propositions or alledged Text. Accuser If children should be excluded from the promise Arg. 2 this could not have comforted the patents but have sadned them that their children should be the same with heathens but here the scope of the Text is urged by the Apostle for consolation Answer This Argument supposeth our denyal of the promise to the children wherein the man runs after his own mistakes denyal of baptisme is no exclusion from the promise As to the odious comparison of children of believers to heathens falsly charged on us we reject Heathens differ as much from the children of believers in our account as open Apostates doe from hopeful expectants of the Church As to the point of consolation our denyal of the baptisme of infants withdraweth from the parent no real ground of consolation founded in the covenant of grace and applyed by the Apostle in this Scripture but we say that the application thereof to particular persons if it be not according to Scripture-â—ule will prove a groundless fiction and no consolation And as to the infants of believers we farther say that besides our assurance that the grace of election because it is bestowed without respect of persons doth reach infants as well as others and it 's likely more frequently the infants of the godly then others That the infants of believers have also a nearness not only to the promise but also to the fruition of the grace promised by reason of many high advantages which others enjoy not and among the rest that the godly to whom they stand related and are committed have promises of being heard of God in their faithful prayers even to the pardon of sin Job 1.5 James 5.15 16. 1 John 5.16 And that therefore there is great ground given to such parents of an holy hope that God doth hear their prayers for the salvation of their infants seeing they are not under that sin unto death that is not to be prayed for And we could never finde our soberest opposites to ascribe a greater ground for a believer to conclude the salvation of his infant if he died after he was baptised then if he did before Besides which great advantages there being also reserved to the children the same tenders of grace for their full investure into the real fruition of the promises we remain yet to be informed what discouragement was put upon the parent labouring under the sence of guilt to receive a dectrine thus tendered bringing with it the same grace upon the like termes to be bestowed upon his posterity together with these high advantages premised We also say Whatever benefit may be justly said to accrue to the infant by virtue of the promise through the baptisme of the parent all that would be more effectually and certainly made out to the comfort of them both by baptisme upon faith then can be by baptisine in infancie by how much baptisme upon faith more certainly declares the parent by whom the benefit doth accrue to be really in the covenant then baptisme in infancie can be said to doe Accuser Arg. 3. If so then this could not encourage the Parents to submit to Christ under this administration but would have hindred them that their children should be excluded from the Promise who stood in it two thousand yeers before under the other administration Answer This Argument runs upon the same supposition with the former whither we refer the Reader for an Answer in part only there it pretended to saddening here to discouragement here also we have the old common mistake that an incapacity to Baptism excludes from the Promise But to pass by these faulâ—s we come to what may be further found a colour for an Objection Object Infants stood visible members of the Church for two thousand yeers in the administration this administration excludes them Answ They stood excluded altogether as much above two thousand yeers before Circumcision as they do now so that an Ordinance for their Church-membership was not so from the beginning but came in by special institution long since 2. The other administration in which they stood was established with a seed to be propagated by natural generation according to express command Gen. 17.9 Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore thou and thy seed after thee in their generations this is my covenant which ye shall keep c. Every man-child among you shall be circumcised But where have we command for the like in this administration That administration was a typical temporary bondage-covenant and in a sigure it ministred unto the ends of the everlasting covenant and therefore it sufficed as unto that administration if the people the children of that covenant were of the seed of Abraham because by that shadowy covenant young and old good and bad were all alike Covenanters and all alike in a capacity to be subjects of an administration which was to serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things till the seed should come to whom the Promise was made Gal. 3.19 as hath been formerly proved whereunto we reser the Reader But the Gospel-administration that brings Christ and all the mystery of his grace in the truth and reality and not in the figure and example is not receptive of children as to the Principle upon which it stands any other way then upon some visible demonstration of Faith whereby Christ comes to be received who are therefore called the sons of God John 1.12 13. As many as received him to them gave he power right or priviledg to become the sons of God to them that believe in his name borne not of blood c. Thus the Apostle Gal. 4 28. calls the saints of the Churches of Galatia children of the promise in opposition to the seed according to the flesh vers 23. And their mother the free Gospel-covenant v. 26. And the same Apostle declareth Rom. 9 8 that the children of the promise are counted for the seed in opposition to the seed according to the flâ—sh v. 7 Neither because they are the seed of Abraham c. Whereunto many other scriptures might be added Yea the whole stream of the New Testament witnesseth to a seed according to calling and as to the principle of their admission all living stones for the constitution of the Church of God and not one word in favour of a seed according to the flesh as to admission into the Church upon that principle of birth-priviledge 3. Though the Gospel-Church may not be built by such a seed nor can be receptive of it upon that account yet would there arise no ground of discouragement or sadness to the Jew thereby his shadowy glory was now to cease but real glory was set up in the place of it and the same specially prepared and held forth to him and his seed as amphe as ever and by a better and more lasting covenant to be made good upon better promises But this glory must be received as it is tendered it is tendered to faith
Prophetical instance in the very Family of Abraham the type of the true Church wherein this great change of Church-Priviledge was revealed to be taken from the carnal Seed that it should be given to the Seed according to Grace under the Gospel-administration And to put that matter out of question we have the unvailing of this Prophetical instance to the very same purpose in Gal. 4.30 so also Isa 54.1 Sing O barren thou that bearest not What she was the Apostle tells you Gal. 4.26 27. next consider her husband vers 5. Thy Maker is thy Husband the Lord of hosts is his Name and thy Redeemer the holy One of Israel at vers 13. you have the refined qualification of her Children and People And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord. Here you have a Prophetical description of the Gospel-Church-state which the People of a fleshly extraction from the most sanctified Saints cannot possibly compare unto it must therefore necessarily be understood of another Seed even of a Seed begotten of God by the Word of Truth James 1.18 the Gospel-People And this was a fair notice given of the change in question to wit narrower as to the qualification of the Persons but more extended in Grace To the like effect is Isa 60.1 Arise and shine c. at vers 21. Thy people also shall be all righteous Another fair warning for the fleshly Seed is Isa 65.15 For the Lord God shall slay thee and call his people by another name What think you of this warning Hear the Prophet Jer. 31.31 The days come that I will make a new covenant c. vers 34. They shall all know me from the least of them to the greatest of them Here is a plain notice of the change of the old administration which gloried in the Seed of Abraham after the flesh and as plainly foretelling the cessation of that propagation to give place to the new administration and the true Seed of Abraham the Seed according to the Spirit and indeed the change of the administration necessarily removes the fleshly Seed because it hath a standing by no other right then what it had under that Covenant We shall not make use of the New Testament to prosecute this point it everywhere abounds with evidence to it 4. And because the Accuser placeth the force of an Argument upon the supposition of not giving notice of the change of the principle of visible admission into the Church we also shall take the same liberty of reasoning and say That seeing the common way of admission to baptism in the Primitive Church was after personal Profession of Faith and also seeing the error of circumcising baptized Disciples had generally overspread the Churches and might be interpreted very much in favour of the fleshly seed Act. 15. it is very strange that notwithstanding the common practice of Baptism upon Profession and notwithstanding the severe Confutation of this and the like error by Arguments plainly in dis-favour of the carnal Seed as may appear Mat. 3.10 11 12. Rom. 4.13 14. Rom. 9.7 8. Gal. 4.30 yet that in neither case there should be found anywhere in all the New Testament a qualification for the saving of the right of Infants of Believers to Baptism if it had been a right especially upon that pertinent occasion about circumcision we therefore conclude that there was not such right Accuser Arg. 7. If their interpretation be true then the believing Jews should have loss by their repentance if their children should be excluded from the Promise as soon as the Parents had repented Answer 1. Very true and a greater loss then that would befal the children if the Parents repentance should exclude them from the Promise But where did the Accuser learn that Interpretation and Opion we utterly disown it and do place it among the other calumnies unjustly thrust upon the Profession of the Truth wherein we stand We say That the Children have a right in the Promise with the Parent and that the Parents Repentance and Baptism brings great advantages to the Childe but we deny that a right to the Promise infers a right to be baptized The Scripture alledged declares a right unto the Promise in these Jews when they had no right to be baptized the right to be baptized ariseth from the instituted Rule prescribed by God's word for the administration of Baptism and the Persons conformity thereunto Among all the Disputes in this Question when shall we be pressed with a rule prescribing Infant-Baptism as a part of the instituted worship of the Gospel-administration 2. We consear that in some sense a Jew converted to the Gospel should have loss and particularly in that point of sealing his fleshly Seed by an Ordinance together with the fall of all the glory of their Sanctuary and pompous Priesthood so much and so long the joy and boasting of that Nation which the Spirit of God fore-saw and foretold by Isa 8.14 and hence it come to pass that Christ became so great an Offence and the Gospel so sore a Stone of stumbling and Rock of offence to them all yea even to many of them after they had submitted to the Gospel yea the Gentile Churches were scarce if at all preserved from stumbling hereat with the Jew But all this loss well considered would amount to no more then what befalls a man who from the Priviledges of a Servant is invested into the Priviledges of a Son And this was the very case Gal. 4.4 God sent forth his Son c. Vers 5. To redeem them that were under the law that we might receive the adoption of Sons Vers 7. Wherefore thou art no more a servant but a son And the reason of this change the Apostle plainly sheweth us vers 23. He that was after the bond-woman was born after the flesh but he of the free-woman was by promise There was an infinite difference in the propagation of the Seed of the former Church-state and of the Seed of the Gospel-state no less then between Nature and the Power of God as was in the Types Ishmael and Isaac 3. Neither hath this change brought any other loss unto the child but 1. The Interest which it had in the everlasting Covenant under the former administration it still retains 2. The benefits and advantages which it had by the Parent are so much bettered by how much the spiritual state of the Parent under the Gospel by Baptism after Faith is better ratified then under the Law 3. All other and further benefits from the Covenant are more freely and fully tendered and with many enforcing advantages brought neer to be had and enjoyed 4. It is an advantage that as a token of the expiration of the bondage Church-state their signing upon the natural birth is also at an end and their sealing into all these Priviledges transferred to an Ordinance upon the visible Title of their New-birth without which no word of God can be found to raise them into the
to whom God doeth here promise to be a God or what hath blinded the man that hath considered the 16 vers and cannot see what interpretation the spirit makes of his own words in Gen. 17.7 He sayeth not Unto seeds as of many but as of one And to thy seed which is Christ Not the natural children of all believers unless men will turne Quakers and say that Christ is given with every natural procreation For Christ even that ONE is that seed to whom or in whom the promise is made Gen. 17.7 Object But this must be Christ mystical and that will serve to take in the natural seed of believers Answer No it is not Christ mystical at vers 17. the covenant is confirmed of God in this Christ the Christ who is given for a covenant of the people Although by adoption believers are joynt-heires with Christ yet are they not and much less are their natural seed joynt-mediators with him in the covenant That Christ was the sole Mediator in the everlasting covenant confirmed to Abraham by the covenant of circumcision that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe is the plain use and improvement of this Scripture in this place But what if Christ mystical be also taken in to helpe the matter when will it be proved that God hath made the birth-priviledg a way under the Gospel-administration to be ingrafted into Christ mystical 4. Take this distinction concerning the blessing of Abraham 1. The blessing of Abraham in the letter and according to the Law 2. The blessing of Abraham in the mystery and according to the Gospel 1. According to the letter Abraham obtained the blessings and priviledges of the whole inheritance which came by the Law to be the peculiar inheritance of himself his fleshly-seed and family together with all the singular advantages which thereby were ministred among them for the calling and gathering of a seed to Christ in an everlasting covenant whereunto that covenant in which they stood under circumcision with the prerogatives of the inheritance thereof did minister as an example figure and shadow The sum of the covenant of circumcision see Gen 17.10 This is my covenant which ye shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee every man-childe among you shall be circumcised unto vers 15. That circumcision was of the same nature with the Law see Lev. 12.2 3. John 7.23 That the Law was a covenant ministring as an example figure and shadow of heavenly things to wit of the sanctuary and of the true Tabernacle whereof Christ alone was the high-priest and minister See Heb. 8.1 2 5. Chap. 9. vers 1. and 9. Chap. 10 vers 1. That the covenant of circumcision fell with the Law see Acts 15.24 Subverting your soules saying ye must be circumcised and keep the Law Col. 2.14 In this sence the blessing of Abraham was not to come to the Gentiles neither consequently the birth-priviledg which had its institution from that covenant only and was a principal part of the blessing thereby given 2. The blessing of Abraham in the mystery and according to the Gospel is the manifestation of Jesus Christ with all the blessings and priviledges of the everlasting covenant to be the peculiar priviledge inheritance right of every believer who therefore are called the children of Abraham that the type and the substance having a mutual and respective application each to other the minde of God might be clearly seen in them both for the distinguishing of shadows and figures which were to be done away from the substance that was not capable of any change which we are manifestly instructed in by the Apostle Gal. 3.26 Ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jew Greek bond free male female mark how the Apostle resolves the point in question at vers 29. And if ye be Christs then are ye Abrahams seed and heires according to the promise Not if ye be the seed of believers then are ye Abrahams seed as the Accuser would insinuate to the Reader by his half-faced argument And this is the blessing of Abraham which was to come to the Gentiles even this that Christ with all his benefits should be given to the believing Gentiles for a covenant Accuser Arg. 11. Then how can believers be heires according to the promise Gal. 3.29 if their children should be excluded from the promise for the childrens right to the promise is a part of the fathers inheritance for the promise is to thee and thy seed Answer 1. We shall not be perswaded to entertain that position that the children of believers are excluded from the promise We say that as the denyal of infant-baptismes imports no exclusion from the promise so neither doth every right to the promise instate a person into the inheritance The Jew had a right to the promise uncalled 1. As God had his remnant among them according to election 2. He had a right to the promise as God gave him a priority and precedencie in the tenders of the promise above and before all other people 3. They had a right to the promise as they were lost sinners whom Christ came to seeke and save But in neither of these respects was the Jew an heire in the promise such an interest and right to the promise declares the person to be made a son by adoption and if sons then heires of God through Christ Gal. 4.7 a priviledge which no title of the natural father can prefer a creature unto in the Gospel-administration 2. The Scripture made use of for infant-baptisme in this argument is this If ye be Christ's then are ye Abram's seed and heirs according to the promise and the application of this Authority is made by way of question If Infants of believers may not be baptized then how can believers be heirs And hath the person this Scripture in his eye and yet pretends himself unprovided of an answer How plainly doth this Scripture lay the Title of the Heir upon this conditional qualification of being Christs He that is Christs is an heir by this Text be his Children never so great alieas and stangers 3. But saith he The childrens right to the promise is part of the fathers inheritance for the promise is to thee and to thy seed His meaning seemeth to be this If the Father be Christ's and so cometh to be an Heir then the promise carrieth the same Title to the Inheritance down to the children which is all one as if he had said That if the Father be a Son of Abraham which in Gospel-construction is a believer then the childe must be a Son of Abraham and a believer also even by his Birth-Priviledge and not by Faith directly confronting many Scriptures which restrain the blessing of Sonship to Abraham and the Inheritance in all manner of persons to Faith in Christ Gal. 3.9 They which are of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham not they which are the
for the promise is to you Here I desire the reader to take notice how the word of command depends upon the word of promise and what an inseparable union and connexion there is between the command and the promise Answer It is a most false and sensless inference the right to the promise we grant to be the ground of the Apostles perswasion to repentance and baptism but it is no ground of a persons being baptized without repentance neither is it so layd down by the Lord or by the Apostle But observe the dealing of this man he requires baptism saith he v. 38. and what next shews the reason v. 39. the promise is to you and to your children and then on he runs that the word of command depends upon the word of promise with an inseparable union and connexion without taking notice of the conditional qualification of repentance no less in the command as he hath devised to call it then baptism yea antecedent to it What wonder if a corrupt mind drive a person headlong to maintain a justification of smaller by greater evils Having first found out in the Apostles declaration of a right to the promise in persons in order to conversion that the same imports a right in a visible Church-state That here again he also hath found out a command for baptism disjoyned from a comand to repent with an inseparable union and connexion directly against the letter of the text Accuser The same reason alleadged by the Apostle why the parent should be baptised is rendred by the same Apostle as a reason why the children should be baptised for the promise is to you and to your children Answer Let the accuser whoever he be enjoy what he demands we consent to him herein that the reason of the baptism of the parent is the reason of the baptism of the child but the reason of the baptism of the parent by vertue of this right in the promise cannot take effect at all or for ever without the qualification of repentance and if the reason rendred by the Apostle be the same for the baptising of the child then it must bring repentance with it to the water as the Eunuch did faith to Philip or it can receive no baptism if the Apostles reason be rightly alleadged Accuser Nay the very same command expressed to baptise the one is implyed to baptise the other for if some or any to whom the promise is made may not be baptised there can be no force in the Apostles argument Answer We are not willing to contend with our opponent about small matters to wit how the Apostles counsel or exhortation Repent and be baptized may pass by the name of a command But having layd down a truth for the substance in what he first affirmeth we shall joyn issue with him in it 1 we consent that the command to be baptized to parent and child is one Then what saith the comand Repent and be baptized We answer What God hath joyned together let no man put asunder The accuser was telling but now of an inseparable connexion he might have better observed it here then where he sought it But 2 Though we approve our accuser in the first part of what he affirms yet we must leave him to himself to make good his reason viz. If any to whom the promise is made may not be baptized then there is no force in the Apostles argument We make no question but that notwithstanding the multitude of Converts at this Sermon yet there were very many Jews to whom this promise was made equally with those that were converted who persisted in their obstinacy and thereby rendred themselves and their children incapable of baptism upon the Accusers own Principles nevertheless the Argument the Apostle made use of was not therefore without force because they might not be baptized The Accuser having put an end to the cruel torture with which he hath racked the Scripture beyond all bounds of sobriety he leads you to see his fair fruits of better information where we believe you will finde enough to discover the person 's very great want of a sober Spirit to say no more Accuser Thus the Lord satisfied me about Infant-baptism being thus satisfied I went to hear the publick Ministery but this coming to the ears of the Anabaptists there came three of their Society the nex day to me to have an account concerning this thing I told them If they would be pleased to come at a time appointed I would give them the Reasons of my withdrawing from them and accordingly they came the Preachers and Principalest among them where I gave them an account of my withdrawing from them as many of my Friends can bear me witness which was as followeth 1. Their denying the Children of Believers a right to the Covenant 2. Living in constant neglect of an Ordinance of Christ viz. singing of Psalms Answer Thus the Lord satisfied me c. and in his entrance on this of Baptism he saith And upon serious enquiring into the Word and earnest seeking of the Lord it pleased him to satissie me and a little after but by considering I saw their mistakes c. If the Accuser deserves the praise which seems desired by him and allowed to him of having with much search of the Scripture consideration and Prayer sound out and set in order these Grounds wherein his satisfaction lay before he departed from us would it not seem somewhat unhandsome dealing and beneath a learned Minister that above a month after our Accusels departure from us these our accusers meditations should be publickly preached in that Town in matter and form well-nigh verbatim as he here hath written them without acknowledging whose Collections they were but we leave them to agree whether the one's claim to them in the Pulpit or the other 's in the Press shall carry away the applause desired and go on to consider what he Reports of that Meeting in which he gives account of his with-drawing The first Ground whereof as he presents it we have already tendered to examination The second is our living in constant neglect of an Ordinance of Christ viz. singing of Psalms At this Meeting he charged us with denying singing of Psalms now he calls it living in constant neglect of it About which what our Light and Practice is and as then in effect was said you may take thus We do fully and cordially own speaking to our selyes teaching and admonishing one another in Psalms Hymns 〈…〉 singing and making Melody with Grace in out heart to the Lord to be the will of Christ according to which wholy men of God are bound in all generations to sound forth his high Praises in the Church by Jesus Christ which ought to be performed by them being merry in the Lord with Melody in their hearts and a distinct and chearful voice expressed either in the Songs of Moses David or otherwise as the Spirit bringeth things to their remembrance
A Plain Discovery OF The UNRIGHTEOUS JUDGE And FALSE ACCUSER Wherein is soberly and in the fear of the Lord brought to light and tendered to the examination of the Upright in Heart the Spirit of that Pamphlet intituled The LEPER Cleansed Published by Richard Ballamy of Tiverton As also A clear Vindication of the PRINCIPLES and PRACTICES of the people by him charged from those Reproaches therein heaped upon them under the notion of ANABAPTISTS Published by Robert Steed and Abraham Cheare Servants of Christ among his despised People Prov. 18.17 He that is first in his own cause seemeth just but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him Job 13.7 Wilt thou speak wickedly for God and talk deceitfully for him Job 31.35 36 37. And that mine adversary had written a book surely I would take it upon my shoulder and binde it as a crown to me I would declare unto him the number of my steps as a priâ—â—e would I go neer unto him Printed for Henry Mortlock at the Phoenix in Paul's Church-yard neer the little North-door 1658. To the Reader Courteous Reader IT is not without a multitude of disadvantages on our hand that the ensuing Defence cometh into open view arising not only from the Reproach that is on us and the weakness that is in us of saying any thing worthy of the cause which in the main we desire to plead but withal to say no worse from the infirmity of the age we live in the generality of men being led into the affecting and dislike of things rather by tradition and upon the credit of such as they reverence then upon a right judgement of matters in their own evidence Yet are we not discouraged from sending this Testimony forth though it hath neither Patron nor Approbation but only Truth to be its Shield and Buckler being clear in this that it was not an Affectation to appear in publick that hath led us forth to this Undertaking but a necessity of vindicating the Churches of Christ that we walk withal from such notorious slanders as also of delivering the Readers of that Pamphlet from the manifest abuse it puts upon them exposing them to a temptation of giving credit to very many untruths and mis-representations of things and therein to a disgust against the Way and all that walk therein which is the main design thereof The Book was indeed by many thought unworthy of an Answer for a time but seeing it grew into repute by the countenance of some that are accounted men of worth who scattered it abroad as an undoubted Evidence of Truth we have thought good to give men a warning at present against such artifices to deceive that for the future they may be the more cautious of giving credit to invectives of this nature which will not be much our care hereafter to make Replies unto as having it in our hearts to expect many such trials from men of perverse minds apostatizing from the Truth in this hour of temptation That the presenting this to thee comes to our lot who dwell at some distance from the place where these affairs were transacted is occasioned from our observation how that the Reproach of this falls heavier upon us in the Countries then it doth on them in that Town where the advantages of informing the Enquirers and clearing the accused are at hand by reason whereof that people being less sensible have been the less careful of performing this service which might seem more properly appertaining unto them Yet neither doth our distance of place render us uncapable of giving thee the true state of things in that our selves were eye and ear-witnesses to the Proceedings of that Congregation in the two principal matters of fact he insisteth on viz. with William Facy and this Richard Bellamy and for the other Occurrences have taken all possible care to obtain such a perfect account of things in the naked truth of them as might render us capable of giving forth the Narrative with all exactness In the whole however we had in our eye the Readers accommodation and therefore endeavoured to be as brief as possible in matters that may be so expressed yet may it not be reasonable to think we can clear our selves from such an heap of slanders in as few words as he may cast them on us especially we have been enforced to be somewhat large in giving our understanding about what he lays down as grounds from Scripture convincing him of Infants right to Baptism which he offers as a main hinge on which he turned from us and thence loads us with the common name of Infamy that we pass under among the sons of men Our Method is to follow our Accuser step by step wherein we repeat his words and have willingly omitted nothing that deserves an Answer although it be against our selves in the whole being desirous to approve our selves to him that searcheth the hearts with him we leave the undertaking to dispose of it and us and at his pleasure to him be Glory for ever Amen ERRATA Page 8. line 4. for Act. 2.34 read 39. page 9. line 49. for hating read suiting A plain Discovery of the Unrighteous Judge and false Accuser To all that love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity whom these may concern Greeting Precious and Beloved IT is not our purpose to entertain yee with the Narrative of the manner of our receiving the truths of Christ in which we stand or of the preparations of Spirit the Lord hath given in order to this work and by the help of this attire to allure your pious minds to our Cause and Persons These vails have somtimes it may be obtained their ends but being grown the common vizour of every il-favored cause we judge them not only impertinent to the matter in question but also unfit for us to publish of our selves and no less unmeet to be imposed on you whom we write unto as ignorant and simple but 〈◊〉 as such who can discern the things that differ in their own qualities Richard Bellamy since he was cast out of Comunion with us at Tiverton or whoever he be personated by him hath printed his book against us Called The Leper Cleansed The title page tels you of what the book is comprehensive Therein amongst severall laudable matters spoken of himself he pretends to lay open the Anabaptists and their unchristian wayes and wiles to deceive and seemeth desirous to be thought a person able to make great discoveries and conquests as having been througly versed in the Doctrine and Practises of the whole body of that party by his nigh two yeers converse with them in society amongst our Brethren in Tiverton But all these terrible flourishes notwithstanding we herewith tender this man and his writings against us to your examination and the true state of our Doctrine Way and Practise as it stands accused and judged by him And if indeed we be convicted for cunning deceivers lyers in wait hypocrites enemies to Godliness enemies to
and by faith alone can it be enjoyed and partaken in and profession the visible title thereunto And against this change the Jew had nothing to except but his unbelieving minde which God determined should break him off Rom. 11.20 The change of the administration from the carnal seed to the seed by adoption did not at all abridge the interest of the Jew to the grace of God in Christ or any priviledges thereof but unbeleef We consent thus far to the truth of the objection that it could not be avaided but that the Gospel should become a sore offence to the carnal Jew that could not discerne the mystery which was beyond his typical state which exalted his nation so much above other people and consequently his children of the flesh who were to succeed in the like pre-eminence and all this to cease and the Gentiles to be admitted into the same grace with the seed of Abraham was doubtless that stumbling block which offended many of them as the Lord had foretold by Isaiah 8.14 applied by the Apostle 1 Pet. 2.5 9. But what of all this must the mystery of grace for the gathering of the elect to Christ be still cumbred and clouded with the pretensions of a carnal seed which could by no meanes be brought to the standard of so high a mystery as Christ was come to call men up unto viz faith repentance laying down of life and all for Christ in or to the glory promised rather then the Jew must take offence we therefore deny that the argument from saddening and offending the carnal Jew is of any worth at all Accuser Arg. 4 If so then children would be superfluous in the Text and so the Spirit of God would be charged with tautologies which would be blasphemie to affirme Answer It seemes superfluity and tautologie must all be one But we say that our denyal of baptisme to infants doth not render the declaration of the right of the children of the Jew in this Scripture superfluous because the children of the Jew may have many great rights in the promise held forth and yet through present personal incapacity may not have a right to be baptised Baptisme is a part of instituted worship and must be administred just as the law of its institution directeth and not otherwayes and it had well become our Accuser to have found one little place within some of his arguments to have convinced us of errour from a rule of the word whereby this forme of infant-baptisme came to be a Gospel-ordinance or at least some example of its practise in the manner he pretends unto and to have passed by these empty notions Accuser Arg. 5. The tense is changed The promise is to you and your children in the present tense but when he speakes of the call he speakes in the future tense as many as God shall call which must needs be applied to them afar off and not to children Answer Must it needs be applied to them afar off and not to children Then it must needs be that the Gentiles and their children must be all called before baptised for all these are meant by them afar off being opposed in the Text to you and your children that is the Jew So that infant-baptisme can have no place in the Gentile-Church by this interpretation but must remaine with the Jewes by virtue of the promise to them and their children before calling This absurd disproportion cannot be shifted aside by replying that them afar off must be limited to the first called Gentiles because then there could be no difference at all in the case whether call be applied to the people of the present tense the Jew and his children or to the people of the future tense them afar off because it is consented that the first Fathers of the Jewish people themselves must be called before baptised This trifling dispute from the change of the tense is very absurd as well as frothie as supposing that the same qualification of calling may not also be requisite to the present time because it is here set down as required in the future not considering that calling must reeds be found in the first Jewes themselves The like absurdity is in his argument of the change of the tense by his change of the subject from promise to call the promise is the call shall be what is all this to ground an argument upon Accuser Arg. 6. If their interpretation hold good there would be a very great change in the extent of the Covenant narrower under the Gospel then it was under the Law and no notice in all the book of God given of such a change Answer Passing by the unexpressed interpretation we shall apply an answer to this argument as it stands opposed to our practise of baptisme as the Lord shall give ability 1. We say That the Covenant hath one and the same extent before under and since the Law considered singly in it self the administration is changeable and was often changed yet whatever passeth from the Believer to his Childe by vertue of the intrinsecal Nature of the Covenant of Grace that also admits of no change but being so made out we say That all that will be more evidently and cleerly ratified both to Parent and Childe for the comfort of both by Baptism after Faith then by Baptism in Infancy 2. Neither is the administration under the Gospel narrower then that under the Law because it admits not Infant-baptisin This administration under the Law was circumscribed to a little Land and a small People the bounds of the other are stretched from Sea to Sea and from the Flood to the Worlds end This was restrained to the seed and family of Abraham the other extended to the seed and family of Christ This had its existence but two thousand yeers upon an occasional temporary principle the other is suited to answer a principle existing from everlasting to everlasting This administration was the shadow figure and example the other the substance This was the Handmaid the other the Mistris And if the case be thus between these two administrations will any presume to charge the Gospel-adminstration with more narrowness then the Law because of the dis-continuance of the Birth-Priviledge 3. Although the Grace of the Gospel be extended far beyond the Grace under the Law yet as to Persons the Children of the Gospel are formed to so strict and refined a qualification that in that respect we allow the Law a latitude beyond the Gospel but yet with this mark That that indulgence of the Law was one of the great imperfections which the Gospel came to reform Mat. 3.10 11 12. And of this change the Book of God doth give abundant notice although the Accuser be informed to the contrary Gen. 21.10 Cast out the bond-woman and her son c. Shortly after the institution of the Ordinance of Circumcision for the Priviledge of the Seed according to the flesh the Lord brings forth a
visible Dignity and Prerogative of the Sons and Heirs of Sarah the Gospel-Covenant or administration And it is cleer to us that such a loss as this was not obscurely pointed at in the preaching of Christ although we do not strain it here Luke 14.26 a loss of natural and carnal Ordinances to enjoy spiritual 4. There is no colour of warrant from the Word of God That Jesus Christ in the day of his appearing did establish any one Ordinance in the Church which did import a Communion in his Intercession to be practicable duely by a person in an unregenerate state Accuser Arg. Then they could have no hope of their children for hope without a promise is presumption Auswer 1. If the hope of the Parent for his child's salvation be grounded upon the administration of an Ordinance in Infancy then neither had the Patriarks for above two thousand yeers hope of their children which we finde false by Noah's Prophesie Gen. 29.26 27. 2. We demand what hopes the Accuser intendeth and by what Scriptures the same are annexed to the administration of an Ordinance in Infancy 3. VVe justifie an holy hope in Believers in behalf of their Children which is grounded upon plain Scriptures without Infant-Baptism 4. VVe say That this Argument seemeth to carry in it this conclusion That Christian People by Infants Baptism are by Scripture-grounds assured according to Gospel-hope of the Salvation of their Children there wants a proof for it and we suppose it is not received as a Truth by many that oppose us in this Point 5. His Argument supposeth That to be without Infants Baptism will infer a being without the Promise but that hath been often disclaimed Accuser Arg. 9. If children should be excluded from the Promise let any man breathing shew me what priviledge the Children of repenting Parents have above others Now it is cleer the Apostle adds children in the Text to shew that they had some special priviledge above those that were uncalled Answer 1. The supposition of this Argument is That the denial of Baptism to the Infants of repenting Parents deprives them of all Priviledges above the Infants of Persons uncalled but this suggestion hath been formerly replied unto in our Answer to the Accuser's second Argument where also many high Priviledges of the Infants of the Godly are expresly mentioned 2. The Accuser doth not shew us how the Apostles words the promise is to you and to your children being made use of to win an unwilling People to the Faith do prove the Baptism of the Infants of those that are actually in the Faith seeing it will not be granted that a right to the Promise and a right to be baptized are convertible terms 3. VVe have already set down many Priviledges of the Infants of believers above others although we admit them not to baptisme or visible-Church membership If we detract from them any spiritual participation in the grace of the covenant we believe we had not been so long left under a general charge without some particular allegation against us But we are well assured that no such thing in particular can be justly found against us Besides we know that our opposites among themselves are so puzled about the finding out more priviledges to the infants of believers then we allow save in the single point of admission to baptisme that although there have been sufficient demands of it we doe not know that the same hath hitherto been done and yet still the cry is up in general words for the priviledges of the infants of believers as if we denyed their possibility of salvation Accuser Arg. 10. Then how could the blessing of Abraham come to the Gentiles according to Gal. 3.14 which blessing of Abraham was I will be a God to thee and to thy seed Gen. 17.7 Answer 1. The supposition of this argument being not exprest we take to be this If the infants of believing Gentiles be not to be baptised then could not the blessing of Abraham mentioned Gal. 3.14 come to the Gentiles I am a God to thee and to thy seed c. To this argument we reply Two places we have in this third to the Galatians in which the blessing of God to Ahraham is intimated 1. In the close of vers 8. In thee shall all Nations be blessed 2. And at v. 16. To Abraham and to his seed were the promises made As to the first place vers 8. it is taken out of Gen. 12.3 And because there is a necessary coherence of this authority with vers 7. for the proof of what is here affirmed viz. That they which are of faith the same are the children of Abraham and because the same proposition is also affirmed by this Apostle Rom. 4.11 That he might be the father of all them that believe and at vers 16. to the same effect Who is the father of us all And is also confitmed at vers 17. by a place alledged out of Gen. 17.5 I have made thee a father of many nations We therefore say That these two places Gen. 12.3 and Gen. 17.5 have an agreement between themselves because they both agree in the proof of the same position viz. that they which are of the faith are the children of Abraham But although this blessing of Abraham to come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ as is expressed Gal. 3.14 by a continued and necessary coherence of the matter there treated of falleth in with that which went before quite against the title of the birth-priviledg established by the law and giveth it to believers the only sons of Abraham in the Gospel-day vers 7. They which are of faith the same are the children of Abraham This bold opposite hath pleased to lay aside that blessing and to call upon another Scripture managed by the Apostle in another argument and to annex it with this vers 14. to serve his turne but with as little advantage as if he had stayed where he was In the interim we deny that there is any colour of truth in this allegation that the denyal of infants-baptisme bars the blessing of Abraham from the Gentiles or can be justly supposed so to doe 2. But admitting his application of vers 16. drawn from Gen. 17.7 I will be a God to thee and thy seed after thee to be pertinent Yet it makes not a jot to his purpose to wit that because the carnal-seed of Abraham had a day wherein as the natural sons of Abraham they were priviledged under circumcision that therefore the carnal-seed of every believer should in the Gospel-day be admitted into the visible priviledges of sons and heirs of Christ It is a very froward supposition that the proportion between Abraham in the flesh and his carnall seed in the time when circumcision was in date should be the same to Abraham in the spirit who is Christ and the carnal seed of every believer in that season when circumcision is out of date 3. What is this seed of Abraham
Children of Believers And in the Text alledged If ye be Christs then are ye Abrahams not if ye be children of believers 4. As to the interpretation of that passage taken from vers 16. The promise is to Abraham and to his seed besides what hath been said in answer to the tenth Argument we say that the application of this Scripture must be made between competent persons and under their proper qualifications and respects respectively considered The promise was made to Abraham as a common Ancestor and he had a noble seed to whom the blessing as an Inheritance did inure but under this qualification as they were his natural seed priviledged under the typical administration by which this Prerogative was so setled Now to improve this Scripture aright the heavenly mystery vailed in this dispensation must be sought out and first we must finde the common Ancestor and him the Apostle discovers to us to be Christ if Christ's then Abraham's seed vers 29. So then although Abraham stood a Father of many Nations under the Law yet Christ is the onely Father the everlasting Father under the Gospel-administration and this Ancestor hath also his Seed more nobly descended then the Seed of Abraham they are all the Sons of God by faith in Christ vers 26. Yea it is impossible that by any other qualification men can come to be the Sons of this Ancestor then by being made one with him in the participation of the everlasting Grace of the unchangeable Covenant Now then it is an incompetent application of persons to compare every particular believer and his children to Abraham the common Ancestor of a whole administration and the Seed priviledged thereby and no less incompetent is the application of the qualification requisite in persons to be accounted heirs that because it sufficed to Abraham's heirs that they were the sons of his natural Generation and thereby made capable of an Inheritance in the figure and in the letter that therefore it sufficeth by being the child according to natural generation of any believer to be upon that account an heir of God and joynt-heir with Christ in the very substance and mystery which the former administration did prefigure We therefore shall deny the Argument raked up out of these two abused Scriptures and we say That it is an absurd as well as a presumptuous reasoning from the promise to Abraham and his seed to infer or suppose that the Infants of believers are joynt-heirs with Christ and their godly Parents under the administration of Grace because of the Birth-Priviledge given to Abraham and his Seed by the Law Accuser Arg. 12. Lastly If children be excluded from the promise it seems the Apostle went about rather to deceive his hearers then to inform them it 's very unlikely the Apostle would use the same dialect of the Covenant that was formerly used to Abraham I am thy God and the God of thy seed the promise is to you and your children if it had been his minde that children should be excluded I wish that men would with unbyassed hearts weigh these things and you shall see that the children of believers are in the promise Answer 1. We say That the Apostle in plain terms tells them That the promise is to you and to your children and in the strength of that gracious promise perswades them to Repentance and Baptism but what if Children be not excluded from the promise where comes in Infant-Baptism upon that account and this should have been the very first thing if he had intended ingenuously to have proceeded and there was a fair occasion for it in the first Proposition That the Covenant of Grace stands now in force to the children of Believers under the Gospel But in stead of a fair proof as well there as all along we have a parcel of doubtful and equivocal terms made use of without any discovery in what sense they are applied of which artifice we have frequent experience And we have some grounds to judge by the management of what hath passed That the Opponent durst not open that door lest the light thereby entring would have manifested these and the like inconsequential and confused reasonings and that therefore it was thought best silently to trust the credit of that Point with the good disposition of the credulous Reader having to deal with us whom in a jeer he scorns with the Title of a learned company meaning a company of silly follows 2. What an odious and audacious inference he here imposeth upon the Spirit of God That if Infant-baptism may not be concluded from the words alledged The promise is to you and to your children then the Apostles use of them is in a deceit we have already made known That the use made of these words was to induce poor grieved sinners to Repentance as containing a Doctrine full of comfort for such that repenting and being baptized they and theirs in all generations had Promises of Christ and all his benefits And what is the deceit herein Indeed to promise an Inheritance in Christ to poor Creatures and to affix a Seal of God to that Promise without any colour of authority by any Rule of the Word may perhaps be in time charged as a notorious deceit the good Lord draw all his faithful Servants out of it 3. That the Apostle useth the like Dialect as he pleaseth to set it out phrase of speech to these Infants that God was pleased to use to Abraham at the confirmation of the Covenant viz. I am thy God and the God of thy seed the promise is to you and to your children is no help to Infant-baptism at all forasmuch as the allegation of the Apostle is to perswade the People to Repentance and Baptism without which the Promise contributed nothing at all to justifie a persons Baptism 4. These words spoken by God to Abraham I am thy God c. did Prophetically and mainly refer to Christ and Gospel-times to have their accomplishment for the gathering in of the Seed of God to Christ scattered abroad amongst the Jews and Gentiles especically and first of the Jews it was therefore necessary that the Argument of the Apostle should be formed to the likeness of the authority from whence it is drawn but still the intepretation suited to the minde of the Spirit to wit the gathering of a spiritual not a carnal Seed to Abraham that is Christ Accuser Further I observe that the promise is to be considered two ways 1. As it is invisibly made so it is alone to the elect 2. As it is visibly made so it is with visible professors and their children whoever is in covenant in the first sense can never fall away but many may be in covenant in the later sense who may afterwards degenerate and fall away Here let the impartial Reader take notice that the Covenant as it is visibly exhibited is the ground for baptism seeing the subjects of the Covenant internally are known to God
alone This distinction of the Covenant is clear from Rom. 9.4 where the Apostle saith The Covenant pertains to them and yet the Apostle was in great heaviness for them vers 2. It 's clear from Act. 3.25 where the Jews are called the children of the Covenant and yet but few of them internally in the Covenant It 's clear from John 1.11 where they are called God's own which could not be by Creation for so all are his own neither could it be by special Grace For saith the Text they rejected Christ then it must needs follow that there was a visible Church-Covenant or Covenant of Grace visibly exhibited that gave them a claim to God Answer He calls upon the impartial Reader to take notice c. so also do we and shall take it for the point in issue between us and our Opponent viz. whether the visible exhibition of the Covenant the ground of Baptism will justifie the baptizing of Infants or the baptism of Believers and let the Reader consider the evidence and pass a righteous sentence The visible exhibition of the Covenant is not that which the fancy and pleasure of men calleth so but it is the visible way of worship which standeth and must stand by special institution and appointment of God himself under known ordinances and laws reveased in the word of God a description whereof we have Ezek. 43.11 12. Shew them the form of the house and the fashion thereof and the goings out thereof and the comings in thereof and all the forms thereof and all the Ordinances thereof and all the forms thereof and all the Laws thereof and write them in their sight that they may keep the whole form thereof and all the Ordinancas thereof and doe them this is the Law of the house upon the top of the mountain the whole limit thereof round about shall be most holy behold this is the Law of the house Here we have a compleat description of a visible exhibition of the covenant where we may see the Lords exactness to give his people an unquestionable plain written rule for all visible worship with this caution that the whole limit thereof round about shall be most holy nothing to be taken from it or added to it So did heat first by Moses Exod. 25.9 40. Now we say if such exactness were to be kept in the figure and a sutable faithfulness was found in the servant what exactness may we expect from Christ the Lord see Hob. 3.5 6. Moses verily was faithful in all his house as a servant for a TESTIMONY of those things that were to be spoken after but Christ as a Son over his own house which house we are And that Christ was not wanting to us in this matter see Mat. 28.19 20. but the administration of baptism is a very main ordinance of the instituted worship of the New Testament and that form of it which is practised among us to wit to baptise upon faith and repentance being an undoubted form instituted and practised by Christ and his Apostles and no institution or practise for baptizing infants being produced We therefore say that allowing this distinction of the promise or covenant invisibly and visibly made and that the visible exhibition is the ground of baptism we require the proof of this that infant-baptism is a part of the visible exhibition of the Covenant in the New Testament days institured by Christ or his Apostles and it is no small comfort to us that in a day of so much contradiction envy and detraction wherein this truth becoms a word of patience to us all hitherto we have never been pressed by any one argument which doth pretend to an institution of Christ or any Apostle but by certain far-fetcht reasons from Abrahams carnal seed and from circumcision and suppositions of strange inconveniences imagined by men to follow the denyal of infant-baptism and such like matters and indeed being tryed are found suppositions and nothing else Accuser In a word this must be acknowledged by the Anabaptists themselves else how can they call themselves a visible Church of Christ if there be no visible exhibition of the Covenant to give men such a visible relation for there is no claym to God but by Covenant Answer You have heard us affirm a visible exhibition of the everlasting covenant and that in Gospel-times the same is of another nature then it was under the Law that now it consisteth in a clear unvailed discovery of the doctrine of salvation by Christ and an orderly disposition of all matters relating to the same by the rule of the written word of God instituting the New Testament-administration all which we thus particularly set down once more 1. The exhibition is the only instituted worship which God accepteth and in performing the same according to rule we are said to do that which is right in the eyes of God and not otherwise Exod. 23.13 Deut. 12.28 2. All the force and authority which it hath upon the conscience lyeth in the rule by which it is commanded and binds according to it and no farther Esa 8.20 To the Law and to the Testimony c. 3. God so greatly detesteth all services which himself hath not commanded that in this respect he declareth that he is a jealous God who will not indure a provocation Exod. 20.4 5. and because mans nature is prone to be inventing and medling God hath therefore never left his Church without certain plain and positive rules for all manner of duties which he requireth And this provision being as needful in the Gospel as under the Law Christ therefore was not wanting to the Church therein Mat. 28.19 20. And amongst other the Lords Ordinances we find a plain rule and institution for the baptising of beleevers and penitents but for the baptising of infants we have not a word and because we do not read it neither in precept nor president we dare not to practise the same Accuser In this sence we are to understand the children of beleevers in the promise according to the meaning of the Apostle in Acts 2.39 Answer That is to say these words of the Apostle The promise is to you and to your children by him preached to the Jew to bring them to Christ by repentance and baptism do import that the children of beleevers are in the covenant visibly exhibited such wretched abuses of Scripture this bold person dares to affirm That the interest of the Jew and his children before repentance and baptism is here expressed to be in the promise of Christ is plain but from these words to conclude an interest yea an actual being in the visible Church would also conclude that the Jew in his rankest opposition was already in that state which the Apostle laboured by the tenders of this grace to bring him into Accuser Now this covenant-right is a ground which God himself lays down why any should be baptised Acts 2.38 he requires baptism v. 39. shews the reason