cause you to consider whether those Sub-divisions and sub-separations among your selves do not befal you as a correction for your first dividing from others without a cause and to awaken you to review the grounds on which it hath been done Now to convince you that you have no sufficient ground to separate upon account of Infant Baptism and that you have great cause to repent that you have so done is that I confess which I chiefly design in this Charitable Address so far as it concerns you only You are wont to interpret the extent of Christs Commission to Baptize by what is recorded in point of fact touching who or what manner of persons were Baptized by the Apostles and others in their times and to conclude that no Infants were authorized by that Commission to be Baptized since as you suppose the Scripture gives no account that any such were Baptized But if this way of arguing were good it would certainly make against your own practice whether it make any thing against Infant Baptism or no. For then the said Commission of our Saviour would not warrant the baptizing of any such as you baptize to wit persons at age whose Parents were Christians when they were born and who have been educated from their Childhood in the Christian Religion for there is not the least hint in Scripture that any such were baptized in the Apostles days nor of any except Infants but only such as were Converted from Judaism or Paganism to Christianity and that presently after such their Conversion But if you think the lawfulness of baptizing such persons as you baptize may be deduced by way of consequence from Christs Commission though there be no instances in Scripture of the baptizing any such Then you cannot deny it to be lawful to baptize Infants if the lawfulness of it can be deduced from Christs Commission to baptize though there should be no instances in Scripture of the baptizing any Infants By this you see that your popular argument against Infant Baptism falls foul upon your selves and your own practice The difference then between you and the Paedo-Baptists must not be decided by examples in point of fact though if it should you would be far more to seek than they as shall be shewed afterwards but by the Doctrine of the Scriptures relating to Church-membership and Baptism which we will now come to consider and therein proceed gradually When any thing hath been wont to be argued from the Church-membership and Circumcision of Infants in Old Testament times in favour of the visible Church-membership and Baptism of Infants now and in favour also of the Nationality of Churches it hath been still replied and urged by you that there is this difference between the Church then and now to wit that the Church was Constituted then by Natural Generation whereas it is Constituted now by Spiritual Regeneration and further that what was sufficient to make Church-members then and to qualifie them for the initiating Ordinance is not so now And because this is a Corner-stone in your building a foundation principle upon which both you and the Congregational men in great part do found your separate Congregations therefore it will be very meet in the first place to examine what there is in this pretension That which is usually alledged for it is Rom. 9.6 7 8. where it 's said They are not all Israel which are of Israel neither because they are the seed of Abraham are they all Children but in Isaac shall thy seed be called That is they which are the Children of the flesh these are not the Children of God but the Children of the promise are counted for the seed However you may have flatter'd your selves from the meer sound of these words to think them a strong foundation for your aforesaid notion and opinion yet being more narrowly looked into they will be found to subvert and utterly overthrow it For that which these words will directly prove is that Church-Membership or persons Relation unto God as his Children did not no not in Old Testament times proceed from Natural Generation or meerly from being Abrahams Seed according to the flesh The unbelieving Jews against whose pretences the Apostle here argues did indeed hold that because they were naturally descended from Abraham and Circumcised and kept the Law that God should be unrighteous and not make good his promise if he should not own them for his Children but cast them off as the Apostle in his Doctrine it seems asserted that he would if they did not believe but reject the Gospel of his Son And that upon which they built this confidence was in that God had promised to be the God of Abraham and his Seed To take off which pretence of theirs and to prove that God would act nothing contrary to his promise made to Abraham and his Seed though he should reject them for rejecting the Gospel he shews they were under a great mistake just as you are now in thinking they were the Children of God or of his Church meerly because they were descended from Abrahams Loins For saith he they are not all Israel that are of Israel which yet they would have been if somewhat else had not been requisite to make them so than their procedure out of his Loins in a course of natural Generation Neither saith he because they are the Seed of Abraham are they all Children to wit of God as after he expounds it when he saith they that are the Children of the flesh these are not the Children of God Ver. 8. But as he shewed from what this Relation of Sonship unto God did not proceed so he shews likewise from what it did by interpreting those words of God to Abraham but in Isaac shall thy seed be called That is saith he they which are the Children of the flesh these are not the Children of God but the Children of the promise are counted for the seed Now by Children of the promise is meant Abrahams spiritual Seed for they we see are opposed to Children of the flesh and spiritual and carnal are contra-distinguished the one from the other as Seeds of a different species or kind This is so plain as what can be plainer So that in Abrahams time and after we see those who were Related to God as his Church and Children were so upon the account of their being Abrahams spiritual Seed And furthermore in that any of the Gentiles being proselyted to the Faith and Religion of Abraham were with their Children to be admitted to the same priviledges with the people of the God of Abraham and to be numbred with them as they were it 's a plain case that their Church-membership or Relation to God as his people did not then proceed meerly from natural Generation and Relation they being Children of Abraham not according to the flesh but according to faith The same may be said of Strangers from among the Gentiles that were born of Gentile Parents in
Christians who contended with the believing Gentiles for not observing the Law of Moses in Circumcision meats and days never that we find quarrelled with them for not entering their Children into the Church as by the Law of Moses they were to do when they themselves were received as Proselytes nor for not baptizing them according to the custom of the Jews both in reference to their own Children and the Children of Proselytes Nor do we find that the unbelieving Jews ever contested with them for any such thing though otherwise they were forward enough to lay hold of any thing they could to object against them All which still renders it probable that there was no such thing wanting in the believing Gentiles as might give either the Judaizing Christians or unbelieving Jews any occasion for such a quarrel which otherwise we may well think would have risen among them But leaving these things suppose it were granted you which yet will not be that the Scripture were wholly silent as to matter of fact touching the baptizing of Infants in the Apostles days yet when we find in Scripture sufficient reason why they might and should have been then baptized it may well induce belief that they then were and now may We do not find as to matter of fact that any of six of the seven Churches of Asia were baptized nor of some other Churches of the Apostles planting but yet that 's no good argument that there was none so long as there is ground enough to conclude that they ought to have been baptized for that they were a part of that one universal Church that hath one baptism belonging to it for the solemn incorporation and initiation of all its members of all that are qualified for Church membership We do not read in Scripture that the Jews baptized the Proselytes both Fathers and Children when they received them into the Church and yet we are otherwise satisfied that they did So that you see it can be no good argument that Infants were not baptized in the Apostles days though it should be supposed and granted that we have no record in Scripture that they were I have told you before that if this way of arguing were good it would oppose and run down your own practice as much and more than Infant Baptism Because there is nothing at all recorded in Scripture as to matter of fact that gives the least hint that any were baptized at age whose Parents were Christian at their birth So that either the baptism of Children is recorded in the recording of the baptism of Housholds or else the baptism of none is recorded in Scripture but of such who immediately before their being baptized were converted from Judaism or Paganism I mean as to what was done after Christs Resurrection This argument from matter of fact I know hath taken much with people of weak minds who cannot see a far off as St. Peter speaks in another case and hath furnished your Congregations with Proselytes to your way but doth indeed wound your cause and gratifieth none but Socinians in their opinion that none ought to be baptized but such as are newly converted to Christianity from another Religion And it is not a thing to be slighted in reference to this matter of fact That Authors of good credit in the antient Church who lived in times not far distant from the age in which the Apostles or one of them lived did assert Infant Baptism to be an Apostolical Tradition and to have been received from them and practised in the Church from their times downwards as many Books before you have made it appear And that which yet adds the more credit to their testimony is in that they were never contradicted in this their report and testimony by any that lived in the same age with them or near to it no not by Tertullian himself though otherwise in reference to his opinion of all sin past being wash'd away by Baptism he would have had it deferred except in case of danger of death in Infants not only till persons were past Childhood but till after Marriage and the heat of youth was over if not till old age or towards the time of death Neither could ever any Advocate of your cause so far as I can learn give any account short of the Apostles times of the first rise of Infant Baptism But not example in matter of fact but the reason and ground on which they stand or do depend is our rule And therefore the reason and ground from Scripture why some Infants may be baptized I reckon is more to be attended to than the evidence of fact And these I have laid before you already and shewed That the reason of allowing the visible Church-membership of some Infants is the same now as it was in old Testament times such as is Gods chusing them to it sanctifying and setting them apart for it and calling them to it That Gods gift in granting this priviledge in the days of the Patriarchs and his calling them to it is without repentance and unrepealed That they are as much qualified for the Church initiating Ordinance now as ever heretofore and as capable of the ends thereof That our Saviour hath owned their special relation to him by appointing them to be received in his name That he hath acknowledged them to be of the number of those that believe in him And that our Saviour and his Apostle hath put them into the number of Disciples That they are in a sense in a regenerate state All which together plainly show them to be qualified for Baptism according to the very Letter of Christs Commission And if there be substance in these reasons as I doubt not but there is Then Infant Baptism is far from being a Nullity And whatever I have said heretofore in times long since contrary to the tenour of these reasons I hereby Revoke and do think I have given you sufficient reason for my so doing and for every one of you to do so likewise Considering then what lies in your way you will find it a difficult task to satisfie your selves or to give others any tolerable account that you can satisfie your selves that Infant Baptism is a Nullity And it is so much the more unreasonable for you to think that it is when yet those who have been baptized in their Infancy do agree with you in the doctrine of baptism touching the nature and necessity of it and the reasons and ends of it and hold themselves as much obliged by it as you do by yours and the sincere of them do as well and as much perform their obligation as those among you do who are sincere AND if these things be so as I have endeavoured to represent them from the Scriptures and if Infant Baptism be indeed no Nullity Then so many of you must needs be under a dangerous mistake and guilty of the odious sin of Schism who think it a sufficient ground to
far as Regeneration in a person is a reason or ground of baptizing him than you have to baptize the adult Considering farther that the words of our Saviour's Commission did run in general terms to disciple all Nations and baptize them how can you think that the Jews or the Apostles themselves could understand otherwise thereby than that the Children of the converted Gentiles and Jews too should with their Parents be received as Proselytes to the Christian Religion and as such baptized unless they had had caution to the contrary which if they had there would have been no place for controversie in this matter The reason of the unlikelihood of their understanding otherwise is taken from a usage among the Jews by which they did initiate Proselytes both Fathers and Children from among the Nations of the Gentiles by baptizing as well as circumcising them A thing which is acknowledged by the more learned among your selves and which you may find recited by several of our English Authors out of the writings of the ancient Jewish Doctors as by Dr. Hammond for one in his Annotations upon Mat. 3.1 John 3.5 See also Ainsworth on Gen. 17.12 The reception of the Proselytes into the Church in this way the Jews esteemed a new birth unto which our Saviour seems to refer in his discourse with Nicodemus when he said except a man be born again of water and of the spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God Jo. 3. And when Nicodemus grosly mis-understood our Saviour and demanded how can these things be our Saviour replied and said art thou a master in Israel and knowest not these things As if he should have said is this any such strange thing which is so like what is familiarly practised among your selves This considered they by Christs commanding them to Disciple or Proselyte all Nations baptizing them could not well understand but that they were now to go abroad into all the World to Proselyte the Nations to Christianity and to enter them in the Christian Church by Baptism both Parents and Children like as now and then a family of them had been formerly Proselyted to the Jews Religion and received into their Church And accordingly the recorded instances in Scripture of persons baptized that had Housholds makes it probable in conjunction with other circumstances that when the Father or chief of a Family was converted to Christianity and baptized his Houshold was baptized also as it had been before practised in the reception of Proselytes Of all those in Scripture who by name or personal description are said to have been baptized there are but nine so far as I remember besides our Saviour to wit Simon Magus the Eunuch Saul called Paul Cornelius Lydia the Jayler Crispus Gaius and Stephanus The Eunuch had no Children and was baptized-upon the road Paul had none not being Married Whether Simon had or had any Houshold is not said And whether Gaius at that time had any Houshold when he was baptized is uncertain But the other five of the nine who had Housholds their Housholds came into the Church with them by Baptism as the Housholds of the Proselytes formerly had done If then we may make a Judgment of what was usually done by so many instances in Scripture as we have of what was done in this Case we shall not want reason to incline us to think that when the Apostles did baptize any that had Housholds that it was their usual practice to baptize all those also that were of their Housholds except such as rejected the counsel of God against themselves and were not baptized which little Children could not do It was not without its signification that of old the great promise of Grace to the World by the Messias was made to Families in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed as if Gods design signified thereby was to bring the Nations of the World into the Church by Families as the event shews he hath done for the most part both before and since the Gospel dispensation The Proselytes of the Gentiles of old as well as the Jews came in by Families and we see by the instances before-mentioned that the Christians came in by Families and were baptized by Families also And the Church hath been stockt by Families and the Christian Religion transmitted down from Age to Age from Parents to Children and from Masters to Servants It will seem the less strange to you that when the Father of the Family was converted to Christianity his Houshold was brought into the Church with him if you consider upon how small appearance of becoming Christians adult persons were baptized and received into the Church in the Apostles days and by them When we read in 1 Cor. 8.7.11 that such as unto that hour continued to eat of the Idol sacrifice with conscience of the Idol are yet called brethren though weak brethren indeed you may easily guess upon how little appearance of Christianity persons were received into the Church and so you may by the baptizing of Simon Magus and many others that soon proved great scandals in the Church by whom the way of truth was evil spoken of When in the same hour of the night in which St. Paul preached the Gospel to the Jayler and his Houshold they were all baptized they did not long stand Candidates for Church-membership nor could attain to much knowledge in the Christian Religion into which they were baptized No doubt but the door into the visible Church is far wider than the gate of the Church as invisible and of the Kingdom of Heaven I do not find that any were refused that were willing presently to be baptized how bad soever they had been before or proved to be after no not Simon Magus himself than whom there could hardly be a worse But then it must be remembred that Discipline was appointed for the cure of distempers in the Church and for the purging it of the notorious scandalous members These things I have the rather mentioned to render it the more probable that little Children were baptized where whole Housholds were baptized when there were any such in those Housholds For if adult and grown persons were baptized and received into the Church upon such easie terms as I have shewed they were if they were baptized when there was but any fair probability that they would own the Christian Religion for the future though but by so little appearance of such a thing as was visible in some of them when they were baptized Then it is not unlikely but that they might baptize some little Children also concerning whom circumstances considered there was every whit as great a probability that they would own profess and assert the Christian Religion for the future as there was that their Parents would in as much as Parents still use to educate their Children in the same Religion which they themselves profess Unto all which let me add this further That the Judaizing
Abrahams House or bought with his money they being under his power to instruct and educate in the true Religion the Males of them were to be Circumcised and received into the Church as Abrahams Spiritual Seed This being so upon what account little Children were of the Church at that time we will consider afterwards In the mean time methinks from what hath been now represented to you from the Scriptures you should not but perceive that the Church was no more constituted by natural generation before the times of the Gospel than it is since And that therefore the spiritual Constitution of the Church under the Gospel is no more an argument against Infants Church-membership nor of the Nationality of Churches now than the like Constitution of the Church in Old Testament times was an argument against them then The next thing I would offer to your consideration is this That notwithstanding that the Constitution of the Church in Old Testament times was as well spiritual as that in the new and did as well consist of Abrahams Spiritual Seed as the New Testament Church doth and that there is no such difference between them as you have imagined Yet for all that the whole body of the Jewish people in Jacobs Line stood related to God as his Children and peculiar people Before they were incorporated into a Common-wealth and while they were as yet in Egypt God himself stiled them collectively considered his Son Exo. 4.22 23. And afterwards to the whole body of that people Moses said Ye are the Children of the Lord your God And again thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God and he hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself Deut. 14.1 2. Elsewhere they are stiled Saints Deut. 33.2 3. Psal 89.5.7 149.1 And St. Paul saith that unto them pertained the adoption Rom. 9.4 Now these several appellations Children of God holy people Saints peculiar people signifie doubtless as much when applied to the Old Testament Church as when applied to the New in the Epistles to the Churches And therefore there can be no difference in the general nature of the Constitution of the one and of the other Though there is a difference in the Revelation of the mind of God and of the way of Salvation to the Church then and now yet there is no such difference in their Constitution as that the one should be called carnal and the other spiritual for as those of the Church of the New Testament are said to be Saints by calling holy brethren Children of God a peculiar people so were those of the old likewise Considering then that the Old Testament Church was Constituted of Abrahams Spiritual Seed as well as that of the New and stiled the Children of God Saints a holy and peculiar people as those of the New Testament Church also are One of these two things must of necessity follow Either first that the whole body of the people of the Jews under the Old Testament and all the people of the Churches of the New who both came under the aforesaid denominations were all savingly holy and no Hypocrites among them or else secondly That some people are in Scripture denominated Children of God a holy People Saints a peculiar people and the like in other respects than that of saving grace or internal holiness And because we have no ground to believe that all those both of the Old Testament Church and of the New to whom the aforesaid appellations are given were savingly sanctified savingly the Children of God therefore we must of necessity conclude that they were and are so called upon some other account that is more extrinsecal than that of special and internal grace And what that should be is not necessary for me to determine it is enough to my purpose that it appears that the forementioned glorious appellations are in Scripture given to some other than such as are savingly sanctified But yet that which seems to me most likely to be it upon account of which others are stiled Saints the Children of God and the like than those that are savingly so is this to wit Gods chusing calling and separating them from other people in the World to be brought nearer to him than those others are in relation and in learning to profess the true Religion And thus such are Saints by Calling Rom. 1.6 7. of which I shall say more afterwards and of the manner how But thus there are many called when but few are chosen as our Saviour hath told us again and again Called not only by being invited but really brought to profess the true Religion in the sincere belief and practice of which Salvation is to be obtained when yet they are not the chosen of God in that emphatical sense which is peculiar to those who are inwardly in heart and Soul separated and devoted to God Thus all and every one are Gods Sons or Daughters that are called by his name as every one is that is called to profess his name and Religion Isa 43.6 7. Bring my Sons from far and my daughters from the ends of the earth even every one that is called by my name And according to this account and in this more general respect persons very unworthy in point of life and practice are Gods Sons and Daughters Deut. 31.19 When the Lord saw it he abhorred them because of the provoking of his sons and of his daughters There are many that are Children of Gods Kingdom that will be cast out into outer darkness Math. 8.12 St. Paul writing to all the Churches of Galatia saith thus unto them Chap. 3.26 Ye are all the Children of God by faith in Christ Jesus and gives this reason of his so saying For as many as have been baptized into Christ as they all were have put on Christ viz. by profession And yet many of them were such as made him to write thus of them I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you unto the grace of Christ unto another Gospel Chap. 1.6 I am afraid of you lest I have bestowed on you labour in vain Ch. 4.11 And again I stand in doubt of you Ver. 20. Much more of this nature might be said and it might be further shewed also that the holy Scriptures stile such Saints in this more general respect and in a large sense which were far from appearing to be so in the more special and emphatical sense Instances of this nature might be given in Members of the Church of Corinth and other Primitive Churches as well as in the antient Jewish Church Compare 1 Cor. 1.2 with Chap. 5.1 and 8.10 11. and 15.34 2 Cor. 12.20 21. But I will not multiply words to prove that which appears so evident by a few as you see But if this be true which I have been proving viz. That some in the visible Church are in Scripture denominated the Children of God a holy people Saints a peculiar people in other
which were and which are much-what the same And if it be so acceptable a thing to Christ for us to receive one such little Child in his name as that he takes it as well as if we received Him nay takes himself to be received in our so receiving it which could not well be if it were not a member of his body the Church can you then think it a thing displeasing to him to baptize such in his name when as that is a sacred Rite appointed by him for a solemn receiving such in his name into his Church as do belong to him as doubtless such Infants do or else they could not be received in his name And when Christ hath given Commission to disciple all Nations and baptize them can you fancy that the same Commission implies a prohibition to baptize little Children though they are Disciples If little Children are made Disciples in their Parents being made so and that in Gods account and by his appointment then to baptize them certainly cannot be a deviation from Christs Commission to baptize Disciples And lastly if our Saviour hath said it of some little Children that they believe in him then the same Commission which authorizeth the baptizing of Believers must authorize the baptizing of them The Commission is general to baptize Disciples indefinitely and therefore must needs extend to all that are so or that are Believers though but in the lowest sense These are no forced or far fetcht consequences but flow naturally from their premises And whereas the Scripture speaks of Baptism as the Sacrament of Regeneration or new Birth which you make as an argument against the administration of it to Infants by reason of their incapacity for Regeneration you should consider first that Circumcision was a Sacrament of Regeneration as well as baptism is and yet Infants were not uncapable of it upon any such account Circumcision in the Letter was a sign of spiritual Circumcision of that made without hands the Circumcision of the heart and was a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith And what thing more spiritual than this is I pray you signified by Baptism Which considered the spirituality of baptism in nature or use is no more an argument against Infants capacity for Baptism than the spiritual use of Circumcision was an argument against that And this is sufficient to take off your argument But you may consider yet farther that Infants even while such must needs be capable of Regeneration in one sense or other unless you will say they are not in a salyable state which yet you have not been wont to say or else that unregenerate persons may go to Heaven and be saved contrary to that of our Saviour Joh. 3.3 Except a man be born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God And therefore you seem to be under a necessity of granting Infants to be capable of Regeneration in a sense more or less proper And if you think Regeneration most properly and strictly taken to be incompetent to an infant state as Regeneration signifies that new state into which a person is brought by a change in the frame and temper of the mind and will and by a regulation of the motions and operations of the Soul in reference to their several objects then you must be constrained to accept of another sense of Regeneration and such as is more competent to an Infant State unless as I said you will say that persons may go to Heaven in an unregenerate State Dr. Hammonds Annot Mat. 19.28 Now therefore since the word translated Regeneration according to the assertion of learned men and the reason and nature of the thing it self doth properly signifie a new or second state it follows that if it can be proved that Infants are brought into a new or second State or capacity of being happy other than what is natural to them as deriving from Adam or their immediate Parents which is called a being born of blood John 1.13 then they may be said to be in a regenerate state And that the whole Race of Adam are put into a new state or capacity for happiness by the second Adam after they had lost it by the first until they fall into actual Rebellion against God by actual sin in their own persons of which sure they are in no danger while they are but in their infant state may I conceive be sufficiently evinced from Rom. 5.18 where the Apostle says as by the offence of one Judgment came upon all men to condemnation even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto the justification of life And the same might be backt by many other Scriptures And it may well be that it was in respect of this new state into which little Children are brought by Christ the second Adam that our Saviour said of such is the Kingdom of God Now so far as Baptism signifies our Communion in the virtue of Christs Death and Resurrection by which our state is changed as well as our conformity to it by a moral change in our nature there is in Infants or conferred upon them that spiritual grace which answers the outward sign in Baptism And that such a change of condition as to be raised out of a state of death into which we were brought for sin into a state of life by forgiveness of sin by virtue of Christs Death and Resurrection is called a being quickned together with him as well as that moral change which is made by sanctification is a thing which seems fairly to lie in those words Col. 2.13 And you being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh hath he quickened together with him having forgiven you all trespasses And let me say this further that it seems not improper neither to say that Infants are dead to sin to actual sin in their own persons in as much as we cannot say that lust hath conceived in them so as to bring forth sin by any consent of will though it 's true they are not dead to it as having mortified it they having not yet while Infants contracted any ill habits to mortifie So that as burying with Christ in Baptism signifies a death unto sin in the person baptized there is in some sort that in Infants which answers the outward sign in baptism in that respect also These things considered you may well infer that if that new state into which Infants are brought be in some respect a new birth a birth from above and such as puts them into an immediate capacity for Salvation as well as Regeneration in the common acceptation of it does the adult and you see by what reason you are perswaded to believe it is then you have as great yea greater certainty of the regenerate state of Infants in this sense than you have of the regenerate state of any adult persons in the other notion of Regeneration and consequently a more certain ground to baptize them so
separate from Christian Congregations for that they have not been otherwise baptized than in their Infancy and which deny Church Communion with them to be lawful for that reason and practise upon it accordingly For this is a Causless and unwarrantable rent and breach made in the body of Christ the universal Church which is Schism in the formality of it Nay it is Schism of a higher nature than ordinary The Schism in the Church of Corinth and the like in other Churches which was so much condemned in the Apostles Epistles as that scarce any thing was more was but a proud uncharitable and unpeaceable faction and siding in a particular Church which did not proceed so high as to separation of one part of the Church from the other in publick worship and Church Communion Nor was such a thing at all practised then by any Christians upon any occasion though there were great disorders among them but only by such as St. Jude saith were sensual not having the spirit ver 19. And if Schism was so highly condemned when it never rose to that height among Christians as to deny Communion one with another in the publick worship to be lawful What can we think of such a Schism then as for you without cause to deny the lawfulness of holding Communion with almost all the Churches of Christ in the World except those few Congregations which have been rebaptized and to practise accordingly not to mention your censuring them to be no true Churches nor any member of them properly a Christian but people of the World If the little Schisms in the Church which never proceeded to separation were thought of such ill consequence by the Apostles as that they laboured hardly in any thing more in their Epistles than to prevent and suppress them Then certainly such a Schism as yours cannot in reason but be of as much more a criminal nature and of so much worse consequence as the unchurching of almost all Christian Churches in the World is worse than those lesser divisions in the Church were notwithstanding which they kept on foot their Communion in the solemn worship The Schism which consisted in separation we see was perpetrated by none then but those vile Gnosticks who though they pretended to more knowledge and perfection than was in them they withdrew from yet such was the opinion the Apostles had of them and their separation as that they were not afraid to say they were sensual not having the spirit Which I note not as judging you to be as bad men as those Gnosticks were setting aside your Schism but to put you in mind that notwithstanding the great disorders that were in those Churches and the want of the due exercise of Discipline in the Church of Corinth and several of the seven Churches of Asia yet no good Christians then ever attempted to erect separate Communities for reformation sake much less were ever encouraged so to do by the Apostles but the quite contrary Now if the Apostles had such a deep sense of the mischievous nature and effects of Schism as put them upon such strenuous endeavours to prevent or supress it as we find they used Methinks this should awaken you to reflect upon your selves and what you have done by your separation in making such a rent as you have done in the Church of God and what the effects of it have been I know you cannot be without all sense of what sad effects our Church divisions have produced Such as is the exposing of our holy Religion to the scorn and contempt of Atheists Infidels and Papists and the tempting of those to become such which were not so before and such as is the discomposing unsetling and confounding the minds of many well meaning and well-designing but injudicious people to the betraying them into the hands of Seducers who have made their advantage of our divisions and such as is the diverting of mens minds from the serious consideration study and practice of the weightier matters of Religion and the engaging them in contentious Janglings and uncharitable Censurings and Revilings to the destruction of true Christian Charity and Piety and the placing Religion much in opinion and in being of a different form and party and such as is the exposing of us all to the danger of the breaking in of Popery by strengthening their hands who are of that way and by weakening our own and by incouraging them in hopes of prevailing at last to practise upon us and by all their Arts to improve the advantage we have put into their hands by our divisions and distractions You cannot be ignorant how many have taken their way to Quakerism and Scepticism through your Congregations like wandering stars having first left the Parochial Assemblies have promised themselves this and that satisfaction first in one new form and then in another until they have run themselves out of breath and at last quite lost themselves and seldom returning And if upon review and examination you find as doubtless you may that your separation which with the separation of others hath brought forth such bitter fruit hath proceeded on mistaken grounds and been undertaken without any just cause what work then will here be for repentance that ever you have been accessary to such mischiefs as those before-mentioned are and what need is there for you that are Leaders to sound a retreat to your followers I can assure you it hath been matter of no small humbling to some when they have perceived the bad effects of such separation that ever they had their hands in it The sense of which bad effects also first put them upon such a serious review of the grounds on which they first set out in it as by means whereof they came to discover the weakness and unsoundness of those grounds And as what I have herein done to help you to a sight of your mistake is intended as a real service to you so I ought to presume that it cannot but be judged to be so by such as are sincere lovers of truth if they can receive thereby any such benefit as is designed them by it And if any shall receive conviction and yet for their reputation sake among their party and for fear of the reproach of inconstancy shall still persist in their way contrary to the conviction of their own mind let them consider that such will hardly be able to buy the truth with the price of liberty estate or life that are scared from a publick owning of it by the corrupt breath of such injudicious and heady persons which cannot excuse them by answering for them to God to whom every one must give an account for himself Let it be remembred who and what they were who believed on Christ and yet would not confess that they did because they loved the praise of men of their own party more than the praise of God Joh. 12.42 43. and who they were that could not believe because they