Matth. 3. 3. I. S. is a stranger in his reasons to what is written though as we noted before he doth account it such a faulty thing in others yet he pleaseth himselfe all along in his reasons to infer this and the other thing to little purpose unlesse to deceive Secondly this practice of old namely of propagating the Church by generation was so far from destroying the Church as that it did tend to the increase of it greatly and was a meanes of Gen. 17. 20. 22. 17. 26 4 24. Esay 4. 8 19. Psal 105. 8. the continuing of it according to the gracious Covenant of God to a thousand generations and his promise to the seeds seed a Esay 59. 14. Now that Covenant is yet in force and that promise Yea and Amen b 2 Cor. 1. 20. in Christ as are all other of like nature Thirdly this is an inference savouring of ignorance or else diffidence or both hath not God said that he will poure his Spirit upon their seed to wit of his Church and his blessing upon c Esay 44. 3. their off-spring and that all their children shall be d Esay 54. 13. taught of God that his Church shall be a praise in the world e Esay 62. 7. when he shall returne in favour to Sion that the Gentiles shall bring their riches to her f Esay 60. nay hath he not said that the kingdome and greatnesse thereof shall be given to the Saints of the most high g Dan. 7. 27. and that this honour have all the Saints h Psal 144 9. Last of all what ever is or can be conceived in this reason either in the parts of it or the whole put together cannot amount to make good the charge the whole supposed proofe reaching but to the wel-being and purity of the Church at the most and not to the being of it it being so far from destroying of it as is affirmed the which I leave to the judgement of the Reader Reason IV It is unlawfull to baptize Infants because it is a ground both of ignorance and errour for it holds people in blindnesse that they cannot come to see and know the nature of that holy Ordinance nor what the same requires in the subjects thereof and also it causeth the simple to conceive that Baptisme is of necessity to salvation Answ That it is so as this Reason affirmeth if any please to beleeve it they may sure there is no Word of God produced to enforce them nor yet good reason or necessary consequence which the Author disliketh in others to move them to it Secondly this Reason savoureth of arrogancy and intrencheth on the wisdome of God that established this very thing in the substance of it in circumcision of old it being then no ground of ignorance nor errour neither is it now though he so say there being no more cause given to simple now to thinke so of Baptisme then was given them then in case of Circumcision Indeed it is rather likely their keeping such adoe about Baptisme and building such high things thereon may occasion some strange thoughts to such as are simple as surely it doth Thirdly I aske what should be the reason they cannot see the nature of the ordinances c. The Baptizing of Infants doth not let or hinder the knowledge of persons of yeers those are not the persons he meaneth surely for I appeale to himselfe whether he in particular be hindred at all thereby Nay further it hindreth not Infants when they come to yeers from understanding the nature and ends of the Ordinance no more then it did in the case of Circumcision the Israelites of old it being Gods appointment that children Ephes 6. 4. now as of old should bee trained up in knowledge and understanding If any be hindred from understanding the nature and ends of this Ordinance such are a great cause of it in regard of many that are of the judgement and practice of I. S. who being so mutable in their course one while laying downe another time taking up and then casting away againe And beside altering the ends of Baptisme and rejecting the proper subjects of it namely the lineall seed of the faithfull that many they converse withall are at their wits end and know not what to hold or settle upon And that it is so and also that this reason hath no force in it against the baptizing Infants I leave the Reader to judge Reason 5 It keepeth up the state of Antichrist by granting of him this so chiefe a corner-stone of the Lords House to lie in his foundation for that Church where Baptisme is the true ordinance of God in the administration of it is by the rule of the Gospel a true Church so that if Antichrists Baptisme which he administreth be Gods Ordinance then that Church wherein he doth so administer the same must be also the Church of God and those in sinne that refuse communion with it Answer It may here be minded that divers things are here in this Reason affirmed and concluded but nothing at all proved we know what is written to the Law and Testimony Esay 8. 20. but I. S. seemeth to be a stranger to that and chuseth inferences such as he found great fault with in his Epistle No man needs to beleeve what is said in this Reason unlesse he will Secondly who granteth this to lie in the foundation of Antichrist surely I. S. surmiseth and taketh for granted that which is not acknowledged if any doe or have done it is not for want of ignorance Jeroboam made a schisme set up an idolatrous way of worship and calves and yet notwithstanding that way of his there was Circumcision the Ordinance of God and no part of the foundation of his idolatrous way nor any corner-stone in the building thereof Neither is Baptisme now any more a part of the foundation of Antichrist or corner-stone in that building And if I. S. were not ignorant of this mystery of iniquity he would not thus reason as he doth This mystery of iniquity it wrought in the Church 2 Thes 2. in the Apostles time when Baptisme was Gods Ordinance and no part of that foundation or corner-stone in that building as neither is now any part of it Let I. S. if he can shew when Baptisme became such a corner-stone in the foundation of that building or why it should be so more then Circumcision of old was a corner-stone in that idolatrous state and way of Jeroboam and the Calves let him shew how long it continued Gods holy Ordinance and when it ceased so to be Thirdly Christ is the chiefe corner-stone and this corner-Stone is in Ephes 2. 20. that dessection yet no part of it I suppose I. S. granteth it and will not deny it That there is in many in this Kingdome especially and John Hus alia else where as it was also formerly such as in whom Christ and his
Word and Spirit dwell yet are not come out of that state according to his sense Now to grant this is more likely to keep up the state of Antichrist and to deny this sure he dare not Let him see how he will avoid his own Argument upon his own ground Surely some have seene this and thereupon have held no faith no grace no Christ till so separated from Babylon Sure he must either renounce his reason or fall under the condemnation of it if he be true to his owne principle In this particular that now I set downe if my judgement faile me not he will never be able to avoid it by granting the Scriptures translated to be the Word of God and usefull in the Church which Babylon hath translated keepeth and holdeth forth and buildeth upon Now for him and others to receive hold and keep the same and to acknowledge them as Gods it must sure be according to his reason a keeping up the state of Antichrist by granting this foundation to his building and this corner-Stone Jesus Christ for of the Scriptures its said and are built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Christ the chiefe corner Ephes 2. 20. Stone But now in stead of the Word of the Lord for proofe of what he had affirmed in his reason he giveth onely his owne saying to very little purpose surely That Church saith he where Baptisme is the true Ordinance of God as if God had some false Ordinances in the administration of it Observe he hath got the word true to helpe him along that Church saith he by the rules of the Gospel is a true Church what rule or rules he meaneth is hard to guesse he setteth downe no place of Scripture Againe it is observable how he closeth with them he opposeth making the Word and Sacraments infallible marks of the Church yea one of them alone to wit Baptisme And yet he holdeth a Church may be Christs without Baptisme as in his book may be seen He inferreth further and thereby will prove for want of Scripture that if Baptisme be true the Church is true I aske Master I. S. if the Apostate ten tribes were a true Church for it is certaine their Circumcision was true So as here the Reader may see how he maketh the Church and Baptisme such speciall relatives as the one gives being to the other as the father doth to the sonne c. and yet he holdeth an unbaptized Church as we noted before He addeth further That it being the Church of God it is sinne in any not to communicate with her A confident charge but where is the proofe alas it is altogether wanting Communion with a Church is the question to which I shall say a little and leave the Reader to judge First I distinguish of Churches secondly of Communion Churches are either pure and undefiled or otherwise corrupt and in sundry things polluted Communion it is either generall consisting in owning acknowledging and standing for or it is speciall and peculiar in fellowship and worship Now for a Church corrupt and defiled generall communion only can lawfully be extended especially if she be greatly defiled for we may not partake of others sins though we are to own their vertues and good things that are in them and hold relation to them while they 1 Tim. 5. 22. hold the head but with a pure Church we may and ought to extend communion in all the parts of communion But the question being of communion with a corrupt Church I say we are to hold generall communion with the same and to owne it for the relation it hath to Christ so long as it holdeth the head And if particular communion in Ordinance can be extended without partaking in sinne we should not be wanting that way as occasion is offered But though with such a Church in generall and further as we can without sinne yet not with her in sinne we are to keepe our selves pure as before And in this case that is very considerable Revel 18. 4. Come out of her my people that ye partake not of her sinnes So that here I both grant and also deny that which I. S. affirmeth I grant if it be a Church though corrupt yet so long as it hath relation to Christ it is sinne not to owne her and acknowledge her relation I wish I. S. were free from this sinne that condemneth as no Churches of Christ all the Churches of God in the world onely those of his way I pray him to consider of it I also deny what he saith being referred to that speciall communion in ordinance and worship which we are bound no further unto then as we may partake with them without sinne and defilement the seven thousand could not might not ought not to have bowed to Baal or kissed the calves or gone to Gilgal to transgresse Rom. 11. 4. Hosea 13. 2. Hosea 4. 15. Amos 5. 5. nor yet joyne with those Priests made of the lowest of the people yet were they the Church of God and Circumcision and other of Gods Ordinances might be done lawfully of them Yea those of the Church did not sinne in abstaining communion in Judah it selfe in the time of Ahaz and Manasses for as in going to Gilgal so in going to Hierusalem they should have transgressed All which considered I conceive it will appeare to be very fabulous which I. S. affirmeth of Infants Baptisme keeping up the state of Antichrist for indeed the contrary is rather true That the deniall of them right to that holy Ordinance doth rather keepe up that state by the hardning them that otherwise would come out And also by the great confusion like another Babel which this opinion and practice produceth All which I leave to the judgement of the godly wise Reason VI It is unlawfull to baptize Infants for that is to build faith upon humane testimony in matters fundamentall for such as are baptized in infancy have no other way to satisfie themselves or others but the bare word of man that must stand in the place of the Word of God for such their truly receiving so holy an Ordinance of God Answer This Reason is very unlike I. S. he promiseth faire for gravity and wisdome c. but surely such a shallow and unsound Argument was never framed before I suppose it is not his owne but that he hath received it without consideration from some one that he was highly taken withall and being a new thing it pleased him and he set it amongst his reasons why he would not have children baptized that they might be something for number though nothing in substance and weight His scope is easie but his expressions darke and covert I shall goe over them by way of quere First I would faine know what faith he here meaneth whether Historicall or of some other kinde Secondly I would know what he meaneth by building faith upon humane testimonies Thirdly I would know what he meaneth
by matters fundamentall and how the receipt of the Ordinance can be a matter fundamentall when the person may not onely be matter but part of a Church without it as he holdeth Fourthly I would know how the word of man stands in the place of the Word of God and what he meaneth by the bare word of man in this matter of fact Lastly I would know what he meaneth by truly receiving this holy Ordinance and whither he hold there be a false receiving this Ordinance and yet the Ordinance holy and true to them that receive it This Reason as it is set down I take to be something like a spell The summe of it in other words I take to be this Infants are not to be baptized for that they cannot be assured when they come to yeers that they were baptized but by the witnesse of man and if that fail then there is no way of satisfying of themselves that they were at all baptized To which I answer first that I would not much strive with a person in such a case If that were the cause that the probablenesse of his not being at all Baptized were the cause that moved him to desire to be Baptized especially if it did appeare to them by whom he should seek to be Baptized that he had not been Baptized at all But surely this is far from the case in question wherein men get themselves baptized not that they thinke they were not baptized at all but that they judge it was not the Baptisme of Christ because of the corruptions in the subject instrument or the manner of their being baptized which made the matter null and void Secondly I would have it minded how a person circumcised in youth could be assured when he came to yeers especially if his Circumcision were gathered and grown so as he could not see the print in the flesh For this Reason if it hath any force in it it hath the same against Circumcision in Infancy as against Baptisme for such so circumcised could be no otherwise assured then such a way as will come within the compasse of humane testimony If it be said They might satisfie themselves by the sight of the print of the flesh I answer that might be gathered and grown so as not to be seen And again if it were not that fight is not the Word of God and beside they might be mistaken or be circumcised unlawfully Thirdly that others were circumcised of old or are baptized now especially those to be joyned with in publike Ordinances and speciall communion Now how could the Israelites know of old or how can it be known now in particular how will I. S. to put the case to himselfe how will he I say know and be assured that such and such as he holdeth communion withall are baptized but by humane testimony instead of the Word of God as he saith he must take their own word in their own case whether it be not humane I leave it to him to judge And I demand further whether upon this his ground any can in faith joyn in fellowship and speciall communion or could of old with any they did not see or have not seen circumcised of old Ephes 44. 9. or Baptized now in this dispensation of the Gospell for suppose they were Baptized in Holland or in some part of this Kingdom nay in this City and I not see it done where am I then by his ground I must beleeve the bare word of man in stead of the Word of God in a matter alike fundamentall according to his account Fourthly in matter of fact I judge Faith of such a nature as we have now in hand is to goe upon humane testimony if I. S. will have it so called and that such testimony is of divine authority and every way satisfactory to be rested in for at the mouth of two or three witnesses every truth stands ratified In matter of fact I Matth. 18. 16. make it appear thus That such a people are Christs Church a Church being a fundamentall thing mens witnesses must carry it and give satisfaction especially in regard of the first beginning of a Church which some much stand upon Again that such a person is the lawfull Minister of Christ and his Church lawfully chosen and ordained what way is there of satisfaction but the word of man to any but onely to those that were at the acting of it Excommunication is an ordinance alike fundamentall with Baptisme it is to be done in faith the practike part of it is to be built upon the testimony of men at the mouth of two or three witnesses so as here expresly the word the bare word of man carrieth the same So as I conclude as this reason is a foolish fancy so it premiseth wholly upon untruth and raiseth unprofitable doubts and hath the same force against other Ordinances of Christ as it hath against Baptisme of Infants that it can by no means reach so high as to hinder Infants Baptisme all which I leave to the judgement of the Reader Reason 7 To baptize Infants makes the Ordinance of God a lying signe because none of those things can be expected in an Infant which the said Ordinance holds forth or signifieth in the administration of it which is the parties regeneration and spirituall new birth a dying and buriall with Christ in respect of sin and rising with him in a new life to God and a confirmation of faith in the death and resurection of Christ and free remission of sins by the same as Rom. 6. 3 4. none of all which can be expected in an Infant Answ This is a lying accusation of a malignant spirit against a holy practise of an Ordinance of Gods own appointment for might not any one as truly have said thus of Circumcision of Infants of old aswell as of the Baptisme of Infants now for what could be expected of an Infant then that cannot be now Did not Circumcision call for and lead unto then as much as Baptisme doth now did not Circumcision call for Circumcision of heart Circumcision Rom. 2. 29. being as the Apostle speaketh of the heart not of the letter the praise whereof is of God not of men did it not also call for regeneration and newnesse of life were not the Infants of it spirituall above the reach of the creature especially children yet it was then no lying signe as I. S. in the case of Baptisme lyingly affirmeth Secondly I say our Lord was baptized and this Ordinance was no lying signe as it was acted on him yet those things were not in him nor could be which I. S. saith the Ordinance holdeth forth or signifieth namely Regeneration a spirituall new life dying to sin burying with Christ rising with him in newnesse of life confirmation of faith and free remission of sins by the same What will J. S. say now will he say it was a living signe or will he confesse his lying accusation to
or free from errour and changes from one to another that hold not the truth of Gods holy Ordinances to have continued in the world but to be ceased by meanes of the defilements that have attended them Consider of it courteous Reader and of the whole insuing matter which I commend to thy consideration and the blessing of God to cause thee to profit which if in any thing thou shalt doe I have my desire and so rest Thine in the service of love P. B. The Contents CHAP. I. COntaining an Answer to nine Reasons against the baptizing of Infants fol. 1 CHAP. II. Containing a discovery of the vaine pretence of finding Baptisme lost and fallen out of the world in the holy Scriptures of God fol. 17 CHAP. III. Containing a defence of the judgement of such as hold that Baptisme hath continued the Ordinance of God under the defilements of Antichrist fol. 32 CHAP. IV. Containing a defence of their judgement that hold no right or orderly ministeriall Church without or before Baptisme fol. 57 A Defence of the lawfulnesse of the Baptizing Infants CHAP. I. Containing an Answer to reasons set downe in page 25. why Infants should not be Baptized the severall Reasons being set downe in order their severall and respective Answers doe follow Reason I BEcause there is neither command nor example for the baptizing Infants in the New Testament the order and government of which is no way inferiour to the old But in the old there was an expresse rule by command from God what Communicants were to be admitted to Circumcison and other Ordinances of that nature and what not But this order is no where found in the New Testament for the baptizing of Infants and therefore the same is not to be practised Answer This first Reason placed in the front is wholly upon supposition concluding and so taking that for granted which is wholly in controversie and the contrary as confidently affirmed by his Oponents as denyed by him namely That there is neither Precept nor Example for baptizing Infants which they affirme there is Againe this Reason is wholly by way of deduction and inference without any Scripture either for ground or confirmation of it of which he complaineth in his Epistle and yet he practiseth it himselfe and that in his first Reason Secondly it is observable how he by this Reason excludeth a great and maine part of the Scripture namely necessary consequence and right inference being such a way as our Lord himselfe used to confute the Sadduces withall * Mat. 22. 32. I am the God c. God is not the God of the dead here is neither command nor example and yet the truth fully evinced the minde of God manifested and the Sadduces confuted Thirdly it is an unsound conclusion that because there is no command or example in the New Testament therefore not to be done There is no particular example nor particular command for womens partaking in the Supper yet they are judged lawfull Communicants There is no example nor particular command for translation of Scriptures or that such translations be used in Church-meetings yet it is lawfully done Lastly there is no command or example for an unbaptized person to baptize himselfe or others So as if this first Argument were true I. S. and those of his way would be in a poore case Fourthly it is untrue that which he inferreth there being both example and precept in the Scripture for the baptizing of Infants though he cannot see it 1 Corinth 10. Matth. 28. compared with Esay 52. 15. which shall be further shewed hereafter in making it to appeare that children are yet a part of the Church and so both precept and example being for the washing of the whole it must include them necessarily as a part Ephes 5. 26. Reason II It is a high contempt and injury to Christ as he is Husband of the Church his holy Spouse to force on him a naturall wife himselfe being spirituall and desires the like associate as such a Church is founded upon nature namely Infants because commonly to one borne of the Spirit there is twenty borne of the flesh Answer First here is a high charge without proofe no Scripture produced for confirmation Is not this rather a high contempt and presumption Is it not a sad thing that a man should fall under the condemnation of his owne law or otherwise exempt himselfe from that which he will binde others unto namely to bring the Scriptures and not consequences Secondly this Reason accuseth God himselfe in giving the Church of old namely those seed of Abraham by generation which he calleth carnall to Christ his Sonne to wife Jesus Christ our Lord being the same spirituall Head and Husband Yesterday and to day and for ever Heb. 13. 8. Thirdly it is no injury to Christ or contempt of him though without any Word of God he so say for Christ to have the heathen Psal 2. 8. given him for inheritance and the ends of the earth for his possession It is no injury to him though the Disciples thought it was to have little children brought to him his Kingdome consisting of such in quantity as well as quality Matth. 19. 13. Fourthly why cannot Children be spirituall and holy as well now under the Gospell as they were under Abraham and Moses when they as well as those of yeers were an holy people to the Lord God * Exod. 19. 6 7 Dent. 6 7. Esay 9. 2. and the same is said of the Church now but ye are an holy Nation a peculiar people 1 Pet. 2. 9. Beside what spiritualnesse was there in the five foolish Virgins * Matth. 25 I would know that is not or may not be in children and is not there as much injury offered to Christ in giving them to Christ to wife Truly this is weake and inconsiderate so to reason not minding that many are called and few chosen Matth. 22. 14. Lastly this Reason is wholly upon supposition the accusation without proofe who forceth on Christ It is his pleasure to take such and reproveth such as would hinder them and saith Suffer such to come they being of my Kingdom Matth. 22. The computation in the end is as weake as all the rest for it was so of old no new thing at all all are not Israel that are of Israel * Rom. 9. 27. and if the number of Israel were as the sand of the sea but a remnant shall be saved Reason III It is a practise that over throwes the body of Christ or holy temple of God for in time it will come to consist of naturall and carnall members amongst whom if any godly be they will be brought into bondage and become subjects of scorne and contempt and the power of government rest in the hands of the wicked Answ This is but onely said and that by one that may erre and be mistaken John Baptist though sent of God yet he cryeth as it is written
be as indeed it is lying and false for none of those things which he is pleased to set downe as held forth in Baptisme or else it is a lying signe could be expected much lesse be in Christ And yet he fulfilled righteousnesse in being D. Sclater baptized as is righteousnesse fulfilled in Infants Baptisme even as it was in their Circumcision of old For we may know that there are other ends in Baptisme as there was in Circumcision of old besides those specified by J. S. as namely the subjecting the creature and dedicating of him to God outwardly in a way of service The marking of him for God by such a Character The differencing of him from the rest of the World and instructing in inward sanctification by the outward washing And here it may be observed that at length J. S. quoteth a Scripture or two but to little purpose surely it is about dipping for that is new and pleaseth him and so in his seventh Reason at length he commeth out with it So he concludeth None of all which can be expected in an Infant And why not but only because he saith so but his words are no Oracles for those or some of those may be found in Infants notwithstanding what he saith God that works those in an elder can work them in a Infant he hath done it as in the case of Jeremy John Baptist he hath promised to do it Deut. 30. 6. And all Gods promises are yea Amen in Christ 1 Cor. 1. 10. Which when J. S. hath considered of he may repent of his error and lying accusation as indeed he hath great cause for to do I suppose the indifferent Reader will be able to see how false and unworthy an accusation this is which makes Christ himself an unlawfull subject and Baptisme a lying signe to him if J. S. his accusation were true in as much as those things could not be expected or be at all in Christ which he specifies as necessary or else it is so Reason 8 Because the subject of Baptisme is to be passive but a Infant is no way passive as that Ordinance requires I mean a passive subject in a threefold way First a thing uncapable and so is a stone Secondly a thing forced and thus is a Infant that opposeth it Baptisme what it can so far is it from being passive in the same Thirdly a thing is passive by a subjecting power producing the same in the subject by bringing of it into a free and voluntary subjection and thus is the true subject of Baptisme none can be capable to receive grace but by grace because it consists of self-denyall Answ First it is marvelous to see how contrary and different these men are in their Tenents A. R. in his Treatise of Childish Baptisme maketh Children to be uncapable Subjects because they are meer passive as he is pleased to say whereas the right subjects of Baptisme he saies ought to be more then passive J. S. he maketh them uncapable because they are not passive at all as contrary as these men are one to another even so contrary is their opinion to the truth Namely their denying Baptisme to Infants as untrue also is that which he further addeth that an Infant is no way passive as that Ordinance requires What that Ordinance requires in a passive way that is not or cannot be in an Infant in a passive way sure J. S. cannot shew Infants were passive in Circumcision of old so were persons of years and there was no reall difference in passivenesse or being patients in that Ordinance of Circumcision as there is none now in Baptisme betwixt Infants and men of years though J. S. would by a foolish distinction of the divers kindes of passivenesse seek to make it appear otherwise He first speaketh of a stones being passive but this he saith is uncapable of what is it uncapable not of totall dipping no not in a passive way J. S. may please to remember what is written of such like subjects namely The baptizing of cups and pots c. which sure he Mark 7. 4. forgot else he would not have distinguished so Secondly for an Infant which he saith opposeth its Baptisme what it can I say it opposeth its Baptisme no more then it did in Circumcision of old But how knoweth he they oppose their Baptisme because happily they shrine and cry a waighty reason sure did not Infants nay did not persons of years in Circumcision do the like yea more do not persons of years shrinke and shew an unwillingnesse to be totally dipped in J. S. his way Thirdly For passivenesse by a subjecting power bringing a thing to a free and voluntary subjection which is as he saith the true subject It may be observed how he rubbeth upon the old sore there is somthing in Infants wanting some Faith some Repentance some Freenesse some willingnesse of submission which he is pleased to make passive qualifications with little reason surely for any man may see what the disease is they bring nothing to Christ therefore they must have no acceptance of him nor grace from him Indeed it is works and not grace that here lets For certainly Infants are as capable of grace and grace as free to them as to persons of years As both old and young are meer passive in regard of inward grace and God giveth freely so both are also alike passive in regard of outward grace to wit that of the * Gen. 17. Covenant and this in question in particular namely Baptisme the Seale of it even as in Circumcision of old But he hath a kinde of reason although no Scripture to prove either his distinction or that children are not passive and that is That none can be capable to receive grace but hy grace because it consists of self-denyall Truly this had need of some explaining surely our being sinners and miserable maketh us meet subjects for mercy I reckon that there is nothing in us as of our own of grace that can make us capable I suppose he holdeth not with the Papists foreseen works or any preparatives that maketh persons capable of grace If he mean thus that none can be capable of the grace of Baptisme in an orderly way but by being within the grace of the Covenant first I should agree with him and do think that nothing can be more clear but that Infants being within the Covenant and interessed in the grace of God that way they are capable of further grace namely to be sealed with the Seale thereof Baptisme But what he meaneth I I know not because he saith It consists of self-denyall If he be able to apply it to the purpose now in hand I shall be willing to acknowledge my want of judgement for to me it is as if he had spake of a man in the Moon and how far this eight reason is from effecting any thing against the lawfulnesse of Infants Baptisme I leave it to the Reader to judge
please So as it must be the want of his new Baptisme or nothing and then I leave it to him to judge whether that be not the form of the Church necessarily according to his ground that gives the being thereunto Secondly if by such he meanes those he was an opponent of in the former matter of the Churches continuation and likewise Baptisme under Popish defection I shall adde a little in the way of defence First granting that such hold indeed no Church to wit rightly constituted as a right or lawfull Ministeriall Church without or before the matter of this Church is baptized Secondly denying that in so holding they make Baptisme the form of the Church as he inferreth and so make Baptisme the form there is more goeth to the proof of a matter then so His five Reasons might well have been spared by which he would prove Baptisme not to be the form of the Church till he had made that to appear to be of necessity the right consequence which sure he is never able to do for there was no right Ministeriall Church of old without Circumcision yet Circumcision was not the form of that Church an uncircumcised person was not to be admitted a member much lesse an officer Circumcision was then an externall qualification of the matter as in like manner is Baptisme now In this matter we shall have recourse to the first beginning of the Church of the new Testament and of Baptisme John the Baptist the forerunner of Christ sent of God to prepare the way of his Son according to Commission baptized much people as did also afterward the Disciples of Christ our Lord to him repaired our Lord to be baptized that righteousnesse might be fulfilled It may be observed by the way that this was in the Church of the Jewes Of these thus baptized was the Church of the new Testament begun whether the initiation of it be referred to the time before the passion of our Lord as to himself and the twelve with whom he brake bread or whether it be referred to the time after his resurrection when he gathered the 120. together and blessed them as is most Acts 1. proper let him take his choice and refer to which he will it was begun of the aforesaid baptized matter which is certainly to the life of the matter in hand in discovering that the matter of the Church was fitted by Baptisme before it was laid together As was the Church at the first rise of it so was the proceed those 120. baptized those that joyned with them being not before baptized as it is written they were baptized and added to the Church This first Church scattered by persecution became the instrument of increase and the first matter of many Churches which Churches by their instruments baptized such as received the faith and joyned into the Lord and thus was the Church and Kingdome of Christ spread throughout the World as the holy history doth shew And let J. S. or any of his way shew that there was ever any unbaptized Church or Congregation of the new Testament or that ever any unbaptized person was received into fellowship or that ever any unbaptized person after Baptisme was a foot in the World baptised or was authorized for to do it And lastly let him tell me whether the order of the new Testament as in another case he asked be not as strict in this case of Baptisme as it was in Circumcision of old when no uncircumcised might have part in the Church or fellowship in the Ordinances much lesse act Ordinances Esek 44. in way of dispensing of them to others And let him tell me whether a precept or example be not as necessary in all those cases as in that of baptizing Infants And lastly whether his practice of raising and beginning the Church of unbaptized persons do agree with the primitive practice of our Lord and his Apostles that began the Church of baptized matter as before J. S. propoundeth a second Reason of his opponents thus The Scripture speaketh of no Church before Baptisme To which he answereth as he did to that of the Gates of Hell not prevailing against the Church He must distinguish he saith A meer shift to blind his Reader and avoid the truth there needs no distinction at all in the case He would not take it well if any should distinguish in case of Infants Baptisme But what is his distinction it is betwixt the truth of the doctrine of Baptisme and the administration of it just as he did in the fore-named case as much as if he had said He must distinguish betwixt the Scripture that teacheth Baptisme and Baptisme or washing according to the Scripture In this first sense Baptisme or the doctrine of Baptisme as much as if he had said the holy word of God is before the Church What this is to the purpose is beyond my judgement nor yet that which followeth no Church according to the order of Christs Testament without it or before it No Church without or before the Scripture how this is to the matter in hand and what clearing or rather darkning there is in this distinction I leave the Reader to judge But now for the second part of the distinction Namely the outward administration of Baptisme that ever followeth the Saints joyning in fellowship by mutuall faith and agreement in the Doctrine wherein consists the stating of the Church in her conjoyning in Covenant which ever goes before in the administration of Baptisme and gives power and authority for the same so saith he in the first sense the Church is not before Baptisme but in the last it is Answ The summe and scope of this whole matter amplified and enlarged is utterly false being referred to the purpose for which J. S. doth bring it namely to prove an unbaptized Church or the Scriptures speaking of such Alas this is farre from proving the matter no not in a seeming way In this case it may be truly said from the beginning it was not so The matter of the Church was fitted outwardly by Baptisme as is before declared And the Scriptures give no president of such Church officer or member at any time such a proceed being cleane besides the Scriptures 2. J. S. deceiveth if not himselfe yet others in what he setteth down in referring that to the initiation of a Church which is onely true of the proceed The Church stated and on foot in the world according to God of baptized persons baptizeth others in way of proceed in a orderly way of administration so it was at the beginning and to begin otherwise is not according to the pattern So as not taking notice of the difference between right beginning and orderly proceed he is clean out and beside the truth and his distinction will appeare to be vain and to no purpose unlesse to deceive for as he setteth down that Baptisme ever followeth in regard of the administration of it the Saints joyning in
Reason 9 This Doctrine of Infants Baptisme opposeth directly the expresse Word of God by teaching that Infants are in the Covenant of Grace being borne of believing parents and so a holy seed by vertue of which they have right to Baptisme as a priviledge of grace Against which the holy Ghost affirms that all are conceived in sin and brought forth in iniquity and so by nature the children of wrath and under the curse and except they be horne againe they cannoe see the Kingdome of God Psal 51. 5. c. Here man saith that Infants are clear and holy from the wombe and so are subjects of grace But God saith all Infants as well one as other are first in sin and unholy and subjects of wrath untill the second birth makes the difference John 3. Answ At the length I. S. hath attayned to the full number of his Reasons which are far more by number then by weight and surely this last is not in the least behinde the other for shallownesse for either he was very ignorant of what he set down or else perversenesse of spirit carryed him headlong to the multiplying of words without councell against the truth For First I would ask of I. S. whether Isaac and Jacob and the Infants of Israel were not in the Covenant of Grace whether he and they were not a holy seed by vertue of which they had right to Circumcision and priviledge of Grace Rom. 2. 29. That the Covenant to Abraham was a Covenant of Grace I suppose he denyeth not that Circumcision was a priviledge of Grace the Seale of that Covenant the Apostle testifieth in the case of Abraham He received it as the Seal of the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4. 11. Secondly I would know whether Isaac the particular Son of Promise Heb. 11. 9. with Jacob fellow-heire were not borne in sin and whether he or they in Infancy were under wrath so as he could not be in the Covenant of Grace Thirdly I would ask him whether children being out of the Covenant of Grace and born in sin and so under wrath according to his sense can possibly be converted so as to see heaven if they John 3. Rom. 10. 15. die in Infancy seeing by outward means they cannot come to believe till they be able to hear and may not be judged within the Covenant nor baptized till they manifest faith sure according to his opinion to our notion they are all debarred Heaven at a blow But truly as the opinion is so is the consequences that attend it erroneous and false but in as much as this stone is much stumbled at by some of that way I shall indeavour to remove it in shewing that the Doctrine of Infants Baptisme agreeth fully with the Word of God The Infants of the faithfull being within the Covenant of grace externally Gen. 17. 7. That this Covenant is to a thousand Generations Psal 105. 8. That God is not the God of the Jews only but of the Gentiles Rom. 4. 29. That the Gentiles are fellow heires of the same body and partakers of the promise in Christ Eph. 3. 6. That there is no Rom. 10. 12. difference but that he that is Lord of all is rich to all Rom. 10. 12. His grace and mercy being not lessened but inlarged All his promises of grace being to the Gentiles yea and amen in Christ 2 Cor. 1. 24. Act. 15. 18. Touching inward Sanctity and inward right in the Covenant as it is Gods worke and interessing of whom it pleaseth him so it is only known to him To whom all his works are known from the Mar. 22. 14. foundation of the World A thing not within our Spheare wee being to meddle with things revealed and to proceed according to that Secondly this Covenant of grace externally of which we treat it is extended more largely then according to J. S. his narrow Deu. 29. 29. minding of it that seemeth as if he would thrust himselfe into the room of God medling with things secret and proceeding in his measuring of things that way making the Covenant of grace externally to be with the invisible Elect and not with the called in Jesus Mat. 22. 14. Christ of whom many are called but few chosen so as he is not able I am sure as infallible to shew one person of that Covenant whereas it is and may be known that the Covenant of grace is made with Christs Kingdome his Church and that consists of Virgins five wise and five foolish and Israel though as the sand of the Mat. 25. 2. Sea yet but a remnant shall be saved If J. S. would but be pleased to Rom. 9. 27. take notice of the outwardnesse of the Covenant of grace as before as well as the inwardnesse of it the outwardnesse of the matter to which the Covenant is made as well as the inwardnesse of the matter known only to God he would surely be of another minde and would not say it crosseth the Word of God to hold children within the Covenant of Grace for truly if they be not neither inwardly nor outwardly in the same they are in a sad case being wonderfull losers by the comming of Christ into the world with grace and Joh. 1. 17. truth by whom so many gaine But it is evident by what before is declared that they are in that Covenant and so are to be sealed as others with the Seale of it and that so doing is fully according to the Word of God But saith he the Holy Ghost affirmes that all are conceived in sinne children of wrath and under the curse so as they cannot see the Kingdome Grosse ignorance of God unlesse born again To which I say Isaack and Jacob heires of the promise were borne in sinne and yet in the Covenant of grace so soon and before they were born J. S. is yet beside the matter and much to seeke A little to unfold this matter so hidden to J. S. and those of his way There is a different consideration to be had of this matter even as there is of a person of yeeres who may truly bee said to be a Saint and also a sinner in a different sense So the infants of the faithfull may be said to be born in sin and brought forth in iniquity and so in that consideration under wrath and yet in another minding born the holy seed of promise even as Isaack and the Israelites of old as witnesseth the Apostle ye are the Children of the promise and again the promise is to you and your children Act. 3. 25. Act. 2. 19. let it but be considered in the case of Isaack in particular who was in a speciall manner the childe of promise yet he was born in sinne c. Let J. S. and those of his way use their wit and reason in stead of faith to find out this matter some other way and they shall but tire themselves in vain It will appeare
rise againe Nay doth not this prove plainly that death had dominion over them and that they were thereby destroyed for otherwise how should there be place for their rising again And indeed the restoring of the Church to her being doth necessarily imply the losse of her being otherwise there would be no place for restoring If all men had been destroyed at the deluge of Noah a new creation had been necessary Happily he may think their is something in that that God is not the God of the dead but of the living in as much as all live to him Indeed this may prove the soules immortality and living with God But what sense it hath in regard of the Church is beyond my thoughts for certainly if it hath reference to the Church it will enforce the being and continuace of the Church of the Jewes and the Patriarchall Churches which ceased long agoe To imagine their continuance what can be more vaine But further if because all live to God therefore the Church alwayes hath a being where is place left for her death and cessation Truly this is a matter too far fetcht to prove any thing in this matter that may stand him in any stead for if any thing be gathered from it it must be that as Abraham and so other Prophets dyed and left the world so the Church of Christ dyed also and was destroyed out of the world But if he shall say Abraham and the rest lived notwithstanding The answer is they lived indeed another way not in regard of their mortall bodies but in regard of their immortall soules Their outward visible bodies were destroyed and in the dust so the outward visible Church is destroyed and ceases to be but the inwardnesse of it the life and soule to wit Jesus Christ is in heaven with God what this maketh to the matter in hand I leave the Reader to judge And this way saith J. S. I suppose Christ may have and enjoy as good a wife ever as any can be preserved for him under the defection of Antichrist Answ This way is a meere supposition without reason and against sense That Christ should have sometime a wife and sometime none and then one againe and yet he should have ever one preserved It were good to lay aside such senselesse suppositions and to beleeve the Scriptures that tell us that the man of sinne sometime sitteth in the Temple of God and that Gods Temple 2 Thes 2. 4. remaineth and hell gates shall not prevaile against it Though the Church Christs wife may goe astray and be corrupted yet he Matth. 16. 18 that is her husband will not forsake but will reform her and refine her and put new garments on her sure he hath read what God said of old to his Spouse Thou hast played the harlot with many Jer. 3. 10. 22. lovers yet return to me saith the Lord I am thy husband and thy maker But happily if he had then lived hee would have supposed Esa 54 5. that Christ might have had or have made to himselfe a new as he in this case endeavoureth to doe for him as good a wife as that that was so corrupt and defiled The truth is there is more rich grace and free mercy in Jesus Christ then to take advantage and to refuse and put away for he is the Lord that changeth not and therfore his Church is not destroyed no notwithstanding the evils she Mal. 3. 6. falleth into for he hateth putting away It were more sutable for J. S. and those of his way to professe Mal. 2. 16. the doctrine of workes which is sutable to their other opinions then the doctrine of free grace unlesse they would be more true to their principles as in this particular more especially wherein they hold corruption dissolveth the marriage bond and maketh the relation to cease and causeth the everlasting Lord to change and his Covenant to faile for evermore Psal 77. 8. The following complaint and story by which it is illustrated I have spoken unto it before in which matter of guilt if hee and those of his way should take water and wash their hands they would notwithstanding be no lesse guilty then Pilate was of Jesus blood But after this he telleth of his feares and that is that men put more in Baptisme then doth of right belong to it that doe preferre it before the Church and all other Ordinances besides Answ Is not J. S. and those of his way sick of this disease and that as dangerously as those he is in such feare of how otherwise should it be that they should be so often baptized over and over and over againe and make a Church that they may make Baptisme I leave the Reader to judge 2. How doth this appeare which he so feareth in others that they preferre it before the Cburch and all Ordinances beside Answ It is onely to the qualification of the matter externally that it might be sutable to the rest of the building Ephes 5. 26. But yet this charge is not altogether true for they doe not preferre Baptisme before the Word and the publishing of it by which faith comes Nay they doe not preferre it above or before the Church the Church being the pillar and ground of truth that is of the truth 1 Tim. 3. 15. of Ordinances and divine worship and so of Baptisme in the proceed of it in a right way which Church the matter of it at the preparing of it by John was first baptized and after laid together in the building So of this matter thus by Johns preaching prepared and by his washing in the second place fitted was in after time gathered and laid into a holy building to the Lord which Church way begun and setled in the world augmented and encreased those washed washing others according to Christs appointment never any unwashed person being added or laid into the building since the Church begun it being necessary that the matter of the Temple be outwardly fitted that it may sute with the rest of the building being laid thereon So as J. S. may be satisfied that his feares in the first place are causelesse the Church being on foot according to God Baptisme in administration followeth But in further declaring the reason of his feares he saith For they can erect a Church take in and cast out members elect and ordaine officers administer the Supper and all anew without looking after succession any further then the Scriptures But as for Baptisme they must have that successively from the Apostles though it come through the hands of Pope Jone what the reason of this is that men can doe all from the Word but onely Baptisme and that must come by man even by the man of sinne Answ To balance the thoughts of J. S. I will present a case to his consideration supposing he had lived in the Apostacie of the ten Tribes yea of Judahs Apostacie and returning to the Lord
fellowship c. this is onely true of the proceed of the Church as before but this joyning is to be of baptized matter as it was at the beginning which necessarily calleth either for a person from heaven as in the instance of John or the continuance of baptized persons in the world from John downward as is the case now though J. S. will not acknowledge the same The sum of the distinction he maketh to be this in the first sence the Church is not before the Scriptures In the last sense it is before Baptisme utterly untrue as before J. S. telleth us his distinction being observed we are not to deny a Church to be a Church though the Scriptures doe not so call it So the Scriptures of which he spake so great things in case of raising Baptisme lost are now become deficient and we may be wiser then they teach us and call a people a Church though they doe not so call them or teach us so to doe and we are not so ingaged to speak as the Word of God His reason of this strange divinity is the Church of the Old Testament and many of the new were Churches before they were so called But I say they were not rightly gathered Churches before they were baptized neither doth the Scriptures give that appellation to any in a relative way to Christ and we may not be wise above what is written Cornelius and his friends coming together were no right orderly gathered Church before Baptisme neither doth the Scripture so call them After all said that may be he demandeth why it may not be so that a Church may be a Church before Baptisme be administred why may not children be baptized I would aske him let him tell me that I will tell him why Againe he saith a Church is so a Church before Baptisme as that the end of her union is for communion J. S. at the last doth in effect in a modest way give up the cause A Church so a Church That is in another way then at the beginning it was when it was first instated Againe in another way then according to a right Constitution and orderly way of serving God Again is a Church so as a betrothed Virgin is a wife before the day of her Espouslas and playeth the Harlot in the mean time and so defileth the marriage bed So is an unbaptized Church a Church of Christ After this he is up with the substance of his five Reasons before alledged to prove that Baptisme was not the forme of the Church but the Covenant And what then for I will not meddle with his Reasons be they right or wrong A Church may be in Covenant and fellowship before Baptisme be administred so as Cornelius and his friends were But I say such a Church can never administer Baptisme according to God unlesse they had a man sent to them as Iohn was sent or as Peter was to Cornelius and his friends He is pleased to call such a Church whom the Scripture calleth not so But what he here setteth down he doth as formerly but say it and not prove it so as we need not much stand upon it A People are a Church by covenant he saith to which Ordinances are annexed But the matter of this Church is to be first outwardly sitted by Baptism An orderly way is necessary and that is by persons sent of God as was John here he deceiveth again affirming that of his so a Church which is onely true of a Church stated and on foot according to God in the world as was the Church of the new Testament baptized and so the matter outwardly sitted by John before the building was erected He quoteth Gen. 17. 11. Ezek. 16. 8. Act. 2. 41. Ephes 4. 5. and concludeth thus So here was a Church before Ordinances or before ever Baptisme was administred either by John the Baptist or the Apostles To which I answer in regard of those two places of the old Testament alledged in this matter in question It is at least as far off as the proving the baptizing of Infants from Circumcision or their being baptized of old to Moses in the cloud and sea which he 1 Cor. 10. accounteth nothing to the purpose as indeed this is little to the purpose They use to ask in the instance before when produced whether that Baptisme of the cloud c. was the Baptisme of the new Testament I in like manner ask him whether those were the ministeriall Churches of the new Testament Alas this matter is too far fetcht I could tell him of a Church and a great one too without faith or the profession of it namely that gathered by Demetrius and his fellow Crafts-men Act. 19. 25. 46. he happily will count it to no purpose truly so is his matter here As for those instances in the new Testament sure he was much over-seen in them and very inconsiderate Those Act. 2. 41. had broken bread and prayed and were baptized before they were a Church As for the Church of Ephesus no question but that was also baptized in like manner and he might from that place as well prove a Church to be before faith as before Baptisme by any thing I can perceive Certainly he had little aim in bringing such places of Scripture to prove a people to be a Church of the new Testament before Baptisme was administred to them at least that it should be so before Johns Baptisme that according to the Commission of God administred Baptisme to fit the matter of the Church before ever it was laid into form A further Objection he setteth down thus Some say from Act. 2. 41. they were added to the Church after they were baptized What is his Answer If it were so they should neither put on Christ nor yet be baptized into one body nor to the true profession of the Father Son and holy Ghost c. directly against these Scriptures Gal. 3. 27. 1 Cor. 12. 13. Matth. 28. 19. Answ I am very sorry to see such weaknesse in persons pretending to and promising much strength of knowledge For First all those that John Baptist baptized could neither put on Christ nor be baptized into one body nor into the true profession of the Father c. by his account and reckoning and so his practice of baptizing was contrary to those Scriptures by his reckoning Was not John Baptist to blame Secondly how appeareth it that if persons sent of God as was John of old as is necessary to raise Baptisme if it were lost out of the world as they hold baptizing according to their Commission that those they baptize cannot put on Christ nor be baptized into one body nor into the true profession of the Trinity onely because J. S. saith so without any shew of ground For Thirdly those Scriptures cited have no such thing in them certainly to the judgement of any rationall man neither can it be imagined that there is any let in regard of any of them why a person sent of God should not baptize before the Church be formed For that in Acts 2. 41. he saith It is onely declarative of the great increase of the Church through Gods goodnesse To which I answer That it declareth plainly that they were of and by that Church baptized that they were added unto in as much as the Church receiveth no unwashen ones If it were questioned whether the Church receive them before she baptize them or baptize them before she receive them I would give my thoughts that in strictnesse of concluding neither are first for these are so interwoven that they go together are unseparable As thus persons beleeving being unbaptized the Church openeth her arms to receive them but before she can fully imbrace them they must be washed and so made like the rest of the body There is a different case to be taken knowledge of First of the seed of the Church by generation I mean they are of the Church first and baptized for righteousnesse sake because they are of the Church and for the end before specified Secondly the case of converted Infidels their accesse to the Church and Ordinances is as before as it was in like manner of old in Israel the infants were circumcised because they were a part of Israel that they might answer the whole But the Converts of the Nations they were circumcised that they might be of the Church and have fellowship in the same The case I conceive to be even so now which I note in way of digression as a touch to be Exod. 12. 48. considered of though happily J. S. will think it to no purpose There is another Argument which he setteth down and maketh answer unto all the difference amounteth but to that of the circumstance of time and hath nothing in it substantiall I shall not make the difference greater but shall leave J. S. to his constituting causes of his unbaptized Church and shall forbear to trouble him or my self or the Reader any further but leave all to the judgement of the godly wise FINIS ERRATA PAg. 11. l. 20. for Infants r. Intents p. 13. l. 16. for shrine r. shrinke p. 14. l. 36. for and priviledge r. a priviledge p. 45. l. 34. for constitation r. constitution
giveth being to all Order and Ordinances It doth give being of direction and warrant declaring what is good and lawfull and what not It acts nothing God requireth an orderly way and that is by the Church Now courteous Reader do but seriously consider how J. S. hath cleared the way of raising and beginning again Baptisme lost and fallen out of the world as he beleeveth and how he hath removed the difficulties in the way which he ealleth clouds that darken the skie See if thou do not yet finde it very dark and cloudy as ever and never the clearer for all the labour and pains he hath taken and whether his labour and travell herein hath been to any more purpose then the washing of the Blackmoore For first of all Whereas he referreth thee to the Scriptures as the Successours of the Apostles in his opinion First Thou seest the Scriptures were before the Apostles and the Apostles themselves were guided by them Secondly That the Scriptures are onely directive and act nothing at all neither can they and beside they do not direct to any such course as the constituting an unbaptized Church or authorizing unbaptized persons to baptize Thirdly Thou seest what great cause of doubt and question there is according to his opinion whether these Scriptures be the Scriptures of God and whether they have not lost their being having been so long in Babylon and in the hands of Antichristians especially if it be minded that they were by Antichristians translated into our native Tongue their translating must needs make them Antichristian and to be rejected as false as well as their Baptisme Where will J. S. be then do thou but think for the raising a new his Church and Baptisme which I would wish him and those of his way to consider of well But then in the second place God being to be sought as he holdeth in an orderly way according to what he hath declared as his judgement and this orderly way being by the Church rightly gathered and constituted to whom Christ hath committed the power Consider good Reader in the first place that if the Scriptures be not Antichristian as his opinion inforceth that they have in them no ground or warrant by any example or precept for such an unbaptized Church neither can such a supposed Church be orderly constituted or the proceed thereof orderly the Scripture being wholly silent concerning any such thing This conceit of so making Christs Church and so making Baptisme being a meer Popish Tenent and the proceed therin like unto theirs in such like cases So as this Ordinance of Christs Baptisme being according to his opinion destroyed in Babylon and there being no orderly Church of Christ in earth to be found as he holdeth nor no Christ Moses Eliah or Prophet from heaven appearing nor yet any that by Signes and Miracles can prove the truth of their Mission I conceive it necessarily followeth and I willingly leave all men free to judge of it That J. S. is yet for all his clearing in a great straight and under a dark cloud out of and from under which he will not be able to get unlesse he do as Saul did make bold to do that which is unwarrantable and so running before he be sent and doing that which God never spake any word about the which he shall do well to take further knowledge of CHAP. III. Containing a defence of the judgement of such as hold that Baptisme hath continued Gods Ordinance in the Apostacie of Antichrist notwithstanding the corruptions attending of it in way of Answer to the Cavils and Exceptions of J. S. against the same BEfore that J. S. could finish the matter in the former Chapter and clear it as he pretended to do he found some Tenents in his way as opposite to that pretended truth but indeed errour which he endeavoured to maintain the which he setteth down thus First such as stand for a personall succession Again thus A word or two to such as hold succession in the defection of Antichrist Again Such as hold Baptisme by personall succession as in pag. 39. may be seen To which I answer First That sure J. S. mistaketh himself being never able to make it appear that any person or persons do so hold So I might let him alone to contest with his own fancie But in as much as he may happily have met with some that hold the continuation of Baptisme as Gods Ordinance in that defection not in way of succession that being no way proper to an Ordinance returning home unto himself his phrase of succession as darkening the truth I shall apply my self to take knowledge of his scope and purpose First he saith Such have received a sufficient Answer that hold so in what he had writ before To which I answer Indeed if he might be his own Judge in his own cause it might be so It were much better that others should have said so and praised him then he thus his own work But what was it that he had proved before in his conceit That all the world are unbaptized onely he and those of his way Is he not a mighty Champion thus to nullifie and make void the Christianity of all Christians in the world It is more then Turks could ever do by all the force and power they had He hath yet a word or two more to say to such as hold contrary to his erroneous conclusion that Baptisme hath continued and doth continue Gods Ordinance c. And first he begins by way of Querie thus If they mean by defection the outward form of worship and Government Ecclesiasticall as he thinketh they do Answ Is defection of so hard and doubtfull sense with J. S. as he should querie thus and go by thinking he may know that defection or defilement pollution or corruption are of one nature and that there is a reall difference betwixt corruption and the thing corrupted between defilement and the thing defiled betwixt Religion and Gods Ordinances and mens additions to and detractions from the same They mean that the Ordinances and in particular Baptisme hath continued from the Apostles downward thorow all the apostacie and defilements that have attended Religion and it to this day Just as Circumeision of old did continue Gods Ordinance in the apostacie and defilements of the ten Tribes under Jeroboam and likewise in the time of Manasses in Judah This is their meaning and what then Then saith he all the power and authority that ever carried out any Administration or constituted Ordinance depends on the same Just as Circumcision depended on the Calves in Jeroboams apostacie And if so saith he then the Ordainer and Ordinance ordained are both of one nature Yea they are both of one nature God is the Author he is spirituall and Baptisme the thing ordained so also If one be saith he Antichristian the other is also Antichristian Strong lines without proof What if neither be Antichristian neither the Authour nor
Ordidinance where is J. S. then For truly his collective reason is as much as if a person opposing Circumcision as none of Gods Ordinance because of the Idolatry of the Jews should have reasoned thus If the Israelites be Idolaters and the Calves Idols and no gods and the Priests Priests to them that are no gods then is Circumcision 2 Chro. 13. 9. of the same nature also as are the Calves Priests and Jeroboams whole way of Dan and Bethel And for proof should say as J. S. doth that it was the power of Jeroboams way or of his Calves that carried on the whole form of worship and proceed and the power and Ordainer and the Ordinance ordained must needs be of one stamp if one so then so the other Had not such a way of arguing overthrown Circumcision then aswell as Baptisme now Let J. S. be Judge himself and let him tell me whether he would not have distinguished in the case Againe I will propose another instance in the way of his Argument Thus the Author and thing ordained or made must be of one and the same nature if one be Antichristian the other also for so he hath proved be saith But the Authors namely those that translated the Scripture were according to his opinion Antichristians and there be additions and detractions as in some translations there are Now the thing made or translated must be of the same nature with the Translators that were the Authors and if it were added for proof it was the power of their Antichristian spirits that carried on the whole worke and proceed thereof and so conclude as before both are one and the same If J. S. now would in this stand to his own ground where would he be he would be as far to seek for new Scriptures as they are for Church and Ordinances that hold there neither is nor yet can be any in the World or as he himself was not long since for Baptisme But truly it is much to be pittyed to see such ignorance in men professing knowledge that they cannot distinguish betwixt Gods Ezek. 4. 4. posts and mens when mens are set by Gods That they cannot distinguish between Gods Ordinances and mens inventions and aditions that they cannot put difference betwixt the Arke and Dagon or his Temple in which he being placed fell before the Arke I would 1. Sam. 5. 4. faine know of J. S. when Baptisme that was Christs seased and lost its being and Antichrists Baptisme came in the roome of it sure he cannot tell But I must here tell J. S. that the power of Jesus Christ supports and carries his Ordinances in the midst of the deepest defections that Satan ever hath or could bring upon the same wherein his glorious power doth appear although J. S. would spoile him of it by faining that he is overcome his Church Ordinances destroyed Gods people of old remained his people his Church his Church his Ordinances his Ordinances as particularly Circumcision in the midst of the greatest defilements that ever attended that dispensation In like manner it is so now under al the defilements of Antichrist in particular Baptisme of which is our question as also the Church our Lord Christ his power being no way lessened for the upholding of it nor his faithfulnesse failed for the preservation thereof according to his promise who hath said The gates Mat. 16. of hell shall not prevaile against it It were good for J. S. to study well that place 2 Thes 2. 4. Where Antichrist is foretold sitting in the Temple or Church of God and if he would please but to take notice that there is difference between Gods Temple in which he sitteth and him sitting there as there was betwixt the Arke in the Temple of Dagon in which the Arke was he happily would change his thoughts and be of another minde and so come to have more respective thoughts of the power and faithfulnesse of Jesus Christ then now he seemeth to have Truly I suppose these foolish inferences of J. S. will appear to be but meer fantasies without any ground tending only to deceive the simple for any indifferent Reader will be able to distinguish betwixt Religion and corruption betwixt Ordinances and the evills by way of addition or detraction that attends them Circumcision was of God and it was the hand and power of God that carried it forth in those evill times The Idols Calves and Jeroboams Priests and his whole way as they were of and from another so another hand and power carried them along Even as in like manner Baptisme and other like things being of God are preserved and carried by a hand and power of God whereas that universall Church generall Ministery and government with those other forms of Churches Provinciall Diocesan and proportionall Ministery and Government Ceremonies with additions and detractions innumerable as they are from another fountain so they are carried in another channell and by another power abetted and set on namely by the power of the man of sin the author and inventer of them So far shall suffice in this But saith J. S. praising of himself He hath proved that if one be Antichristian the other is Antichristian By what Scripture he hath proved it none can tell And saith he To dream of any approved Church by the Word of God under the defection and yet a part of the same is for a man to look for a man in the Moon and to suppose a Church to consist in such matter as is destructive to it self and therein to hold a successisn of truth is against the light of nature and a keeping of the Pope upon the Throne of Christ whether he will or no. Answ Is not this high Divinity which I. S. belcheth out of his self-sick stomack against the people and truth of God Is it not a sore and heavy charge but it is well it is but said and not proved Now least any as simple as he that said it should believe it because it is said and that by a person venerable in their way I shall take the pains to examine the respective charges as they are laid down First saith he To dream of an approved Church by the Word of God A. Sure he dreamed himself in what he fathered thus upon his opposites who do not hold an approved Church in such a sense as J. S. seemeth to intend that is a pure and spotlesse Church But they hold according to the Scripture a Church to be really true and Gods though corrupt and greatly defiled I suppose he will not question but that Judah not to speak of Israel was the Church of God in Manasses time and in other times when Idolatry greatly prevailed yet not approved as pure and spotlesse but reproved for corruption and defilement yea and visited with the rods of men Psal 89. 3 2. because of the same that she might be reformed so as to be again approved of her