Elizabeth Luk. 2. 22 23 24. Exod. 13. 2. Lev. c. 12. Socrat. l 6 c. 12 13.
symbolizing with legal Ceremonies Gal. 2. that so the Truth of the Gospel might continue in the Churches of Galatia plainly shewing that as Light and Darkness cannot dwell together so the Gospel is exclusive of legal Ceremonies and humane Innovations And seeing all must grant there has been a very great departure from the Truth of the Gospel both in Doctrine and Practice there cannot be a better Method I suppose thought on to amend what is amiss in the Christian World and thereby to restore true brotherly Fellowship than that used by our Lord Mat. 19. 8. to reform a Corruption among the Jews and such an Error too as had a shew of Scripture-Authority for it I mean the Case of Divorce yet our Saviour suppresseth that Custom by referring to the primitive Institution of Marriage From the Beginning it was not so And upon this Text how well does our Brethren I mean the Sober and Pious in the Church of England defend themselves against Popish Innovations both in Opinion and Practice One of them speaks thus As touching each of these Errors we can say with our Saviour in this present Correption of the Pharisees that from the Beginning it was not so and we care not whence they come unless they come from the Beginning This hath ever been saith he the Rule the warrantable Rule to reform a Church When Esdras was intent on building the Temple he sent not to Ephesus much less to Rome he did not enquire into the Rituals of Numa Pompilius but had recourse for a Temple to that of Solomon and for a Rite to that of Moses Indeed for Things meerly indifferent as he observes there must be preserved a Liberty in all Churches to consult and do for the best I dare not say as he To make Constitutions for that 's a great word but to manage her Affairs with Decency Order and Charity But to come more directly to our Doctrine which is Brotherly Fellowship Love and Vnity is carefully to be endeavoured and maintained by all Christians Certain it is that our Love as Christians may go much further than our actual Communion in all things Christian may do and yet this Love it self is a kind of Fellowship The Angels have Fellowship with us and acknowledg themselves our Fellow Servants Rev. 19. 10. and yet they do not partake with us in all our acts of Religion but only by approbation and corroboration in things which are well done Now the best or most orderly sort of Christians cannot conceive a greater disproportion between their Churches and the Churches of the most erring if but well-meaning Societies that conscientiously profess Love and Obedience to Christ And even hence we are obliged to hold as much Brotherly Fellowship with them as we can especially that of Love and Brotherly Compassion For when we consider that even some of all sorts of Christians will rather dye than basely deny their Lord and Master we cannot but have Fellowship with such in our Spirits whilst it is the same and not a feigned Christ to whom they shew their utmost testimony of Love And this Consideration alone may suffice to take away that imbitteredness which is too often found among Christians dissenting one from another Let their Appellations be what they will so that they believe in the true Christ and live well being also faithful to what they know And tho they be never so angry with me for opposing them in their Traditions or erring Notions otherwise yet I must have a Brotherly tenderness towards them all for the Truths sake which dwelleth in them But now for ample or full Communion I see not how that can be attained and maintained but where there is antecedent to it an Union both in Doctrine and Practice in things necessary to the true Constitution and Government of the Church of Christ And seeing also our Differences about these things are not small or trivial it cannot I think be better ordered than that a Friendly Distinction and Brotherly Forbearance be permitted as to ample Communion for that Men cannot comfortably nor peaceably join together till they be agreed in these things I see not that the difference betwixt Paul and Barnabas was so great as to the thing about which they differed as the things about which Christians differ in these days and yet its certain their Contention being great for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies provoking gauling and imbittered Speeches and Minds say the Learned it is certain they could not transact their Affairs in the Gospel together but apart And this was written perhaps to shew that a competent Unity in Judgment must precede our actual Communion and till that be attained among us there is a necessity in regard partly of human Frailty and partly in regard of some precious Truths to forbear one another without destroying the Truth to which we have attained respectively And this is the greatest Love we can extend to one another under these difficult Circumstances 1. To pity and heartily to pray one for another for the Servant of the Lord must not strive but be gentle towards all Men in Meekness instructing those that oppose themselves 2. There must be all Patience exercised and Compassion shewed to the Ignorant and those that are out of the way especially where the scruple is tender and conscientious And in the mean time the faithful Minister of God must hold fast the form of sound Words he must teach the same Doctrine which was committed to his Trust by the Apostles He must warn others that they teach no other Doctrine He must not give place to Jewish or other Fables And the Church must so walk in Christ as they first received him rooted in the Foundation-Principles established and built up in him Not carried about with every Wind of Doctrine but speaking the Truth in Love must endeavour to grow up into Christ in all things In a word it is the Duty of this Brotherhood to stick close to the whole Councel of God and not to partake with other Mens Sins or Errors in Life or Religion which cannot be done where contrarieties in Doctrine and Practice about things necessary to the true State and Government of the Church of Christ are allowed in the same Fellowship or Community Love the Brotherhood This Fraternity are in a special manner to love one another 1. Because God himself hath loved them with a special kind of Love And if God so loved us we ought also to love one another 1 John 3. It is happy when the Love of Christians is founded upon this bottom viz. the Manifestation of God's Love to them and not upon any thing of human Excellency for this is to have Mens Persons in Admiration and not to admire this Behold what manner of Love the Father hath bestowed upon us 2. Because this is the sweetest Manifestation that we are the Children of God for in this is manifest the Children of God 1 John 3. 10. namely that they
it and also I grant that they belong to the Kingdom of Heaven and so are of the Universal Church But this proves not that they are Disciples at all for the Infants of Heathens are Members of Kingdoms and may go to Heaven and yet you think they are no Disciples for all that And if Infants may in some Sence be said to be God's Servants Psal 119. 91. yet this proves not that they are Disciples for all Creatures as well sensitive vegetative as rational are said to be his Servants yet all Creatures are not Christ's Disciples Mr. Taylor 's Argument 8. To whom Christ grants Imposition of Hands to them belongs Baptism But to Children Christ grants Imposition of Hands Therefore to them belongs Baptism ANSWER 1. If the major Proposition be taken universally that to whomsoever Christ granted imposition of Hands or touching in any case that to them belongs Baptism then the Major is not true for he touched or put his hand upon the dead yet Baptism belongs not to the dead Luke 7. 14. If it be said Christ touched the Bier not the Dead I answer He touched the Childrens Cloaths when he took them in his Arms but he took the dead Damsel by the hand and said Talitha cumi Damsel I say unto thee Arise Mark 5. 41. Thus much to the Major now to the Minor 2. If by laying on of hands you understand that which by Christ's Doctrine Heb. 6. 2. is made a standing Ordinance in his Church and in order next to Baptism as is evident you do then I deny your Minor For that Ordinance was not yet instituted nor useful because the End of it was not yet to be received for the Spirit of Promise was not yet given nor as yet to be given because Jesus was not yet glorified John 7. Wherefore your Misinterpretation of Mat. 19. 13 14 15. is injurious to Truth and would prefer these Infants to the Apostles in the reception of the First-fruits of the Spirit unless you think Christ laid hands on the Children without obtaining the End or Essect of the Service So then it 's clear that this laying on of hands or touching Infants for so it is expressed both by St. Mark and St. Luke cannot with any fairness be understood of that laying on of hands which follows Baptism and therefore is no Proof at all for your Minor 3. The Church of England does not believe that Infants are fit Subjects for laying on of hands and therefore does not understand this Text Mat. 19. of that laying on of hands which follows Baptism neither does Mr. Taylor himself believe that Confirmation belongs to Infants If otherwise they are very unfaithful in that they were never known to lay hands upon any one Infant for confirmation as I can hear of But how comes it to pass that Mr. Taylor will baptize Infants when yet he confesses their Baptism is not mentioned in the New Testament and yet not plead for their Confirmation till they be capable to own their Covenant made in Baptism when yet he pretends tho I dare say he believes it not that Text Mat. 19. 13 c. is express for that laying on of hands which follows Baptism to be granted to Christ to Infants pag. 56. 4. Mr. Taylor says That Christ confirmed or laid hands on the Baptized I shall entreat him to make this plain for I would gladly see it well proved however I am sure his Doctrine orders it to be done and that 's sufficient What you say further here is either what we oppose not or what is answered elsewhere save only your last Particular which now we shall consider 5. Their coming to Christ say you is their becoming his Disciples or Proselites Suffer them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be Proselites to me If to this I should answer with Tertullian Veniant ergo dum adolescunt c. Let them come therefore when they are grown up it will be thought too little tho God knows how hasty soever Men are to get them sprinkled they are slow enough to bring them to Christ when they are capable to be taught I will therefore answer further Do you think that when Infants are brought to a Priest to be sprinkled and crossed that then they are brought to Christ Or can Christians no other way bring their Infants to Christ Or do no Infants belong to Christ but those who are so brought These Things will not be asserted I think yet let us go as far as we can by the Light of the Text. By this Example of Christ I think the Ministers of Christ may lawfully pray for a Blessing in behalf of all the Infants of those that shall desire it and that it is well done in those Parents that do desire the Prayers of the Church or her Ministers for their Infants And this is as much as can be fairly urged from this Text as imitable for us For the touching by our Saviour's hands may be a Point too high for us unless we will also touch the Dead c. which I hope is not written for our Example But now if the Minister will needs baptize my Child because I bring it into the Congregation and desire Prayer to be made to God for his Blessing upon it he herein goes beyond the Example of Christ and beyond the Text and therefore there I must leave him his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notwithstanding For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex verbo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod est advenio quoniam veniebant est Ethnicis ad Judaismum saith the Learned and I think Infants cannot change their Religion nor was it fit to call an Infant of a Jew a Proselite when it was brought to Circumcision and consequently as improper to call the Child of a Christian a Proselite However all that can lawfully be done to proselite an Infant if you will needs have that Term used is but to devote them to Christ by Prayers for his Blessing but not a Syllable for baptizing them Mr. Taylor 's Argument 5. If the Faith of the Parents entitles the Children to the Covenant then it entitles them to Baptism But the Faith of the Parents entitles the Children to the Covenant Therefore the Faith of the Parents entitles the Children to Baptism ANSWER 1. The Consequence of the Major may well be denied for tho it should be some ways true that the Faith of the Parents entitles the Children to the Covenant yet it follows not that it entitles them to the performance of or submission to the Things which they understand not nor are able to perform And whither would such a Consequence lead us if we should follow it What Duty should not Infants be entitled to as well as to Baptism But let us see whether the Minor be well proved you quote Acts. 2. and think it a clear place to prove that the Faith of the Parents entitles the Children to the Covenant But this Text says not a word to that purpose for
Mr. Taylor to follow him But sith he refers me also to Mr. Leigh's Crit. Sac. He shall do well to mark what he saith even as quoted by Mr. Walker p. 36. the reason says he why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put pro Lotione mundatione is because such as are immersed that is dipped come out of the WATER washed or cleansed So then to Baptize is to dip the Subject in the Element in the Name c. and that which is no small but a most importent Confirmation of that Mode and only that is the Baptism of Christ's own Person for Mr. Walker cannot deny that the Greek in Mark 1. 9. being rightly rendred in English is thus read Jesus came and was baptized of John INTO JORDAN and therefore he may be confident he was not sprinkled for it would be nonsence to say he was sprinkled into Jordan but good sence and plain truth too to say he was dipped into Jordan And yet for all this Mr. Walker fights stoutly both against Truth and Reason leaning only upon the single Authority of Bernard and will have Sprinkling to be meant or signified by the Word Baptize as well as Dipping And Mr. Taylor says the same tho many learned Writers contradict them both But it shall suffice here to set down two both equal in Learning and Vertue to these our present Opposites The first shall be that truly Famous Man Dr. Jer. Taylor in his Rule of Conscience l. 3. c. 4. If you would attend to the signification of the Word BAPTISM signifies plunging in Water or dipping with washing And saith Keckerman Immersion not Aspersion that is dipping not sprinkling was the first institution of Baptism as it doth plainly appear from Rom. 6. 3. Syst Theol. But for all this Mr. Walker pretends Antiquity for Sprinkling and it is strange to see what learned Men will say when they are set to defend Error We will but touch two of his most ancient Instances that you may see the bottom of the business 1. He goes as high as the second Century and takes an instance of sprinkling from the service of the Daemons that is Devil-Gods but why so Because he supposes the Heathen used sprinkling in the Service of their Daemons in imitation of the Christians Practice But the truth is it 's more to be feared that unwary Christians did fall to imitate the Heathens for we are told so in effect even by a learned Popish Author which for the plainness of the Testimony I will here faithfully transcribe He saith This chief Chair of the Church being translated from Antioch to Rome He Peter and his Successors were very careful and vigilent to reduce the Christian Religion being as yet indigested unpolished and little practised and the Professors thereof into better Order and Vniformity out of the Law of Moses which Christ came not to abolish but to fulfil out of the Civil and Politick Government of Romans Greeks and Egyptians and out of both sacred and prophane Rites Laws and Ceremonies of other Nations but most especially by the wholsom Doctrine and Direction of Christ Jesus and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit See a Book called The Manners Laws and Customs of all Nations pag. 151. Behold here the Springs of Human Inventions and Ceremonies Mr. Walker's second Instance is a Story of one sprinkled with Sand instead of Water the Water being scarce and the Party like to dye but alas they could not dip the Sick into the Sand and however their Zeal may be commended their Action is not to be commended at all It shews their Folly for it 's better to be without a Ceremony when we cannot possibly have it in God's way than to set up our own Devices in the stead and place and use of it For I will saith God have Mercy and not Sacrifice And thus we shall leave Mr. Walker to consider his Sandy Foundation for his sprinkling Infants 2. Mr. Taylor says Sprinkling cannot nullify Baptism and therefore our dissenting Brethren are to blame to make our Baptism to be essentially corrupted and not to be accounted Baptism because not performed by Dipping To this I answer When our Saviour commanded to baptize he commanded but one not divers kinds of Actions and to do that which is not only contrary to his own blessed Example in this very thing but also such an Act as cannot with any equity of Speech or good Sence be called Baptism is to err essentially in the performance of it And so great is the difference between Dipping and Sprinkling that such as sprinkle Infants dare not speak as they act when they pretend to baptize No they dare not say I sprinkle thee in the Name of the Father c. which they might well say if the word Baptize does equally signify dipping and sprinkling We are not therefore to blame to labour to have this Ordinance kept as it was delivered for sure if it be our Duty to keep God's Ordinances it 's our Duty to keep them as they were observed by Christ and the Primitive Churches And so far as the manner of doing this command of Christ is essential to the Ordinance dipping is of the essence of it without which it cannot be called Baptism Again All the Scriptures which command to baptize do expresly command to dip the Party to be baptized and therefore Mr. Taylor is to blame to say There is not one place of Scripture which in express Words commands Dipping pag. 59. Yea Sir your Text Matth. 28. 19. commands Dipping For were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated into plain English it must be rendred by dipping And I pray Sir consider whether you could not with a good Conscience translate it so And on the other side Whether your Conscience would not accuse you should you translate the Text Teach all Nations sprinkling them I dare say no Man dare thus read the Text. Why then do they thus act Shall we speak one thing and do another So speak ye and so do ye as they that shall be judged by the Law of Liberty to wit the Gospel 3. What you urge from the Legal Washings has been answered by the Learned of our way and particularly by Mr. Danvers who says I have carefully examined all the Places in the Old Testament where the word Dipping or Baptizing is mentioned and do find it is expressed by the Hebrew Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Minceus and Dr. Hammond observe The Septuagint do render the Word Tabal in the Hebrew by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and with all the Translators both the Latin Dutch Italian French and English do translate to dip the Word rendred Washing being another Word as the following Scriptures inform you Gen. 37. 31. Exod. 12. 22. Lev. 4. 6. 17. 14. 6. 16 51. Levit. 9. 9. Deut. 33. 24. John 3. 5. Numb 16. 18. 2 Kings 5. 14. I cannot think therefore that you can conscionably parallel Rom. 6. 3 4. Col. 2. 11. with the
Cause why we think your pretended Baptism a Nullity for your Error about the Subject is more than the other 3. What you say further is to make us believe that Christ did not go into the Water that the Eunuch went to the Water only because the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies ad to But your Conscience will tell you it signifies into as well as to and indeed you grant it and then to what putpose do you quarrel our Translation However we have proved that Christ was baptized in the River and 't is expresly said of the many Thousands which came to Jordan that they were all baptized in the River confessing their Sins Now Sir here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot be rendred to the River nor with the River without egregious Folly and then 't is very plain that they were all dipped in the River for it had been absolute Folly to go into the River to sprinkle the Face Hand or any other part of the Body Seeing then they went into the River to baptize it shews it cannot rightly be done without going into the Water and therefore of necessity we must understand Dipping is the only true Mode of Baptizing 4. I marvel how any wise Man can look upon that Text John 3. 23. John baptized in Enon because there was much Water there and so much as think Sprinkling to be a lawful way of baptizing If he will use any of his Wit he cannot but infer Baptism could not be rightly done with a few drops of Water seein John chose Enon because there was much Water there And what tho 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signify many Waters yet it does not signify many Rivers but by the Noise of many Waters is often meant the Noise of much Water in one Source or Channel However you say the Greek signifies the Confluence of these two Springs Jordan and Jaboc but yet you are unwilling that they should yield so much Water as might suffice to dip in And yet the Scripture tells you elsewhere that Jordan overflows all her Banks at certain times and Lithgow that was at it will give you an account that it is a River sufficient to dip a bigger Man than your self in But here you say is no mention of dipping Yes Sir but there is for when you hear that John was baptizing in Enon he was either dipping or sprinkling The latter would make the Speech absurd and nonsensical the former therefore was his Business for he was dipping in Enon near Salem because there was much Water there Your Church therefore is very much to blame in leaving the Way of Truth and following her own Tradition and is therefore the cause of our present disunion and will be till she turn to the Truth both in the Subject and Manner of Baptism or at least forbear to impose upon us without Authority from Heaven What you add by way of answer to some of our Objections against Infant Baptism is answered in my Reply to Dr. Stillingfleet and Mr. J. Barret which is bound up with my Book of Primitive Christianity and to that I will refer you What you add about Sureties or God-Fathers c. I shall not take notice of at this time and indeed the usage is so odd that Dr. Jer. Taylor well said if it had been God's will to have had them It is to be supposed he would have given them Commission to have transacted the Solemnity with better Circumstances and given Answers with more Truth for if the God Fathers answer in the Name of the Child I do believe it is notorious they speak false and ridiculously And this is even enough to say to such an Innovation But what absurdity is it which being once made a Cannon by learned Men will not find some to daub it up with untempered Mortar Could Men but remember Nadab and Abihu Lev. 10. they would fear to add to or take from the Ordinances of Christ under what pretence of Piety or Prudence soever Thus Sir I have briefly answered your Arguments and hope I have not mistaken your Sence in any Passage I except against And for a Conclusion I crave leave to say That the way to obtain that Unity which is so desirable between the Baptized Believers and the Church of England is not to fall to it by Disputation but by proposing what Abatements may be made about such things as are not mentioned in the Scripture as this of Poedo-Baptism is not or at least what mitigation may be hoped for as to the imposition of such things And on the other side I trust in the Lord that you shall call for nothing from us wherein we may submit without sinning against God but we shall gladly hearken to you In the mean time constant Prayer to God for the Blessing of Truth and Peace and friendly conference between the leading Men on both parts may do much to further so good a Work specially if his Majesty would be graciously pleased to permit such friendly Treaties But of writing many Books there is no end SECT IV. A Plea for the Church-Assemblies of the Baptized Believers MAny and very great has been the Sufferings of the Baptized Believers in this Nation since the publication of the Act entitled an Act to prevent and suppress seditious Conventicles And if the meaning of the said Act be to restrict all Christian Assemblies except the Parochial to the number of four Persons besides the Families where they do assemble We see not how we can with safety to our Souls conform to the Limits thereby prescribed But forasmuch as the said Act pretends only the prevention and suppression of Seditious Conventicles We humbly conceive that those who are free from Seditious Designs in their meeting together to worship God are rationally acquitted from the Imputation of Sedition and consequently no Man can conscienciously prosecute any of us upon that Statute being utterly unable to prove any such Crime against us nor could any ever yet convict us of such an Evil nor by the Grace of God shall they I hope ever be able to do it Upon a due Enquiry it will evidently appear that it is the Lord himself that hath ordered his People to convene or congregate for the better discharge of the great Duties of Prayer Preaching and the Celebration of other his holy Ordinances to which holy Ends he has allowed not four Persons only but the whole Church in any Town or City to come together into one Place among whom also such as do not believe the Gospel are allowed to appear in order to their Illumination and this without any limitation in respect of Number So that it seems to exceed the due Bounds of humane Power to use Restraint where God hath given such gracious Liberty 1 Cor. 14. 23 24 25. Jam. 2. 2 3. Heb. 10. 24. Forasmuch then as God has not given any Power upon Earth to forbid any Christian or such as desire to know Christ to hear his
be restrain'd from Seditious Practices as well as others and we do by as good Right think it unlawful for us to be so restrained We hope our Legislators did not intend at all to exalt their Authority against the Lord whose Power is above all But yet when these Laws come to be executed upon good Men by the Industry of mercenary Fellows meerly for worshipping God then are they turned into Snares to the ruin of the Innocent and dishonour of that Power which gave them being And all this falls out for want of better provision in the said Laws to convict Men of Sedition than only because they were observ'd to preach or pray 4. Wherefore being fully satisfied that our Assemblies are true Church-Assemblies and that upon the strictest enquiry we are able to make into the due Nature and Order of such Assemblies we conceive our selves indispensibly bound by the Word of God the Examples of the first and best Churches and the Tie of Conscience as regulated by a sincere Love of Religion to hold fast the Profession of our Faith without wavering or changing by reason of the Change of Times or Man's Laws Being also rationally persuaded that the more publick and free Men are to serve the Lord the less danger of Sedition Wherefore with innocent Hearts and pure Hands as to any Design of Sedition in the strength of Christ we will keep his Way and let the Lord do with us as seemeth him good SECT V. Of the Baptized Believers Call to Christianity and to the Work of the Ministry WHen our Saviour commanded his Apostles to teach all Nations and to preach the Gospel to every Creature We do not doubt but their performance of this his gracious Will may truly be said to be the calling of the Gentiles or Nations And that Men enjoy a great Mercy for which they ought to be very thankful to be born in a Nation to whom the Gospel has been preached and received by their Progenitors And that it is also a great Blessing to be born under the Government of Christian Princes and we believe we ought to love and honour our Nation and the Rulers of it upon this very account as well as for the Obligation of Nature and Laws viz. because they assert the Interest of Christ Jesus in general as well as we Nor is it our Business to destroy the State of Christianity received in any Nation nor at all to despise the Ministry that conscientiously upholds it but only to labour that Christianity may be delivered from the Errors that have encumbred it by reason of the change of Governments and Interests or Corruptions of the Ages past And in this Consideration as we look upon our Nation to be a Christian Nation so we count our selves much more happy in being Members of a Nation that owns the true God Christ Jesus to be the Saviour of the World the Scriptures to be holy and true and that Faith and Holiness is the way to true Blessedness than to have been of any other Nation whatsoever But yet for all this there is a great Truth in the Words of Tertullian i. e. We are not born but made Christians And therefore we do not think that our meer Birth of Christian Parents does qualify us or give us an actual Right to Christ's Ordinances but to this end we believe and know that every Person ought to have the Gospel preached or some way made known to them and that a work of real Grace or the new Birth at least by a solemn Profession must precede our Baptismal Covenant to this the Scriptures give full consent John 1. 12 13. 2 Cor. 5. 17. Eph. 2. 10. 1 Pet. 1. 23. And thus we and ours so many of them as the Lord our God does call by the preaching of the Gospel are actually incorporate with the Church of Christ Militant and engaged thenceforth in the high and holy Calling and actual Profession of the Christian Religion 2. But now Whether we have any lawful Call to the work of the Ministry is the business to be a little considered partly for that some of our late Persecutors were pleased to suggest the contrary and partly to put our selves upon the strictest Trial even in this case where we are supposed to be the most deficient The Questions in this case to be resolved are 1. Whether a succession of Ordination from Man to Man down from some of the Apostles be absolutely necessary to a due Call to the Ministry or 2. Whether the same Means that is of Authority sufficient to make Men Christians be not also sufficient to make Ministers In answer to these Questions we shall do little more than offer what we have formerly written upon this Subject And tho the Papists are the Men who stand most stifly for Succession as necessary yet of late we find our Friends of the Church of England looking that way as if they would justify their Ordination in a successive Line from Man to Man through the Papacy which thing is disclaimed by Dr. Luther with the greatest vehemency in these words Whoso loveth Christ ought to endure any thing rather than to be ordained by the Papists because in their Ordinations all things are carried with such wicked preposterousness that if they were not mad and blind they would perceive how they mock God to his Face being stricken with an universal blindness they do not so much as know the Word of God specially the Bishops who ordain Let me be counted a Fool a Knave a Lyer if there be any one of them ordain'd by them who dare say that at such time as he received Orders he was commanded to dispense the Mysteries of Christ or to teach the Gospel but they ordain Sacrificers of the unbloody Sacrifice of the Mass and to hear Confessions c. Thus far Luther And the Oath which they take at their Ordination as set down by Mr. Bullinger is very un-gospel-like the sum of it is in these Words That the Priest will be a true Subject to the Pope obey the Decrees of the Fathers and of the Church i. e. the Roman Church and that he will persecute Hereticks Beza censures all Ordination taken from the Papists Let us hear him speak What ordinary Vocation is that which you say the first Reformers had excepting some few of them is it not the Pall Shall we think then that the Popish Orders are valid in which there is not any preceding enquiry into manners No such Enquiry or Procedure as is inviolably to be made or observed by Divine Right in Elections and Ordinations Shall we think so highly of their Ordinations that as often as any false Bishops are converted to true Christianity immediately all the Filth Uncleanness and Impurity collated is washed away Nay but with what Face or Conscience will he be able to forsake Popery and not abjure his irregular Ordination or if he do abjure it how can he by virtue thereof claim Authority to