Apostle shews Heb. 11. that under the old Covenant the godly were famous for their faith Were those promises of God exhortations of the Prophets and practise of those Worthies spoken of concerning faith and circumcision of the hart more then was comprehended in the Covenant under which Gods people at that time were Thirdly whereas you say the Church of the Gospel doth stand on faith and circumcision of the heart Is your meaning that there is no Church of the Gospel but all that are therein and professed and acknowledged members thereof are indued with faith and circumcision of heart If so experience of the Scripture and all Christian Churches will confute you sith still chaffe is mingled with graine tares with wheat the children of the wicked one with the children of the kingdome Or is your meaning that faith and circumcised hearts is required of all in the Church of the Gospel and is truly in those that are internall and living members of the same This is granted and may be said as truly of the Church of the Iewes and therefore this can make no difference being common to both Fourthly Can you tell what you meane when you say That the old Covenant stood onely by nature and circumcision of the flesh I cannot tell how you are to be interpreted but one of these three waies Either first that this Covenant was grounded on nature Or secondly that it promised onely naturall or temporall blessings Or thirdly that it was made with all and onely the naturall seed of Abraham all which are grosse and notorious errours openly crossing the Scriptures For if you meane that this Covenant was grounded in nature this is false for God chose Abraham and Israel of free grace and love above all other people Iosh 4. Deut. 7.7 c. neither did they differ in nature from others Or secondly if you meane that God onely required of them outward circumcision and cutting off the naturall foreskin and promised only naturall and temporall blessings this opinion is fitter to be abhorred then confuted Or thirdly if you meane that to be of the naturall seed of Abraham and to be circumcised in the flesh was sufficient and necessary for being in that Covenant so that their being in Covenant consisted in being the naturall seed of Abraham this is as false for first Were not many Proselytes joyned with the Israelites in the same Covenant so that to be of Abrahams seed was not necessary Secondly Did not they want circumcision in the wildernesse fourty yeares and yet remaine in Covenant Thirdly Did not Ishmael and Esau grow out of Covenant though the seed of Abraham and so ten Tribes ceased from being Gods people long before the old Covenant was antiquated and did not the Prophets shew that Legall observations were nothing worth without sinceritie Fifthly though the outward cleansings and ceremonies of the Law have ceased and so that outward faederall holinesse be at an end yet there is an outward and faederall holinesse of the new Covenant whereby Christians are distinguished from other people They have their outward Baptisme and the Lords Supper prayer in the Name of Christ alone the Word and profession of the Gospel by which they are distinguished from unbeleevers Act. 2.41.42 There are reckoned up first Baptisme secondly the Apostles Doctrine thirdly Fellowship or Communion with the faithfull fourthly breaking Bread and fifthly Prayers as distinctive markes of the Church by which it then was and to this day is distinguished from all other societies whatsoever 1 Cor. 5.12 There is a distinction expressed of those that were within the Church or Covenant and members of the Courch and those that were without whereof these were not subject to the judgement or censure of the Church those were But how are these distinguished that the Church may neither goe beyond nor neglect her office within her bounds By inward holinesse that none sees but God and each mans owne conscience and therefore cannot be a note of distinction unto men that cannot discern the heart By outward holinesse of life Not so for some of those that were within were guilty of more grosse profanenesse then those that were without as in the same Chap. 1 Cor. 5.1 and 11. Therefore there must be some note of distinction or faederall holinesse by which those that were wicked in heart and life and yet Saints by calling and members of the Church and so under the Churches jurisdiction might be discerned from them that were without and so subjected to the Churches censure 1 Cor. 5.11 12 13. Yet you say further There is now onely the new Covenant which is a covenant of grace and salvation and brings certaine salvation to all those that rightly enter into it which is onely by faith Hence it is said Act. 2.47 That the Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved Answ It is as true that the old Covenant made with the Iewes was a covenant of grace and salvation which brought certaine salvation to all those that rightly entered into it and that it was onely by faith Heb. 11. And as for the Scripture you cite it is said indeed That the Lord added to the Church such as should be saved But it is not said onely such as should be saved were added to the Church or that all those who were added to the Church were saved You proceed And that the holinesse of children is not meant of any holinesse in relation to any Church-covenant will appeare further by these reasons First that which is an effect of regeneration is not brought to passe by generation though the parents be holy But to be of the covenant or kingdome is the proper effect of regeneration Ioh. 3.3 without which none can see it much lesse be of it or enter into it Therefore it cannot be brought to passe by generation though the parents be holy Answ We say not neither can it follow from our grounds that the children of Christian parents are in covenant with God by generation but by vertue of Gods gracious promise and from the nature of the covenant of grace wherein God is pleased to accept parents together with their children for his Secondly to be of or in the covenant outwardly of which being in covenant we speak and which is sufficient to make an externall member of the Church and give right unto the outward seales you can never prove to be the proper effect of regeneration untill you have proved that all those who were baptized by Iohn the Baptist and the Apostles and so admitted into the covenant as members of the Church were truly regenerate which to hold were to contradict the Scripture Your second reason is this Secondly contradictions cannot be the effect of one and the same covenant in one and the selfe-same respect But for one parent to be a beleever that is of the Church when the other parent is not to produce an holy seed that is in covenant 1 Cor.
of necessitie the whole Church and every particular member therof must be present at the choosing of a Minister and give their voice expressely therein If this be your meaning it is neither proved in the Scriptures you bring nor any other Or whether by being chosen by a Church you meane no more then to be chosen by some speciall persons in a Church that represent the whole Church If this be your meaning I will concurre with you in that particular as knowing that women and children have no voyce though members Nor is it necessary that every particular member of the rest should give his vote sith at such times oft some are occasioned to be absent and if present they yet may be so many that they cannot well give particularly their voices and though many refuse to give their votes yet if the greater part vote for him it is sufficient Secondly Whereas you say Constitute of Saints and beleevers by calling I aske whether you meane those that are so effectually called that they are really and truly become Saints and beleevers so that there is not a wicked man or hypocrite among them and that the mixture of wicked men or hypocrites among them which call the Elders causeth them not to be true Elders If this be your meaning looke over that place which you brought for proofe of your opinion and you shall finde it clearely confuted 1 Cor. 1.2 if you compare that verse with Chap. 3. v. 3. and Chap. 5. and 6. throughout Chap. 8. and 10. and 11. and 15. and 2 Cor. 12.20 21. and almost throughout both Epistles By comparing which places you shall see that these beleevers and Saints by calling did not so walke either in regard of soundnesse of judgement puritie of worship or holinesse of life as to give cleare evidence of their effectuall calling or sound sanctification So compare Phil. 1.7 with Chap. 3.18 19. and Rom. 1.7 8. with Chap. 16. v. 17 18. and then speake your conscience whether you can judge all these down right beleevers effectually called really Saints But if by beleevers or Saints by calling you meane such as are called to faith and holinesse and withall make a profession by externally giving their names up to Christ and accepting outwardly the covenant promising faith and obedience unto Gods word though there may be hypocrites and wicked livers we concurre with you as knowing that they must be Christians by profession and partakers of the heavenly calling not Iews Pagans or other Infidels that goe to the making up of a visible Church and such are our Churches whereby the Elders of whom we speak have been chosen or accepted Thirdly whether your meaning be the Congregation or people only without the precedency concurrence examination direction and Ordination of Ministers must chuse their Governours or Officers or else they are not true Governours or Officers If you meane so looke backe on the Scripture cited by you Acts 14.23 with other places Act. 6.3.6 1 Tim. 4.14 and 5.22 where it appeareth that Ministers had the chiefe hand in making Ministers Now these things propounded I answer to your position that we can easily shew that our people in England in regard of their generall and unanimous consent to and profession of faith in the same truth contained in the book of God acceptation of the covenant and giving up of their names unto Christ are a Church or Congregation of faithfull people or Saints by calling though many doe not walke answerably to their calling the greater is their sinne and shame and shall be their condemnation unlesse they repent And in regard of the many severall companies of the faithfull by whom Gods worship is performed apart one from another there are many Churches or Congregations of Saints by calling in our Land We can shew also that although our Elders of whom we speake have not been chosen by the whole Congregations in respect of every particular member yet by some speciall persons in behalfe of the whole Congregation to whom that charge was committed by them or which was their sinne usurped from them and that the people at least by accepting them so chosen did make choice of them in their own persons And that whatsoever disorders or defects have been in the choice do not nullifie their ministery As for such as have acknowledged the unlawfulnesse of their ministery or plead meere qualifications of whom you speake let them answer for themselves how they can we are not bound to stand to their principles or maintain their opinions As for the seven next Objections into the Answer whereof you digresse most of them being belike fained of your self that you may finde somewhat to say beside extravagant impertinencies malicious and master-like censures and some unquestioned truths which are yeelded by us but do nothing profit your cause nor hurt ours I see nothing that it is worth while to answer but what may be sufficiently answered unto by what hath been said before Neither do I intend to follow you in your idle roving Onely it is to be observed that this A. R. cannot endure to heare of a Synode though a speciall and maine ordinance of God to compose differences and quiet the hearts of Gods people which have been disquieted by trouble-Churches See Acts 15. the whole Chapter Because saith he a Synod cannot make a Last to suit every ones foot which in plain English is this they will not suffer Iesuits Papists Arminians idle Ministers Anabaptists Antinomians and Familists to have their own way in practise worship opinion c. Neither will they suffer every man to abuse the Scripture after his owne fancie and vent abroad his poysonous conceipts among the simple to draw disciples after them As if it were better to let every man follow his owne devises and labour to draw others into his opinions so that whosoever is most cunning pragmaticall and able to conform his doctrin to the humours of men shall goe away with most disciples to the overthrow of thousands of soules than that there should be a consultation of godly learned conscientious Ministers about the establishment of religion And here it is further to be noted that the children of darkenesse though in some particulars they be opposite one to another as Papists Arminians ignorant lazy and malignant Ministers and licentious Atheists on the one side and Anabaptists with Antinomians and Familists on the other side doe differ from yea directly oppose one another in some particulars yet they agree together as in opposing Gods faithfull Ministers and people so in hating the light and refusing to be brought unto the triall of Gods word and to be tyed unto the Rules thereof as they shall be found out and applyed by an Assembly of faithfull Ministers Again it is to be observed That these men take it in high indignation that any should go about to restrain them from abusing the Scripture and carrying about the simple people with every wind of
made concerning the thing signified viz. powring his Spirit which promise belonged to them and their children therefore they should receive the signe which God had instituted to signifie it which may seeme the most genuine resolution of the Text. Or secondly This reason may be understood as brought both to the exhortation Repent and be baptized and the promise And you shall receive remission of sinnes and the gift of the holy Ghost for considering that baptisme and the gift of the holy Ghost are correlatives as the signe and thing signified the reason well may that I say not necessarily must be referred to both Or thirdly if we grant that it is immediately referred to the foregoing promise yet it must necessarily be taken as a reason of the exhortation at least mediately for seeing the promise of remission of sinnes and the holy Ghost is brought as a reason to perswade them to be baptized and these words For the promise is to you c. is brought as a confirmation of the promise Causa causae est causa causati and considering that the cause of the cause is the cause of the caused and the reason of the reason is the reason of the thing proved by that reason this For the promise c. must needs be brought as a reason why they should be baptized and so those who bring this as a reason that the Apostle gives why they should be baptized joyning the thing argued and the Argument together and omitting that which was interposed as not pertinent to the purpose are quit from your slander of false alledging Scripture and you convinced to be a false accuser of the brethren The next Objection that you frame I owne not Assenting that it is true that neither these Iewes nor the Gentiles were in Covenant untill they had entred into the same by repentance and faith seeing that the old Covenant was now abrogated and the Gentiles had beene hitherto foreiners so that you will acknowledge that whensoever Iewes or Gentiles should receive the promise by faith and repentance it did not onely belong unto them but also to their children For though it be expressed to the Iews That the promise was to them and their children it is to be understood to hold of the Gentiles also For now the partition wall was removed and the Iewes had no priviledge for their childrens having right unto the promise any more then the children of beleeving Gentiles Thus farre I have digressed in answer to some objections made against the Scripture which was brought for the proofe of my proposition though it might be handled as well in the assumption yet because I have more to say on the assumption I brought these objections under the proposition The summe of the proposition must be remembred to be this Where is right to the spirituall blessing promised in the word and sealed in baptisme there is right to baptisme which stands firme against whatsoever hath beene objected I come to the assumption The places of Scripture quoted to confirme the assumption have beene spoken of before Onely we may consider now First what things are promised in those Scriptures expresly Secondly what is implied Thirdly to whom these promises are made For the first God promiseth to be their teacher yea though they be uncapable of humane discipline They shall not teach one another but they shall all be taught of God Esa 54.13 Ier. 31.34 Againe that he will give yea powre his Spirit and that his Spirit shall be upon them Ioel 2.28 Es 59.21 Secondly under these two expressions yea each of them severally are comprehended all those things that are requisite for our being in Covenant with God and all those spirituall graces that give us right to the seale of entrance as first Regeneration which is the proper and certaine worke of the spirit of sanctification Ioh. 3.5 which spirit of regeneration to be signified by the water of baptisme may appeare by that Scripture Ioh. 3.5 Tit. 3.5 Againe this implies communion with Christ which must needs be by faith actuall or virtuall Ioh. 6.45 Heb. 11.6 For whosoever is taught of God and hath the Spirit of Christ must needs have Christ and so it follows that such have right unto remission of sinnes Thirdly these promises belong unto the children of the Church the sonnes and daughters of the faithfull all of them from the least to the greatest the seede of the faithfull and their seeds seed as may appeare in the Scriptures quoted and here must be comprehended infants as well as others who have right unto the promise by vertue of their parents entering into Covenant with God as Act. 2.39 The Apostle bids them repent and be baptized and so enter into Covenant for the promise saith he is unto you and your children so that there can no reason be given why infants should be excluded from these promises unlesse any one shall say that infants are uncapable of these gifts which this A. R. seemes to hold in many places of his booke which opinion is more worthy detestation then confutation Are not infants capable of sinne Psal 51.5 and therefore of sanctification shall the first Adams disobedience be available to bring guilt and defilement and not Christs obedience to procure remission and sanctification Or is there no remedie for the poore infants of beleeving parents but if they die before they come to the use of reason they must necessarily perish as being born the children of wrath and being uncapable of remedie Or doth this man hold that they are brutes without soule in that he compares baptizing of infants to circumcising of Camels or Asses 2 Part pag. 21. Are not these profane Atheisticall conceits contrary to the promises of God cleare testimonie of Scripture and example as of Iohn the Baptist who was sanctified and moved by the Spirit even in his mothers wombe Quest But what must we then beleeve that all the children of Christians are already indued with the holy Ghost taught of God and sanctified c. so soone as borne or in their infancie Answ It is enough to prove their right to baptisme that they are under the promise and interessed therein by vertue of their parents being at least externally in Covenant so that whether they have already received the Spirit or have a promise thereof it sufficeth to give them a right to the Sacrament As these are bid repent and so come under promise themselves with their children and then be baptized and afterward they shall receive the holy Ghost Quest But must we think that all children of Christian parents that are baptized either have or shall receive the Spirit and so be saved Answ Iohn the Baptist and the Apostles though they were not to beleeve that amongst those multitudes whom they baptized there were none but truely had or should receive the Spirit for it was after proved by the event that many were hypocrites yet they turned away none because by
commission bound them to baptize none but those which were brought to actuall faith you have not proved as may appeare by the foregoing examination of what you produced Secondly Why should not we interpret their commission by their practise rather then draw their practise to that sense which your fancy is pleased to put on the commission Their practise as a commentary on their commission shews in what sense it was understood by them Thirdly Why may not those places that speake of the beleeving of the family before they were baptized if you can produce any such be expounded by these that shew the heads of that the families beleeving and being baptized and giving up themselves and theirs unto God the whole families were accounted beleeving families and so baptized especially seeing it so agreeth with Gods proceeding with Abraham the father of the faithfull Fourthly Or what necessitie is there that either those Scriptures should be expounded by these or these by those when they are both equally plain and cleare They may be both true according to the proper sense of the letter and history In some families all might well be of ripe years and actuall beleevers in others not and yet both sorts might be baptized without absurditie Arg. 3 Those which are Saints or holy ones are meet members of the Church and so have right to that Sacrament that seales admission into the Church Eph. 5.25 26 27. 1 Cor. 1.2 But the children of Christian parents are Saints or holy ones Ephes 5.25 26 27. 1 Cor. 7.14 Therefore they are meet members of the Church and so have right to baptisme being the Sacrament that seales admission into the Christian Church The Proposition namely that Saints or holy ones are members of the Church and so to be admitted to the Sacrament of entrance thereinto I know not to be questioned or denied by any and if it should may be confirmed by those Scriptures wherein the Churches have the title of Saints given to them or Saints by calling implying that a Saint and a member of the Church are termes convertible considering that in some Epistles the faithfull are all called by the name of Church the name of Saints or holy ones not being used and contrariwise so that sometime the Apostle calls them to whom he writes Saints not Church sometime Church not Saints sometime both Church and Saints Rom. 1.7 1 Cor. 1.2 2 Cor. 1.2 Ephes 1.1 Phil. 1.1 Col. 1.2 Gal. 1.2 1 Thes 1.1 2 Thes 1.1 as may appeare in the places quoted in the margine so that all the members of the Church are Saints all Saints are members of the Church Yet it is to be noted by the way they were Saints by calling or called to be Saints Not so that every member of these Churches were truly sanctified but such as had beene called to holinesse and made at least an externall profession of obeying this heavenly call For some among those sanctified ones or Saints by calling were notorious offenders and such as were stained with grosse errours as 1 Cor. 3.3 5.1 2. 6.1.8.13 so Chap. 8.11 15. 2 Cor. 12.21 Gal. 3. Phil. 3.15 Yet it was sufficient to make them Saints by calling and members of the visible Church that they were partakers of the heavenly calling Heb. 3.1 and so they had externall right to the Sacrament although if they did not walke worthy their calling they brought upon themselves the greater condemnation Secondly it is confirmed hence In that holinesse comprehends all the conditions or qualifications that are requisite to baptisme Holinesse cannot be without communion with Christ regeneration and remission by the Spirit and Bloud of Christ 1 Cor. 6.11 1 Ioh. 1.7 So that as much as a man is holy so much he hath communion with Christ regeneration and remission If indeed and truth he be holy then is he inwardly and really united unto Christ regenerated and justified If outwardly and in profession onely he be holy then hath he communion with Christ regeneration and remission onely outwardly and in profession as Heb. 10.29 Those Apostates are said to account the bloud of the Covenant wherewith they were sanctified prophane and to doe despite to the Spirit of Grace These were not truly and inwardly sanctified for then should they have never fallen away but onely outwardly faederally and in respect of externall profession Yet this externall holinesse is as much as the Minister can discern or require as necessary for receiving into the outward covenant and admitting to the seale of entrance Thirdly this is confirmed by that Scripture cited in the Proposition Ephes 5.25 26 27. where it is shewed that the Church is sanctified and purged by Christ in the washing of water in the word that he might make it to himselfe a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing but that it should be holy and unblameable Wherein these two propositions making for the confirmation of my Proposition are plainly contained First that the Church is sanctified by Christ and that it is an holy societie which holinesse is such a proper adjunct or unseparable propertie of the Church that whosoever is holy must needs be a member of the Church Secondly that this Church which Christ so loved for which he gave himselfe which he hath made holy he hath cleansed with the washing of water in the word which whether it be meant of the outward signe or thing signified in baptisme or rather both doth apparently shew that the whole Church and all the members thereof being holy have right to the outward washing of water in baptisme To the Minor or Assumption That the children of Christian parents are holy First it might be proved from the same place Ephes 5.25 26 27. For otherwise unlesse it be granted that all the children of Christian parents are so faederally holy that at least some of them are sanctified in deed and truth it will follow that they are not loved of Christ none of those for whom Christ gave himselfe nor part of the Church at least in their infancie and consequently those children of Christian parents that die before the years of discretion and actuall faith must unavoidably and remedilesly perish and that the parents of such can have no hope at all of their escaping eternall damnation not withstanding all the promises that God hath made to his people and their posteritie which opinion what Christian heart doth not abhorre Secondly but for the fuller proofe of the point that children of parents whereof the one at least is a beleever are holy that place 1 Cor. 7.14 is most direct and cleare where the Apostle saith For the unbeleeving husband is sanctified by the wife 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the unbeleeving wife is sanctified by the husband else were your children uncleane but now they are holy whence we may note First that the word holy is the same that is used else-where for Saints as the proper title of the members
of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 1.7 1 Cor. 1.2 c. Secondly that the reason why these children are said to be holy is the faith of the parents or one parent at least to whom the other parent is sanctified by vertue of the beleeving parents faith according to those generall rules 1 Tim. 4.4 5. Tit. 1.15 Whence it was that the beleeving yoke-fellow had the lawfull and sanctified use of the unbeleeving yoke-fellow For though it be unlawfull for a beleever to marry an infidell 2 Cor. 6.14 Yet when of unbeleevers who were married together in the time of infidelitie one is called the other is not the calling of the one to grace doth not dissolve or annihilate their marriage which is Gods ordinance and therefore good if the unbeleever be content to live in marriage fellowship with the beleeving mate So that Gods Covenant with the beleeving parent or parents is the ground of the childes holinesse for as hath beene touched before in regard of externall covenant with God the state of the parents or better parent and of the child is the same If the parent be in Covenant the child though by nature the child of wrath yet by Gods grace is borne in Covenant and so he and his posteritie continues untill any of them cast themselves and their posteritie out of Covenant by Apostasie The child that is borne of parents out of Covenant remaines out of Covenant unlesse either the parents or some that are in stead of parents being called of God give up themselves and the child unto God or the child coming to yeares of discretion be called into the Covenant in his owne person Thirdly Hence it followeth that the holinesse of the children of beleeving parents is not necessarily internall and reall holinesse so that it be externall and faederall it sufficeth to make them members of the visible Church For as of those Corinthians and others that are called Saints we cannot infallibly gather that all were internally sanctified it was sufficient to make them externall members that they were both Saints by calling so it is sufficient to make the children so farre holy as to be members of the Church and outwardly in Covenant if their parents were outwardly in Covenant What is inwardly wrought it is not for man to judge Now let us see what A. R. objecteth to this place of Scripture A. R. For answer you lay down some grounds as First There is but one Covenant now on foot which is the Covenant of grace and salvation Heb. 7.22 8.13 10.9 Answ We grant you this and more too Namely that never since Adams fall was there any Covenant properly so called made with mankind by God but the Covenant of grace and salvation Where read you of any Covenant of works and damnation Secondly You say That there is but one manner of entering and being in the Covenant Ioh. 3.3.5.6 Heb. 10.19 20 21 22. Answ True If you meane being in that Covenant inwardly spiritually and savingly and the same ever was the manner of being and entering into Covenant since Adams fall viz. by Iesus Christ or regeneration Thirdly You say There is but one holinesse now acceptable unto God which is inward spirituall and in truth without which no outward obedience or conformitie to any worship is warrantable or acceptable Ioh. 4.23 24. Heb. 11.6 Answ If you understand it of such warrantablenesse as finds acceptation with God in the party performing it as your latter seemes to expresse the former This is not questioned nor denied by any that I know But why doe you limit your propositions by the particle Now as if though now outward obedience and conformitie to any ordinance be not acceptable without inward holinesse yet it sometimes had been which is utterly untrue as may appeare Gen. 4. Psal 50. and 51. Esa 1. Ier. 6. and almost every where Now you come directly to answer Hence say you it followes that if beleevers children be in Covenant and have true holinesse then they are all saved old and young But all beleevers children are not saved no not of faithfull Abraham himselfe Esa 10.21 with Rom. 9.27 Therefore the children of beleevers are not in the Covenant now on foot nor ought to be baptized Answ You might as well reason thus If Simon Magus Ananias and Sapphira with many other hypocrites in the Primitive Churches whom yet the Apostles baptized and called Saints and faithfull were in the Covenant and had this true holinesse or were truly Saints then they must needs be all saved But they were not all saved Therefore they were no beleevers or Saints nor in the Covenant now on foot and therefore should not have beene baptized The Apostles belike wanted you to direct and controll them and shew whom they should have baptized and whom not Secondly I answer directly Though true holinesse be necessarie for spirituall and internall being in Covenant and for eternall salvation yet the outward holinesse of the party consisting in externall being in Covenant is sufficient to warrant a Minister to baptize otherwise he should never have warrant to baptize for none knowes the heart so as to judge of inward holinesse infallibly but God You adde that we object notwithstanding all this that you have said Why may not infants be in the Covenant outwardly having faederall holinesse and in that sense be holy and so to be admitted to the outward ordinance of baptisme as infants were unto circumcision in time of the Law and in the State of the Iewes To this you answer That the State or the Church of the Iewes were under the old Covenant and Law and stood not by faith or circumcision of the heart as this of the Gospel doth but stood meerly upon nature and the circumcision of the flesh and accordingly had their outward and faederall holinesse and outward cleansings all which were abolished with their State and no such holinesse or distinction is now between any persons in the world Answ Secondly though they were under the old Covenant legally dispensed wherein grace was more obscurely and sparingly communicated to Gods people then it is under the Gospel yet the old Covenant was a Covenant of grace which all must needs grant unlesse they thinke that the Patriarks Prophets and that holy nation of the Iews were a gracelesse people out of favour with God either not at all saved or saved by workes For there is no way to be saved but by grace or workes and no salvation by grace but in a Covenant of grace But I hope you will not be so blasphemous as to say this Secondly If the old Covenant stood not by faith to use your phrase and circumcision of the heart how is it that God promiseth circumcision of the heart Deut. 30.6 and living by faith Hab. 2.4 and the Prophets call upon the people for circumcision of the heart Ier. 4.4 and for faith Psal 37. Esa 7. 2 Chron. 20. and that the
7.14 and for the other parents to be one a Iew the other a Babylonian the one a member of the Church the other not to produce an unholy seed that is out of covenant and to be put away both wise and all borne by her as Ezr. 10.3 is a contradiction in one and the selfesame respect and therefore cannot be the effect of one and the selfesame covenant Answ Not to examine the forme of this Argument nor to stand upon the strangenesse of your expressions I conceive I apprehend what you would say and answer It is no contradiction for the same covenant to require that the Iewes should cast away their Babylonish wives and the children which they had by them as unholy and out of covenant and yet allow the Primitive Christians their retaining of their yoke-fellowes though unbeleevers in hope that they might be brought within the covenant and wonne unto Christ and the retaining of their children as being already in covenant and holy I say here is no contradiction for here is not the same respect which is necessary in contradictions First the Iewes were forbidden to take wives of any but of Abrahams seed and their owne Tribe Christians are not tied to any Tribe for their yoke-fellowes which hinders not but the covenant was the same with us and them though some circumstances varied Secondly the Iewes took Babylonish women for I will not contend about the name Babylonian but give you leave to call these strange wives Babylonians after they themselves were in covenant with God which made their marriage with them altogether unlawfull and their seed an unholy off-spring But those Corinthians to whom Paul writeth were married before their calling into covenant with God as your selfe write 2. Part. pag. 10. And after marriage the one was called to the faith the other remained unconverted as may appeare vers 20.21.24.27 so that their former marriage being lawfull in it selfe and not forbidden of God but rather approved for marriage even among infidels as well as eating and drinking is Gods ordinance necessary for the due conservation of the world and it not being the unbeleeving yoke-fellows fault that his yoke-fellow is an unbeleever the unbeleevers sinne shall not prejudice the beleever to hinder their posteritie from the priviledge of faederall holinesse Thirdly you gather from Exod. 12.48 that considering the Iewes Church-State from whence this successive holynesse and being in Covenant is concluded to come doth not admit in any consideration of any lawfull being of parents the one a member of the Church the other not to produce a lawfull seed within the old Covenant that then such a thing in the new Covenant cannot be lawfully concluded from that rule Answ That scripture Exod. 14.48 doth not necessarily require that both parents whose male children should be circumcised should become Proselytes and submit themselves to Gods Covenant It was sufficient that the man who had principall Authority and power to dispose of his children should circumcise his male children though his wife should refuse to become a Proselyte for ought that can be gathered from that or any other scripture or the Proselyte wife if either she should be forsaken of her husband or become a widdow or be permitted of her husband to dispose of her children though he were never converted might have given up her selfe and her family to the God of Israell by circumcising her males for it is said the stranger not his yoke-fellow or both the parents shall circumcise his males So that your reasons being disproved prove nothing You bring us in objecting They are termed holy and so to be esteemed to which you answer So were the unbeleeving Iewes when they were broken off Rom. 11.16 and so is the unbeleeving wife and yet neither of them to be baptized for their being termed holy and therefore neither children for their being termed holy Answ Neither are the unbeleeving Iewes called holy as unbeleiving for the Apostles calls those Iewes an holy lumpe and holy branches not that were rejected through unbeleefe but that had been and were to be converted to the faith and saved as is apparent by the coherence for whom he calls holy here Rom. 11.16 he speaks of their fulnesse or full and generall conversion vers 12. and v. 15. he speakes of their conversion which shal be life from the dead and saith that they shal be saved v 26. So that it is evident that he calls the Iewes holy not in respect of the unbeleevers which were broken off and discovenanted but of their holy ancestors and those whose fulnesse should be a glorious inriching of the Gentiles whose receiving should be life from the dead and who should be saved and obtaine mercy And so they are called holy as a people considered for the future to be taken again into Covenant and to have right to the seale of the Covenant Secondly Neither is the unbeleeving wife called holy in this place indeed she is said to be sanctified to the husband so that he hath an holy and comfortable use of her as of other temporall blessings But to be sanctified for such an use or to such a person differeth farre from being holy You bring us in here demanding what holynesse then is meant to be in children and answer not that holynesse which accompanies faith and that only is availeable to the admittance unto the state of the gospell and to have right to baptisme Ans Because you have a good faculty in repeating the same things againe and againe and denying without proofe whatsoever makes against you I will be content to cast away some more time in answering you though the same for substance that hath been said and reply If you meane that holynesse which accompany faith vertuall or actuall is only available to internall admittance into the state of the Gospell so as to be made living and reall members of the Church we assent to this assertion But the question is not now who is a true and spirituall Member of the Church and infalliblely admitted to the spirituall and saving benefits that Christ hath purchased for his Church But who is an externall Member and may be admitted to the outward seale No question Iohn the Baptist and Christs Disciples admitted many to baptisme of whose saving faith yet they were not undoubtedly assured Wheras you goe about largly to shew That in the state of the Iewes and old Covenant some were faederally and outwardly holy and some uncleane But now that all such distinctions are taken away and that the Apostle now meant not any such holynesse for beleevers children to have neither is there now any such kind of holynesse in the world neither is there any other kind of holynesse save only that true holynesse which accompanies the new creature available to baptisme this is the summe of your speach wherunto I Answer It hath sufficiently been shewed before that there is a federall holynesse in the new Covenant or Christian Church
aswell as there was in the Church of the Iewes Neither doth your long discourse or many abused scriptures prove any thing to the contrary To repeat what was said before Whence was the Church of the Corinthians holy or a Congreation of saints sith there were so many really profane and carnall amongst them but from federall holynesse by which they were distinguished from them that were without though some in the Church were more notorious for vice then those that were without whence were the Hebrews called holy brethren but because they were partakers of the heavenly calling though some were so fastned to the Ceremonies Heb 3.2 and inclined to backsliding that the Apostle useth sharp and severe language towards them ch 6.10 and 12 How is it said that they had been sanctified by the blood of the Covenant that afterwards trampled on the Sonne of God by apostasy accounting the blood of the Covenant profane and doing despite to the spirit of grace if men may not in the state of the Gospell have a federall holynesse without inward holynesse that accompanies the new creature and saving faith So 1 Pet. 2.9.10 the Apostle calls the Christians to whom he wrote a chosen generation a royall priesthood an holy nation a peculiar people a people of God that had obtained mercy Must we think that all these to whom Peter wrote were undoubtedly indued with true faith and holynesse that accompanies the new creature so that there was no hypocrite amongst them that we have no ground for How then are these glorious titles bestowed upon them all By vertue doubtlesse of Gods calling and their outward accepting of Gods Covenant though there was but a part only amongst those Churches to whom these clogies properly belonged for there were tares among the wheate You goe on and say If it be objected that in respect of justification it viz federall holynesse availeth nothing but to baptisme it may to which you answer That which availes to justification and salvation doth according to the rule only availe to baptisme For if thou beleevest with all thy heart thou art justified Rom. 10.10 shalt be saved Acts 16.31 and maiest be baptized upon the same and no other grounds Act 8.37 Answ If the same be the rule or ground for justification and salvation and for baptisme then must Ministers have no rule for baptisme unlesse they can know the heart as God who justifies and saves and so consequently the baptizer must either be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the knower of the heart that is God alone Act 1.24 or baptize beside or without rule that is unlawfully for the true holynesse that accompanies the new creature and saving faith is known to none but God and the spirit of man which is in him 1. Cor. 2.11 You proceed bringing us in objecting and saying that all that were baptized by the Apostles themselves were not saved therefore what you answered to our objection viz. that that availes to baptisme which availes to justification and salvation is not so To this you answer by distinguishing between the rule which is infallible the judgments of men which are fallible and may be deceived in applying the rule yet it followes not but that the rule being of God is still as infallible as God himselfe For all that beleeve shall be saved which is true as God himself is true but all who are judged by beleevers to be beleevers doe not beleeve and therefore are not saved This failing therefore is not in the rule but in their judgements that are but men Answ To what purpose is it to say this is an infallible and eternall rule Whosoever beleeves shall be saved unlesse you prove the other that is in question viz. that saving faith is the only rule of Baptisme and that none might be baptized but they that did actually beleeve with the faith that accompanies the new creature and that this rule is true as God is true which yet I conceive you will not be so bold as to say which unlesse you say you say nothing to purpose For hence it would follow that all whom Iohn and the Disciples c. regularly baptized had true faith and consequently were saved that they failed yea were rash and presumptuous and sinned grievously as going beyond commission when they baptized any hypocrite that such an one after he came to repentance must necessarily be baptized againe for his former baptisme was applied beside the rule and so was a false baptisme Yea if faith be the rule both of baptisme and justification alike it will follow that as all and only beleevers were justified and all and only the justified were beleevers So all and only the faithfull must be baptized and all and only the baptized are faithfull and consequently whosoever is baptized is a beleever and a justified person and whosoever is not baptized is neither beleever nor justified But to leave these absurd consequences that necessarily follow upon your absurd opinion It is evident that God never appointed saving faith to be the rule of baptisme by which his Ministers should be directed in administring baptisme For it is impossible for a Minister to know infallibly whether another savingly beleeveth and so whether he may baptize him according to the rule if faith be the rule That cannot be a rule to us to worke by which we must necessarily be ignorant of God never ordained such an uncertaine yea incomprehensible rule for his servants to worke by You proceed But in baptizing of Infants the case is farre otherwise yea quite contrary who will or can faile in judging an Infant to be an Infant Answ There is no more danger of failing in judging an Infant to be an Infant then in judging a man to be a man But there may be failing in judging an Infant to be truly and really holy and in Covenant though all the children of Christian parents are called holy aswell as there might be failing in judging this or that man in the Corinthian Church to be a saint indeed though the whole Church were called saints For as the Apostles did according to the rule of charity judge men to be beleevers and so baptized them when they made a profession of faith and did not manifestly discover the contrary though afterwards many proved otherwise So we are to judge Infants of Christian parents to be holy and so within Covenant and to be baptized because Gods word testifies that they are holy and neither your shifts and sophisticall evasions nor all the policie of Satan can disprove it though afterwards some of them are proved to have been only outwardly not inwardly in Covenant Here you bring in some authours testifying that baptisme of children is but a tradition a custome of the Church invented by the Pope c. Which testimonies I cannot for the present examine as not being furnished with the bookes of the authours Though if one should cast away so much time as to follow you
this holinesse or unholinesse of children proceeds not from the holinesse or unholinesse of parents but from the lawfull or unlawfull conjunction of parents in the begetting of children for the Apostle in this place speakes of all men universally Answ Let any indifferent man judge whether this be not an uncleane illegitimate and spurious interpretation of and drawing conclusions from the Scripture For first What comfort or resolution had this beene in the scrupulous parent to tell him that his children were holy that is legitimate and no bastards but legitimates because they were begotten in lawfull matrimony that had beene contracted before conversion whereas by your interpretation of these Scriptures if they had continued still unconverted both of them their children had beene as holy that is legitimate and no bastards Secondly how can this place Marriage is honourable in all c. and the bed undefiled be understood of all men universally as you say viz. unbeleevers as well as beleevers Tit. 1.15 When the Apostle saith Vnto the pure all things are pure but unto them that are defiled and unbeleeving is nothing pure but even their mind and conscience is defiled how can the marriage bed then be undefiled to such It is evident therefore that we make not the Spirit of God contradict it selfe that the universall note all men is to be restrained to the subject matter viz. all sorts of beleevers for to such he wrote of what qualitie condition or calling soever Thirdly But I pray you see and if you will not let others consider how all this while in interpreting this Scripture 1 Cor. 7.14 and wresting wiredrawing and pulling in as it were obtorto collo other Scriptures which you would force to favour your interpretation you have directly and manifestly contradicted the Apostle and corrupted the Text. The Apostle tells the beleeving yoke-fellows that their children are holy though their yoke-fellows were unbeleevers because they are sanctified to them viz. by their faith you say therefore the children are holy because their matrimonie was lawfull If the Apostles meaning were that which you would have it he should have said You were lawfully married therefore are your children holy But he saith The unbeleever is sanctified by or to the beleever else were your children uncleane let their marriage be never so lawfull Paul gathers the holinesse of children from grounds peculiar to the faithfull viz. the faith and being in covenant at least of one of the parents shewing plainly that were it not for this the children must needs be uncleane You would draw it from grounds common to Infidels viz. lawfull matrimony affirming that whosoever is borne of parents though infidels lawfully married is holy in the Apostles sense Thus when men set themselves to maintain errours they are not afraid nor ashamed plainly to contradict the Spirit of God You have somewhat further which you call an objection It seems then that the holines here of the children ariseth not from the holinesse or faith of the parents but meerly from the lawfull marriage and conjunction of the parents and then you answer It is even so and goe on to repeat what you have said and adde such like stuffe not worth reading Answ It is even false though you dictate it as è cathedra or è tripode and a manifest contradicting of plain Scripture as hath beene before demonstrated Your two next objections doe not concern us and therefore I passe them by Yet one more objection you bring us in making Have the children of beleevers no more priviledge then the children of Heathens Turks and Infidels you answer In respect of the Covenant of grace and salvation none at all and bring those Scriptures Ioh. 3.7 8. Act. 10.34 35. to shew that the Covenant of grace cometh not by any naturall birth but by a new birth Onely their priviledge you say is in respect of the meanes of salvation for beleeving parents may be a means to bring their children to the knowledge and faith of Christ Answ What Christian heart doth not abhorre this assertion as being directly contrary to the tenour of Gods Covenant Gen. 17. of which more hereafter and repugnant to Gods gracious promises frequently inculcated in Scripture Exod. 20.5 6. Act. 2.39 Esa 59.21 Doth not this strike at a maine pillar of a Christians comfort grounded on those precious promises so that by this tenet if the children of Christian parents die before they be capable of the outward meanes of salvation or their parents be taken from them before they come to yeares of discretion they must be parted with as the children of Turkes or Infidels as being out of the state of salvation as being in a lost and hopelesse condition as having no right to the Covenant notwithstanding all the gracious promises that God hath made to the faithfull to be their God and the God of their seed to shew mercy to their posteritie even to thousands that the promises doe belong unto them and their children that his word and Spirit shall abide on their seed and their seeds seed Let men judge whether the father of lies can speake more contradictorily to Scripture for the extenuating of Gods rich grace and dashing the comfort of Gods people Thus have I vindicated the ground of my third argument Yet notwithstanding all shifts we see this truth remaines firme that the children of Christian parents are faederally holy and members of the Church and so have right to the seale of admission into the Church 4. Arg. 4. Arg. To those that are in Covenant with God the Sacrament or seale which God hath instituted to represent and seale admission into Covenant is to be administred Gen. 17.10 11. Exod. 12.48 But children of beleeving parents are in Covenant with God Gen. 17.7 Exod. 12.48 Esa 59.21 Therefore children of beleeving parents are to be admitted to the seale of entrance into the Covenant which now is baptisme in the time of the Gospel For the confirmation and explication of the former proposition I conceive it is hardly questioned but that when God hath made a Covenant with his people and appointed a seale to signifie and represent admission into the same then the seale or signe belongs to those which have entred into Covenant under what kinde of administration soever the Covenant be dispensed So Philip reasons If thou beleeve with all thine heart thou maist be baptized So Peter Can any one forbid water that these should not be baptized c. For actuall faith at least in profession was necessary to those that at first entered into the new covenant and received the sign or seale thereof to wit baptisme as well as it was necessary to Abraham who entered first into the old Covenant which was sealed by Circumcision though actuall faith was not required of his posteritie as necessarie to their being in Covenant Neither for ought that I see doth the Adversarie deny this proposition Yet if it be questioned it is fully
it is not lawfull for women to receive the Lords Supper for as much may be sayd for that as for this and against this as that But the consequent is absurd therefore the antecedent is false And this I would wish those women to consider which by reason of the weakenesse of their judgment are aptest to be deceived by those that creep into houses and leade captive silly women laden with sinnes led away with diverse lusts ever learning and never able to come to the knowledg of the truth For if they should yeeld to this perswasion their children must not be baptized in their infancie because the Scripture doth not expressely command it On the same ground they must yeeld that they themselves have nothing to doe with the Supper and so by degrees they may be cheated of all Gods Ordinances and their comforts priviledges and obedience on the same grounds As also I would wish that the foregoing argument may be considered by them who have refused to have their children baptized in infancie and shew what ground they have in Scripture for baptizing them when they come to yeares of discretion I cannot see but they have as great cause to question whether ever their children may be baptized as whether they may baptize them in infancy Let them give an example or command in scripture expresse or by just consequence of a beleeving Father which kept his child unbaptized untill he actually beleeved and then brought him to baptisme And then let them bethinke themselves whether the issue will not be either their posterity must not be baptized at all though they beleeve and repent never so much and so they cast themselves and their children out of Covenant or they must be baptized without warrant or commande for all those examples and commands that are in scripture of faith required in those that should be baptized speake of them who themselves and their parents till that time had not been under the new Covenant Or lastly if they will have those commands and examples for their warrant and applyable to them they and their children must become infidels and persons out of Covenant and deny that ever they were in Covenant before or had received any spirituall and Evangelicall favour that so now at last entering newly into the Covenant of grace by faith and repentance whereunto they professe that they have been hitherto strangers they may receive the Sacrament or pledge of admission into Covenant Which how injurious it would be to Gods grace and their own souls and posteritie if ever they tasted of Gods mercy or were but externally in Covenant let all men judge It is usuall in controversies of this kinde after Scripture proofes and reasons deduced therefrom and grounded thereon to produce the consent and testimony of the Godly and learned whether Ancient or Modern especially the former that were most neere the Primitive purest times And I doubt not if a man had helps and leisure for searching Antiquitie it might be easily shewed that the baptizing of Infants was long in use before Antichrist got to his throne contrary to the opinion of this disputant yea in the Primitive times unlesse Authors be silent in this point because no controvesie then rose above this matter or corrupted But as I have said neither having the books of the Ancients that speak of this subject nor time well to turne over those volumes if I had them I must forbeare Onely let the Reader again take notice of these two first-mentioned and Prime Authors whom A. R. cites for his purpose For as touching Origens giving testimony that baptizing children was a ceremony or tradition of the Church not to examine how truly these words are cited out of the Author which I cannot for the reason aforementioned but to take the words on his trust This testimony shews that in his time who lived but 200. yeares after Christ it was a thing ordinarily practised and as I shewed before in vindicating my third Argument an unquestioned practise from which as an undeniable principle that holy man seemes to prove that Infants of a day old are not free from sinne And let none be offended that it is called a ceremony though that name as it is used for humane traditions beside or contrary to Gods word is odious yet the word may in its proper signification be used for any rite either humane or divine and both Baptisme and the Lords Supper may fitly be called ceremonies now as well as Passeover Circumcision and other Divine Ordinances instituted by God among the Iews Neither let any be troubled at the word Tradition for that is used not onely to note things taken up by men but also for the Doctrine of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Institutions of the Apostles 1 Cor. 11.2 2 Thess 2.15 And whereas it is said a ceremony or tradition of the Church there is no necessitie that it should be understood that the Church was the Authour thereof but the subject in which it was used and by which it was delivered to posteritie may well be meant by that phrase So Augustine who lived in the fourth Century after Christ calles it a custome as he saith of the Church Which yet he might well doe and yet it be a divine ordinance for all Gods ordinances are or should be in custome in the Church But if it were a custome of the Church in Augustines time and a ceremony or tradition of the Church in Origens sure it is strange that it should be brought into use a thousand yeares after Christ as one of his Authours saith and be a devise of Antichrist as he holds For customes are things that have been of long use and ancient standing And whereas some Authours speake of such as were Catechized and instructed by the Church before they were baptized and must give a reason of their faith before they were admitted to Baptisme and that they used to Baptize such at two times of the yeare onely I beleeve it will be apparent to those who looke into these Authours that they speake not of the children of beleeving parents but that those Catechumeni who were first Catechized and then baptized were Pagans who lived in those parts where the Church was which were quite out of Covenant and therefore because God did not so miraculously and suddenly bring such to the faith as in the times of the Apostles some space was required to instruct them in the principles of Religion before they could be judged fit for Baptisme But as I said I may not meddle with the examination of his authorities nor produce any humane authoritie for this seeing it hath been sufficiently confirmed by Arguments drawn from Scripture grounds though it were an easie thing I suppose to beat this Adversary with his own weapon And it might be an usefull worke if some Antiquary would take the pains to turne over the ancient Writers and shew what they have left on record concerning this
let them looke backward unto their baptisme and their consecration unto God and their abrenunciation of the world and the devil transacted therein and remember that they were buried with Christ in baptisme and professed a death unto sinne and a resurrection to holinesse so that now it were a monstrous and absurd thing to live in sinne as for a dead man to rise or a living man to lie in the grave Remember you are not your owne but Christs who is your Lord and Master and so resolve to continue still doing his worke and resisting his and your soules enemies Thus the Apostle teacheth us from baptisme to fetch arguments of sanctification both for the mortifying of our corruption and for the quickning of us to holinesse Rom. 6.1 2 3 4 c. Fifthly In times of doubt desertion temptation to distrust c. Christians should have recourse to the consideration of their baptisme and remember the ancient love of God to them in their infancy in taking them into his family and undertaking to be their God in baptisme wherein the whole Trinitie Father Sonne and Holy Ghost became ours giving us under seale assurance of pardon and peace direction and support perseverance and salvation So that let our temptations miseries and discomforts be what they will if we can but cast our eye back on baptisme and the covenant of grace sealed therein we may gather strong consolation therefrom And if we can in these and such like particulars testifie our prizing and improvement of our baptisme we shall not easily be cheated of it or drawne to question whether we were ever truly baptized seeing we daily find the comfortable fruits and effects thereof not shall we give occasion to others to queston whether our Infant baptisme were true baptisme when we give a reall demonstration to them that by vertue of the covenant of grace sealed therein unto us we walke as Christians in all holy conversation Sixthly this may serve to stirre up the Ministers of Christ among whom I professe my selfe the meanest and unworthiest of any that seeing there are so many pragmaticall deceivers abroad to seduce Gods people not afraid to call in question well-grounded truths buzzing into the eares of the simple such things as tend to the overthrow of Christian consolation and chearfull obedience speaking perverse things by which they overturne whole houses This I say should stirre us up if there be any conscience of our owne weightie duty and dreadfull charge any sparke of compassion to mens soules love to the truth or zeale for Gods glory to endeavour to prevent the inundation of errours rents distractions licentiousnesse and profanenesse that will unavoidably follow upon the plucking up of these flood-gates to the overflowing of the Church if some speedy remedy be not applied which belongs to the Ministers of Christ principally should it not grieve us to heare this holy function of the Ministery spoke of so disdainfully as it is in this Pamphlet answered as if our Ministers were but a company of ignorant covetous and ambitious men And oh would too great occasion of this imputation were not given by too many of our Ministers Woe to the world saith Christ because of offences Luk. 17.1 2. but woo to them by whom offences come They that runne into these errours of Anabaptisme by occasion of the badnesse of some Ministers shall not thereby be excused nor escape the woe unlesse they repent But it had beene better for those men never to have meddled with the Ministery yea to have beene throwne into the bottome of the sea with a milstone about their necks when they undertooke the charge of soules who by their ignorance lazinesse covetousnesse pride and superstition have given occasion unto some to raile on our Ministery as Antichristian And it is apparent that these errours are growne so rife and over-spreading through the silencing of good Ministers and setting up and maintaining of such as have beene carelesse and scandalous Therefore it greatly concerns all good Ministers to seek a remedie to this evill 1 Tim. 4.15 2 Tim. 2.15 2 Tim. 4.2 by giving attendance to reading exhortation and doctrine To study to shew themselves approved workmen of God that need not to be ashamed rightly dividing the word of truth yea to preach the word in season and out of season rebuking and reproving and exhorting with all long-suffering and doctrine seeing the time is come when people will not endure sound doctrine but after their owne lusts heape to themselves Teachers having itching eares If ever they had need t is now to hold fast the faithfull word that they may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort Tit. 1.9 10 11. and convince the gain-sayers Because there are many unruly vaine-talkers and deceivers whose mouthes must be stopped who subvert whole houses teaching things which they ought not There is great need that Ministers should take heed to themselves Act. 20.28 29 30. to the flock over which the holy Ghost hath made them Overseers to feed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne bloud seeing grievous wolves are entred among us not sparing the flock and from among our selves are men risen which speak perverse things to draw disciples after them These exhortations of the holy Ghost and many more in Scripture to call us to our dutie were never more seasonable and necessary In obedience to which charges of God let us therefore by painfull studie constant preaching fervent prayer and holy conversation fit our selves for employ our selves in and procure authoritie to the work of the Ministery that we may be free from the bloud of all men and that the people may be no more as children carried about with every winde of doctrine nor for want of plenty of pure streames be forced to drink up the puddle waters of errours and delusions Lastly The consideration of the pragmaticalnesse of many in these dayes to impoyson the mindes and trouble the hearts of Gods people with strange doctrines and dangerous errours who doe not onely creepe into houses to pervert the simple but also are so bold as to divulge their opinions to the danger of many souls as it appeareth by this Pamphlet answered and the effects it hath wrought The consideration I say of the boldnesse of such persons and of the distractions and unsettlednesse of the hearts of Gods people by occasion thereof should stirre us up every one in his place to doe what we can for applying a remedy to this miserable distraction and spreading sore Let us receive the truth in the love thereof 2 Thess 2.10 11. 1 Joh. 4.1 lest God be provoked to give us over to strong delusions to beleeve lyes Let us not be so fond as to beleeve every spirit but try the spirits whether they be of God Let us labour for soundnesse of judgement that we may discern between things that differ But especially that we may procure a generall