the Church universal and when not there would be a great deal of uncertainty by what how and when to esteem them members thereof Should we make any thing else the rule of this Judgement we should find our selves at a strange loss to give right judgement herein For example Should we make a mans profession of the Christian Religion in general this rule then the question will be whether every profession of the Christian Religion does render a man reputably a member of the universal Church If not as I suppose it will not be asserted that it doth then the question will be to what degree a man must profess before he be worthy that denomination And who is able here to give the rule unto his brother yea or unto himself either but that he will be in danger of making it too high or too low too narrow or too wide But now if we take the rule which God hath fitted to our hands Baptism I mean we shall then find our selves delivered from those uncertainties difficulties and dis-satisfactions yea from that un-evangelical arbitrariness in the things of God which otherwise will of necessity and unavoidably befall us herein For according to Scripture rule all they and only they are to be esteemed visibly of the universal Church who so far profess repentance from dead works faith towards God and the rest of the foundation principles as thereupon to submit to the Ordinance of Baptism as engaging themselves thereby to be no longer the servants of sin but thenceforth the servants of Jesus Christ and of righteousness I shall not here repeat the proof of this you have it already If then none are to be esteemed as visible members of the universal Church but only such as are baptized then none but such as are baptized may be admitted as members of a particular Church For it is altogether irregular indeed absurd to admit any into particular Church-Fellowship who are not first visibly members of the Universal because particular Churches and so particular Church-members receive their right of being such of and from the Universal Church and from that precedent standing they had there as branches and members of it As the special must and doth agree with the general kind in the general nature of it or else it is no special of that general as Logicians speak So must a particular Church agree with the universal in the universal nature of it otherwise it is no particular of the Universal but is something of another kind But now Baptism is so essentially formally and universally necessary to the visible being I say visible being of the universal Church and of every member of it as that it is the distinguishing mark between those that are and those that are not visibly of it For it is that mean or only visible door by which visibly men pass out of the world into the Church from under the dominion of sin and Satan into the Rule and Government of Jesus Christ That the Scriptures do assigne this office unto Baptism I have formerly proved as I suppose and is the vote and concession of all men generally a few only excepted of those that profess Christianity If the Scriptures do in any other quarters of them repeal this mean and ordain another in its stead or do assigne any other besides this to the same service I desire to be directed therein that I may know what it is and where I may find it for I must profess my total ignorance of any such thing though I have made diligent search for it Nor is it indeed Gods way and method to leavy more means for the same end when one is every way sufficient as I have formerly shewed Baptism then being so much of the general nature of the Churches visible being as that no man can according to Scripture-rule esteem any one duly and regularly a member thereof without it those particular Churches or Church-members then that partake not hereof cannot in due form of Evangelical Law nor according to the principles of reason be esteemed particucular Churches or Church-members of the universal but either of some other kind or at the best of an un-evangelical form and constitution 4. This being Gods method order and way of bringing men into the enjoyment of Church-communion and Church priviledges viz. through the door of Baptism as hath been already observed this very method and order of his ought to be very sacred unto us and inviolably observed by us For as God is the God of order and not of confusion so he hath commanded us to do all things viz. which he hath commanded in Church-Affairs decently and in order 1 Cor. 14.40 Now what is it to do all things in order but to do every thing in its due place that first which in order of institution is first and that afterwards which hath a relative dependance upon that which goes before There is indeed a beautiful harmony and comely agreement between the wayes of Jesus Christ Ordinance and Ordinance when each of them is observed in that order that is proper to them in which respect I suppose the Tabernacle or House of God of old was called the Beauty of holiness or the Ordinannances thereof the comely honours of the Sanctuary as Master Ainsworth tenders it which yet were but a pattern of heavenly i. e. Spiritual or Gospel things Heb. 9.23 and 8.5 The which spiritual beauty being beheld by the Apostle in the Church at Colosse he was much taken there with Joying and beholding your order c. Coloss 2.5 i.e. Joying to behold your order which argues that this order of theirs was a lovely object And doubtless it is a duty incumbent upon every one of them who have devoted themselves to Jesus Christ and the Affairs of his Gospel to endeavour as much as in them lies the honour of their Master and of the Affairs of his house and therefore if there be any piece of comeliness or beauty more in one way then there is in another as doubless there is more in God's order and method then there is in that which is but of man it will well become the servants of the Lord Jesus to be zealous of that The best way and method of doing the best things is to be coveted as well as the best things themselves And as it is a thing very well pleasing unto God to have his own things done in his own way and order so it is a provocation to him to have his way and order neglected and another introduced instead of it yea though such a disorder proceed from no wicked intent out from inadvertancie only The Lord our God saith David made a breach upon us for that we sought him not after the due order 1 Chron. 15.13 meaning in that stroke upon Vzzah who did but touch the Ark out of an intent doubtless to uphold it upon the stumbling of the Oxen otherwise then Gods order was And shall we think that the
to this God puts his Laws in the minds of men and writes them in their hearts Heb. 8.10 which implies that he did not do so under the Old Testament or at least but very little comparatively Again Joh. 4.23 But the hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth implying that thither-unto or until then they had not so worshipped him or at least that there was but little of that found under the Legal Dispensation And according to the nature of this Ministration children voyd of understanding and faith were capable of holy things as Circumcision and Passover and the like and consequently of the ends and benefits of them in part upon a literal administration and reception of them Rom. 3.1 2. Exod. 12.44 48. But the case is far otherwise now under the Gospel which is the Ministration of the Spirit 2 Cor. 3.6 It is not the work done but the manner of doing of it in knowledg faith and fear of the Lord that entitles men unto the benefit and blessing of Gospel-Ordinances for so the Apostle affirms concerning Baptism it self 1 Pet. 3.21 when he says that it saves us now as the Ark did some in the days of Noah not saith he the putting away of the filth of the flesh i. e. not by the external letter of the Ordinance but the answer of a good Conscience towards God i.e. when accompanyed with such a frame of mind and conscience as does answer God in his intendments of Grace in that Ordinance So again Col. 2.12 when the Apostle saith that they were buryed with Christ in Baptism and that they were therein also risen with him yet he says that thus they were by the faith of the operation of God who raised Christ from the dead meaning such a faith as was produced by the operation of God or else such as had the operation of God in raising up Christ for its object however it was by the interveniency of this Faith that they became both buryed and risen with Christ in Baptism Now Infants as they are not capable of acting this Faith or making this answer of a good Conscience so they are not capable of those blessings and benefits intended by God in Baptism in as much as he hath suspended the donation thereof upon these in conjunction with Baptism And where any effect depends upon the taking place of more causes then one as it does in the case in hand it is not any one of those causes alone that will produce that effect 3. How ever the ends of Circumcision were attainable though administred to Infants in those respects before mentioned with their fellows yet doubtless the Ordinance it self was so much the less spiritual and so much the more weak and savoring of the Legal Ministration and suited to the then childish condition of the Church because administration thereof was made to Infants This I conceive might easily be made out from several of those rational principles consonant to the Scripture upon and from which I have already evinced Baptism to be more spiritual profitable and edifying when administred to men professing the Faith then when applyed to children Therefore doubtless what the Apostle speaketh of the Commandment in general meaning the Law which as he says made nothing perfect how that it is disanulled for the weakness and unprofitableness of it Hebr. 7.18 19. may well be understood to comprehend even this part of the Commandment also which enjoyned an Ordinance one or more to be administred to little children And how ever such a mean low way and method of enjoying Ordinances as was accommodated to the capacity of babes was not uncomely whilest the Church was in the condition of children as the Apostle speaks Gal. 4.3 no more then it is for a child whilest he is a child to speak and act as a child yet to retain this poor and low and barren way of administring a Gospel-Ordinance to Infants now the Church is raised both in capacity and administration to its manly condition is as incongruous and uncomely as it is for one still to speak and act as a child when he is become a man By this time I hope it appears that there is not the same reason why Baptism administred to Infants should reach the ends thereof as there was why Circumcision though applyed to Infants formerly should attain its end For the nature of the two Ordinances differ the terms of their Administration differ and the respective capacities of the Church then and the Church now differ and according to that rule in Logick Where the things themselves differ there the reasons of those things differ also ARGUM. III. 3. MY next Argument shall be taken from the different nature of the two Ministrations of the Old and New Testaments as rendering Infant-Baptism in that precise consideration of it as applyed to Infants disagreeable to the Ministration of the Gospel but withall more correspondent with the Ministration of the Law Therefore I thus further argue If Infant-Baptism be disagreeable to the Ministration of the New Testament then Infants ought not to be baptized The reason hereof is because so far as either this or any other way or practice does comply with the Legal Ministration and disagree with the Evangelical so far it does cross or oppose the design of God in changing the Ministration of the Law for that of the Gospel and consequently carries in it a spirit of antipathy against the very spirit of the Gospel Ministration This if it were not sufficiently evident of it self might receive abundant confirmation from such Scriptures as these and what might fairly and plainly be deduced from them Joh. 4.23 24. 2 Cor. 3.6 Gal. 4.9 Col. 2.8 17. Heb. 7.18 19. 8.6 7. 9.9 10 11. 10.1 But I presume of every mans plenary satisfaction as to this Therefore I proceed But Infant-Baptism is disagreeable to the Ministration of the New Testament Assumption 1. The truth hereof in the first place is conspicuous and perceptible by what hath been made good in our former Argument For there we proved Baptism as administred to Infants less edifying as to the several ends of it then when administred unto Believers and if less edifying then the more suitable and conformable to the Ministration of the Law which was a Ministration of less light and edification and to the same proportion disproportionate to the Ministration of the Gospel which is a Ministration of a greater light and a more rich edification 2. I might in the second place well suppose Infant-Baptism to savor strongly of the Legal Ministration because the principal Arguments produced in defence thereof are such as do arise out of and are deducted from the example of Infant-Circumcision a principal part of the Legal Ministration and from that analogy and proportion that is supposed to be between them and not only so but likewise because such Arguments and Pleas tend to draw down this
righteousness then was in the multitude that were baptized before him and if not this what else imaginable but this viz. that his * Iesus said unto them My time is not yet come but your time is alway ready Joh. 7.6 appointed time and season of his appearing with the Gospel in the world was not till then and therefore not his time of being baptized in as much as the one was in order to the other and was to take its rise and beginning from the other And this we have further reason the rather to conceive because of that Particle NOW emphatically here used as it relates to the fulfilling of righteousness by that which was to be done Suffer it to be so NOW saith Christ to Joh. touching his being baptized For thus it becometh us to fulfil allrighteousness Mat. 3.15 Not only in being baptized of him but in being baptized of him NOW to wit at that juncture of time in which he was to be manifested to the world to be the Son of God to manifest to the world the Gospel of God NOW to be baptized viz. upon suchterms it was a thing very comely though John seemed to think otherwise in as much as that it was a fulfilling of righteousness i.e. that righteous law or institution of God given in that behalf And thus we see that the example of Christ's Personal Baptism which was intreated to bless the opinion for Infant Baptism hath contradicted it altogether The Second Part SHEWING How necessary it is for persons to be baptized after they believe their Infant-Baptism notwithstanding as also discovering the disorderly and irregular Communion of persons baptized with such as are unbaptized in Church Fellowship HAving in the former part of this Discourse laid down part of those grounds and reasons which have swayed my judgment and satisfied my conscience in the sight of God touching the unlawfulness of Infant Baptism and which I doubt not will have the like influence and operation upon the unbyassed minds of other men It remains now that I come to speak something to these two questions following 1. Whether men may not rest satisfied with that Baptism which was administred to them in their Infancy without any further reception of Baptism afterwards notwithstanding they come to understand the irregularity of their Infant Baptism 2. Whether it be necessary for such persons who have for some considerable space of time made profession of the faith though as yet unbaptized whether it be necessary for them to be baptized since the ends of Baptism seem to be anticipated by such a continued profession As touching the former of these Questions I conceive I may affirm that none may safely and without danger of sin rest satisfied with that Baptism which they received in their Infancy they coming once to understand the irregularity and sinfulness of Infant Baptism and I do assert it upon these grounds 1. Because the Apostle Paul as may reasonably be conceived did not hold it convenient or safe for certain Disciples with whom he met to rest satisfied with such a Baptism as had been formerly either erroneously administred to them or else which was deficient as touching some special ends of that Baptism which was enjoyned the Disciples of Christ but did proceed to baptize them or to cause them to be baptized afresh The Case before us is touching those certain Disciples which Paul found at Ephesus and of whom he demanded Whether they had received the Holy Ghost since they had believed Unto whom they replyed That they had not so much as heard whether there were any Holy Ghost Vnto what then said Paul were ye baptized And they said Vnto Johns Baptism Then said Paul John verily baptized with the Baptism of repentance saying unto the people that they should believe on him that was to come after him that is on Christ Jesus When they heard this they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus And when Paul had laid his hands upon them the Holy Ghost came on them c. Acts 19.1.2.3.4.5.6 In this passage of Scripture there are three things which I would have observed as to my present purpose The first is touching the Baptism which these Disciples are said formerly to have received The second is touching their later Baptism which they received upon Pauls instructing them And the third is touching the reason why they were now baptized upon Pauls preaching to them notwithstanding they had formerly been baptized unto Johns Baptism 1. That these Disciples had been formerly baptized unto Johns Baptism is that which they themselves affirm verse 3. 2. That the same Disciples were now again baptized upon Pauls preaching Christ to them I conceive fairly appears by those words ver 5. When they heard this viz. that which Paul had declared to them they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus There are indeed two other Interpretations of these words urged by some that do much differ from that sence which I have now given but are both beside the Scope and meaning of the place as I suppose I shall presently make appear 1. Some by their being baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus as here in this place would have us to understand it not of their being baptized with water but of their being baptized with the Spirit which is Master Calvins sence upon the place and so he takes these words They were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus and those that follow in the next verse viz. And when Paul had laid his hands on them the Holy Ghost came on them and they spake with tongues and prophesied to import one and the same thing and that the later words are only an Explanation of the former shewing after what manner they were baptized and he further saith That for the visible graces of the Spirit which were given by the laying on of hands for this to be expressed by the name of Baptism is no new thing as he does alledg from Acts 1.5 and 11.16 But 1. That their being baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus and their receiving the Holy Ghost upon the laying on of Pauls hands were not the same thing as is alledged may be discerned 1. By a due consideration both of the different nature of the actions themselves and the successive order of those different actions For the doctrine and so the practise of Baptism is one thing and that of laying on of hands is another as is apparent by that of the Apostle Heb. 6.2 where the Doctrine of Baptisms and of laying on of hands are differenced by the same note of distinction by which the Doctrine of the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment are differenced from them both And the same thing appears from the order and suecession of these different actions as well as from the different nature of them For we have 1. Pauls teaching of these Disciples distinctly mentioned 2. The baptizing of them in Name of Christ
same Lord who hath his eyes like a flame of fire is not as jealous now for the due order of the Gospel as he was for the due order of the Law And is there not the same reason to fear that if any Church now shall transgress the Laws of his House that they also shall feel his hand in one kind or other as well as they did in times past in like case to the end That all the Churches may know that it is he that searcheth the reins and the hearts and that will give to every one according to his works i.e. that they may know that he is a narrow Observer of what is done in his Churches Revel 2.23 Since then it was the Original Order of the Churches of Christ in the midst of whom Christ himselfe walked to admit such only to their Church-communion as had been baptized and that as we have reason to believe according to what they had been taught by the Apostles who did appoint them their order of doing as well as the things they were to do Tit. 1.5 2 Thes 2.15 1 Cor. 14. and 11.2 How does it concern such as are studious of reducing things in the Worship and House of God to their primitive purity and beauty to tread in their steps and not to deviate there-from upon any pretence whatsoever It is true as I observed before upon another occasion that it may so fall out that in undertakings of reformation and restitution of ordinances and worship from under their corruptions and decayes there may be an impossibility precisely and in all things to answer the original usage but that through an indispensible necessity there will be in these reformers some variation either in the Administrator or in some considerable circumstance of the administration in respect of which indispensible necessity God accepts men according to what opportunity they have and not according to what they have not when they proceed according to the Rule and Original pattern to the utmost of their power and opportunity But now in the case in hand no man amongst us is staved off from a close conformity to the original Order by any absolute and indispensible necessity or for want of opportunity there being a great variety of baptized Churches in these dayes amongst whom baptized persons may cast in their lot and take out their portion of Christian Fellowship and Communion So that where there is a mingling of persons baptized with such as are unbaptized in Church-Fellowship now amongst us the departing herein from the ancient Gospel-order is not by way of necessity which according to the Proverb hath no Law but is meerly voluntary and of choice and therefore so far as I understand inexcusable I know indeed that such things as these seem but little in some good mens eyes I fear much less then of right they ought who count men more nice then wise who make a business of it to stand upon such punctillioes But be it so that they are the least of many among the things of the Gospel yet why should they not have their share of respect amongst men according to what they be What dispensation hath any man to despise or neglect the least of the things or wayes of Christ Jesus because they are little The Jots and Tittles of the Law which were the least things of it were to have sacred respect amongst men and to be observed Matth. 5.18 And though judgment mercy and faith were the weighty matters of the Law and accordingly ought to have been done yet the paying tythe of mint annise and cummin which were the lighter matters of the Law ought not to have been left undone Matth. 23.23 And was the tythe of herbs the jots and tittles of the Law which came by Moses to be duly kept and observed and shall any of the things of the Gospel which came by Jesus Christ be neglected because of their littleness This is the praise of the faithful servant that he is faithful in a very little Luke 19.17 And it is the positive conclusion of Christ himself who knows what is in man and what are the principles of his actions That he that it faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much Luke 16.10 And therefore it concerns every man that hath a desire to approve himself a faithful servant in the account of his Lord and Master Christ Jesus to make conscience even of these things Gospel-order I mean how little soever otherwise they seem to be in their eyes whose sight is so bad as that they cannot feesmall objects or else they so in-observant as that they overlook them 5. We know that none were to be admitted into the Passover of old but such who had been first circumcised Exod. 12.48 And therefore if Baptism bear the like relation to the Supper of the Lord as circumcision did to the Passover which yet is a thing generally acknowledged by all then it follows that as none uncircumcised might be admited to the Passover so none unbaptized may be admitted to the Supper of the Lord and consequently not to Church-communion whereof that is a special part 6. I demand according to what rule or principle of reason judgment or wisdome any man is to steer his course in his spiritual Affairs in a way that is more dubious and dark when he hath opportunity of proceeding therein upon terms of clear and certain satisfaction and such as are full of lights In other cases we suspect them who wait for the twi-light and unto whom the morning is as the shadow of death as the Scripture speaks Job 20.15 17. Whereas on the other side He that doth righteousness cometh to the light John 3.21 And whether those that decline a more lightsome and clear way and choose that which is more obscure and dark may not reasonably be suspected to have some practise to promote which holds no communion with the light I leave it to indifferent men to be considered Doubtless it argues a distempered mind in a man that 's the best you can make of it when he chooses uncouth wayes and unknown for his journy when he may have such as are straight plain and well known But now that the joyning together of baptized persons with baptized in Church-communion was practised in the Apostolical Churches is a thing so evident and clear that I think none will deny but that it is as clear that baptized and unbaptized persons did in the Apostles times incorporate themselves into Church bodies I think none will affirm however it will be found there is no reason so to do And therefore now for any to chuse rather to joyn themselves in Church-communion with unbaptized persons when they have a fair opportunity of associating themselves therein with such as are baptized is at the best to prefer uncertainty before certainty of Scripture-ground in so weighty a business as is that
of Church-Fellowship And where there is any flaw in the evidence or ground upon which a man acts in matters of Religion there will be a proportionable deduction of comfort and spiritual joy in the doing of the work because all the joy and comfort of any mans actions in Church-Affairs or indeed in any other does arise and spring partly from the knowledge he hath that it is a work of Gods approving and partly from his confidence of his being accepted with God in the doing of it the later of which takes not place without the former But it may be some will here object and say Object 1 That though it do not lie so fair and clear in the Scriptures with that degree of evidence that unbaptized persons were admitted into Church-Fellowship with those that were baptized as it does appear that baptized ones held communion together yet it does appear at least upon probable grounds that unbaptized persons were Church-members with those that were baptized in the Churches of Galatia and Rome For when the Apostle saith Gal. 3.27 As many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ And again Rom. 6.3 Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death Do not these Particles of Speech so many of us and as many of you as have been baptized imply that there were some in and of those Churches that were not baptized into Christ For the form of Speech and manner of Phrase here used by the Apostle is partitive or distributive and supposes the persons of whom he speaks to be part of them baptized and part of them unbaptized To this I answer Answ 1 That upon due consideration had of the manner of speaking Scope of the Apostle and the Collation of other Scriptures here with it will appear that no such thing can be duly collected from the Scriptures mentioned as is pretended in the Objection 1. That though this form of speaking As many of you and so many of us c. is sometime used in a partitive or distributive sence and does denote a manifest difference between the persons of whom the predication is made yet it is not alwayes so used nor does it alwayes import such a thing 1 Tim. 6.1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own Masters worthy of all honour that the Name of God and his Doctrine be not blaspemed Here we see is the same form of speaking with that mentioned in the Objection But if we should understand it in a partitive or distributive sence then we must suppose that some servants only were under the yoke of servitude and that others were not and also that the Apostle would only have some servants viz. such as were under the yoke to count their Masters worthy of all honour but that he laid no such injunction upon other servants both which were absurd to imagine But the Apostles meaning is that all servants for as much as they are under the yoke should exhibit all respects of honour to their Master becoming such a relation And therefore in as much as this manner of expression is used sometimes distributively and sometimes collectively of all particulars to which it is applyed that light by which we must know when it is used in the one sence and when in the other must be had from the Context and Scope of the Sentence where we find it 2. And therefore I answer further that the Scope of the Apostle being consulted in the places mentioned in the Objection it will evidently appear that the inference made thence in the Objection is altogether groundless and unreasonable For the Apostle having said Gal. 3.26 Ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus those words in ver 27. viz. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ are alledged by him as the reason of what he had said before in that ver 26. as hath been opened more at large upon another occasion in the former part of this Treatise But now if their putting on of Christ in Baptism was a proof of their relation to God as children as the Apostle you see makes it to be then that which he gives in by way of reason and proof that they were all the children of God by faith would fall very short of this end if only a part of the members of these Churches had been baptized and not all For though they who are baptized into Christ and have thereby put on Christ are thereby evidenced to be the children of God yet how would it have followed that they had been all the children of God by faith upon that account when only but a part of them had been baptized So that indeed if you will understand this Scripture as supposing some part only of these Churches to be baptized and another part unbaptized you force and fasten upon the Apostle a Solecism in reason a gross absurdity and piece of ridiculosity in his way of reasoning as you will easily perceive if you do but put the matter of his words so understood into a Syllogism which then must run thus If some of you only have been baptized into Christ and have thereby put on Christ then you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus But some of you only have been baptized into Christ and have thereby put on Christ Ergo you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus To understand then the Apostle in such a distributive sence as that is for which the Objection pleads is to deale by the Apostles argument and reason as Hanun did by Davids Messengers when he cut off their garments to their buttocks and to render it altogether inadequate to his Scope and purpose Whereas to understand his as many of you c. in a collective sence for all the individual and particular members of those Churches is to render the Apostles argumentation comprehensive of its end correspondent to its Scope and as hitting the mark For if their being baptized into Christ was a proof of their Sonship to God in the sence formerly declared then he might well conclude them all and not some of them only to be the children of God by faith in Christ in as much they had been all baptized into Christ Jesus The Scope of that place likewise Rom. 6.3 will not admit of a distributive sence of those words Know you not that so many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death For the Apostles pressing the great duty of Mortification upon this whole Church at Rome he is to make his exhortation the more effectual remembers them how they engaged themselves to the practise thereof by their Baptism upon which account he does enforce it upon them as you may perceive if you carry your eye along from ver 2. to the 13. So that you must suppose the Apostles ground
sanctification was more comprehensive of all particulars requisite not onely to their being a Church simply considered as such but also as unto the excellency of such a being For their sanctification the thing by which they are described includes in it both their Baptism and all other parts and degrees of that qualification by which they were or might have been eminently the Churches of God Whereas Baptism being one of the principles or beginning Doctrines of Christ and such as which the Apostle leaves behind as it were when he endeavours to advance the Hebrew Church to higher perfections Hebr. 6.1 2 3. if the Apostle had described them by this his description of them would have fallen beneath their qualifications they having now made some progress in Christianity when those Epistles were written to them These things then considered the Apostle his describing the Churches to whom he wrote by such qualifications wherein Baptism is not particularly mentioned will not minister any ground of making Church Members of such who are not baptized 3. Object 3 Another Objection and indeed all that I know further considerable is this The Apostles exhortation to the Church at Rome was that they would receive such as were but weak in the faith to wit such as erroniously held it necessary to abstain from such meats which in themselves were indifferent and lawfull to be used Rom 14.1 2. and if their weakness in the faith or error in their knowledg hereabout was no sufficient bar against their admission into Church fellowship then why should a like error and weakness in men now about Baptism be counted a sufficient and just impediment to their admission into Church Communion For answer to this Answ several things may be considered by which gradually we may come to a clear resolution and full satisfaction in the Case as touching the invalidity of this Objection As 1. That as on the one hand it is not every weakness in faith or errour in knowledge about the things of the Gospel that does exclude a man from Church-Fellowship as appears by the Scripture now mentioned in the Objection so on the other hand it is not every profession of the faith neither which men make that does render them duly capable of it For then the worst of men if but making any kind of profession of the Christian Religion should be admittable into the Communion of Saints which yet is a thing altogether dissonant unto the Laws of Church-communion Some errours then must be acknowledged to be in some men professing the Gospel which do justly debar them from Church-communion 2. This being granted in the next place to the end men may be upon terms of certainty is to know what errours they be which do de jure exclude men from Church-Fellowship and what do not recourse must be had to some fixed standing rule by which to make a right judgment in the case otherwise men will but rove at random and be in danger of making such errours exclusive of mens Church-membership which are not as likewise of making the door of this admission wider then God hath made it 3. That then which must be the standard by and according to which to make a right judgment in the case must be that thing what ever it be which is appointed by God as the next and immediate means appropriately of mens visible union with the Church and the reason hereof is because as on the one hand less then a mans coming up to that mean what ever it be which is the immediate inlet into the Church cannot minister either a right or opportunity of his being of the Church so on the other hand nothing more then this can be duly insisted on as absolutely necessary to make a man capable thereof and therefore who ever attains thereto cannot upon any account of infirmities otherwise be justly debarred his communion with the Church 4. That thing then which is the appropriate and immediate means of a mans visible entrance into and union with the Church is Baptism it being as the Bridge over which or as the Gate through which men declaredly pass over from the friendship of the world into the fellowship of the Saints this hath formerly been proved and therefore needs not here to be repeated It is true indeed Baptism is properly the immediate means of admission into the universal Church but whoever is by it duly made a member of the universal Church hath thereby a right of admission into a particular Church and not otherwise 5. Therefore in the last place If Baptism duly administred and received or mens coming up to the laws and terms of its due administration be the standard according to which men are to be judged meet or unmeet for Church-communion then it follows that whatever errours or infirmities are in men yet if they be not of that nature as to detain them from imbracing Baptism on Scripture terms those errours do not cannot justly debar them of Communion with the Church and on the other hand whatever other quallification there is in men towards the disposing and fitting of them for Church communion yet if they be under the power and command of any such errour which causes them to refuse baptism upon those terms according to which upon Scripture account it ought to be administred and so causes them to fall short of the formall and immediate mean of their regular union and visible conjunction with the Church that errour does necessarily deprive them both of right and opportunity of being of the Church visibly These things then being duly considered we may easily come to a resolution about the two Cases mentioned in the Objection viz. Whether this errour about Baptism of which we speak does no more deprive men of a right of admission into Church-Fellowship then that weakness in the faith did of which the Apostle speaks For that error about abstaining from meats which is the weakness in the faith of which the Apostle there speaks being an errour of that nature only which did not keep them that were under it from closing with Baptism as the means of their union with the Church I mean upon those terms according to which God had authorized the administration and reception of it but that they might and did repent and believe the main Principles of the Gospel the terms quallifying men for Baptism and did thereupon receive Baptism for all this weakness of theirs Hence it came to pass that they were to be admitted into Church-communion this weakness of theirs notwithstanding But now their errour about Baptism of whom we speak being an errour of that nature by which they are kept off from imbracing Baptism upon Scripture terms and so of attaining to and making use of that which is the appropriate mean of their visible union with the Church this errour of theirs does in a direct way unavoidably cut them short both of right and opportunity of a regular admission into Church-Fellowship There being then so broad a difference between the two errours compared in the Objection as you see there is the one consisting with the other being repugnant to that very mean without which a visible conjunction and union with the Church is not attainable on Scripture terms it therefore no wise follows that because the one was no just impediment unto mens Church-Fellowship that therefore the other is not neither for where things and cases do really differ as these do there the consequences of those things cannot be the same Thus having finished my Answers to these Objections I suppose it doth appear by what hath been offered to consideration on this behalf these Objections notwithstanding that persons baptized refusing to joyn themselves in Church-communion with those who are unbaptized is not without such grounds which will render them approved in so doing ERRATA PAge 6. l. 29. for to r. by p. 10. l. 15. r. is p. 16. l. 3. for end r. need p. 18. l. 19. for disciples read visible members p. 20. l. 35 for who r. we p. 21. l. 20. r. of p. 22. l. â— r. no. p. 22. l. 33. for any r. my p. 84. l. 20. for dealings r. deelinings p. 89. l. 7. r. to p. p 91. l. 4. r. upon p. 93 l. 38. omit old p. 93. l. 37. omit the deeds p. 94. l. 30. omit in p. 109. l. 7 for into r. unto p. 109 l. 19 for lights r. light The End