are willing to make a Trade of Preaching that so you may uphold your honour and profit and that distinction between Gift and Office is as clear as the Sun and you say nothing in answer unto it from the Scripture but in way of comparison with the Magistrate which will not hold for men have preached and it was their duty without the Office only by Gift as in the former Scriptures but men may not be Magistrates unless called to office and the disproportion between things Spiritual and things natural is that in which natural men are lost and the wisdom of man cannot reach it But you seem with Tho. Hall to make much ado about private Preaching and to confirm it you produce two Arguments 1. If we finde in Scripture that all Christians may preach taking preaching in a large sence for private duties we owe one to another c. But you prove by Scripture that all Christians may Preach take Preaching in a large sence c. How now Richard Sanders why you are proving more then ever I asserted Where will you be anon they may Preach and they may not for that which I asserted was that gifted brethren might Preach you say all Query 1. Whether these Scriptures produced by you do at all speak of Preaching 1 Thes 4. 18. comfort one another with these words Heb. 3. 13. But exhort one another daily while it is called to day Qu. 2. If it do infer Preaching why not publick in the Church If they were to exhort one another why not in the Church What word is there that hinders that it was not in the Church and so publick So likewise in the rest of the Scriptures so that by all that is said here is no room for private Preaching unless particular exhortation so men in office may preach as well as men out of office So that because there is a private watching in the Church of Christ and a private admonition exhortation c. you will therefore call it private Preaching and if you make that Preaching then you think to limit all the gifts in the Church there so contradicting all the Scriptures before mentioned and its true all are not teachers in way of Office yet all that have gifts may nay ought to make use of them for the good of the body and the glory of Christ The second Argument is taken from women If it be lawfull for women to preach privately c. But women may preach privately c. Answ Here you lie pittifully in the dust let the Reader peruse the Scripture produced by you for proof of your assertion that women may Preach 2 Tim. 1. 5. and 2 Tim. 3. 15. See if there be ever a word of Preaching in that place or any thing that hath a tendency to it Surely you think people are so ignorant that the very mentioning of Scripture will satisfie them although it be nothing to the purpose the other Scripture Act. 18. 26. The text saith it was Aquila and Priscilla his wife The word is expounded the way of the Lord c. But how will you prove that it was Priscilla that expounded Why not Aquila if it must be preaching as well as Priscilla But what should I rake after such nonsence and confusion I do not in the least question the womens Duty in their station as well as all the brethrens which is to watch to reprove to restore to exhort c. yet this prevents not the brethrens Duty who have received Gifts from the Lord to make use of them publickly for the good of the whole and they justly forfeit them if they neglect and they may be taken from them and given to those who will better improve them and I am confident that the gifts of Christ in the Saints will confound and bring to nothing the Worldly Ministry and that so much the rather too because they so much envy and oppose the Truth and way of God in this particular You observe 3ly That I take no notice of the thing in hand when the question is stated Whether any may Preach in a constituted Church not called to Office the Scriptures my answers are grounded upon speak only of Preaching to Infidels c. Ans If you were not wilfull or blinde you might see that I prove Preaching both in and out of a constituted Church too the Scriptures I produced for Preaching in a constituted Church are Rom. 12. 3. 6. 1 Cor. 14. 31. and that it intends the Brethren without exception see ver 1. where he speaks to the Church Desire spiritual gifts but rather that ye may prophesie and none are excepted but women ver 34. 1 Pet. 1. 10 11. and as for that you make so much ado about the extraordinariness of the case of the Preaching of the scattered brethren to Infidels I have answered it in the former Treatise yet something shall I say here 1. An unlawfull thing is not made lawful by the extraordinariness of the case unless in case of saving life so the Lord will have mercy and not sacrifice as in the Scripture mentioned by you provided it be not in the profession of Christ then he that to save his life will deny Christ before men he will deny him before his Father which is in heaven so that necessity makes not an unlawfull thing lawfull If Vzzah touch the Ark he must die 2 Sam. 6. 6 7. But 2. What necessity was there in it that Paul or the scattered Brethren or Apollo should preach if it were unlawfull there was no necessity unless such as Paul minds A necessity is upon me and wo is me if I preach not the Gospel 1 Cor. 9. 16. And if this necessity was upon them I think it was lawfull and upon the same account is it lawfull for any of the Saints that have received the Gift to Preach therefore for shame forbear to tell of the extraordinariness of the Case any more if the thing in it self was lawfull and do not abuse the Scripture for the upholding of your own ends and interests and do no more charge folly upon the Servants of the Lord for their fulfilling of the will of Christ And whereas you pretend That one Scripture witnessing that God hath appointed and fixed some in office for the work of the Ministry is of more strength to condemn the liberty of preaching pleaded for then twenty Examples of gifted mens preaching Let the Reader judge of the truth of this or whether both these held forth in Scripture do not clearly speak thus much to it that both are to have being together not one to put out the other and that Office that thinks to silence Gift is no Office of Jesus Christ but that which seeks it self and its reward will be accordingly But I might conclude more sure then you that there being a fixed Scripture that Commands Baptizing of Believers is of strength enough to condemn a thousand consequences for sprinkling of Infants having not so much
men Mat. 1. 5. 9. And thus you make the Commandments of God of none effect by your traditions ver 6. I say if this be permitted to draw consequences from Scripture to overturn commands it is the most dangerous way that ever was invented to usher in Heresie and Errour and upon that account its easie to turn out almost all the truth of God in Scripture and set it at variance against it self we grant consequences rightly grounded but we deny consequences to overturn Commands and Gospel and all As for all that you say from pag. 31. to 34. it is nothing but a reiteration of what hath been said before either in this or your former Arguments And notwithstanding you are pleased to say pag. 33. That Infant-Baptism is clear enough to those who have eyes to see or hearts to believe it To see and believe what you say and take your word for all for there is neither Scripture nor Reason for it Page 34. You say Since the Anabaptists call and cry so much for a literal Command By the way Sir Are you such an enemy to literal Commands will you make void literal commands to set up your own inventions or do you envy against them because they overturn your practises You say They may do well to give you Commands for many of their practises As first what express command they have to deny the Moral Law to be a rule of life Answ They deny not the Moral Law to be a rule of life to believers in its essence but they deny it to be a rule of life as an administration in the hands of Moses But Christ having taken it into his own hands and fulfilled the righteousness of it he gives it anew unto them and it ceaseth to be any more the Law of Moses but is the Law of Christ this is cleared abundantly 1 Joh. 2. 7 8. First It is no new Commandment but the old Yet secondly It is a new Commandment which is true in him and in us because the darkness is past and the true light now shineth So that notwithstanding it is the substance of the old yet it is new because in Christ and from him to us and in us If this will not satisfie see 1 Cor. 3. 11. compared with 1 John 2. 7 8. 2. You Querie What express command against the coercive power of the Magistrate I suppose you mean in the things of Jesus Christ 1. I suppose if Magistrates command any thing contrary to the mind of Christ we are not to obey they have nothing to do to make use of their coercive power there if they do they sin and all men are commanded not to sin That it is a sin is clear That which contradicts the command of God is sin Which shall we obey God or man judge ye Acts 4 19. There was the command of God and the command of man in opposition each to other and there the command of man was sinfull 2. Jesus Christ is King of his Church Rev. 15. 3. and it s his work to make use of a coercive power to bring in souls to his Kingdom Psal 110. 4 In the day of his power his people shall be a willing people and unless you can produce any Scripture in which Christ hath resigned his power to the Magistrate I suppose he is still King of his Church and those who make use of a coercive power in his Kingdom are at best but Usurpers 3. Christ hath entrusted and impowered none but his Ministers with that work of gathering souls into his Kingdom and this they are to do in his power in his authority and in his way And those who pretend themselves to be the Ministers of Christ yet want the coercive power of the Magistrate declare themselves to be none of his not serving the Lord Jesus but their own bellies c. 4. There is the substance of an express command Rom 14. 4. Who art thou that judgest another mans servant to his own master he standeth or falleth c. And Jam. 4. 12. There is one Law giver who is able to save and to destroy who art thou that judgest another It s clear that none have power to judge and determine coercively but he that hath a power to save and destroy And the Reason is drawn from ver 11. that none hath power to judge of the Law and give sentence but he that is above the Law and if any will go about to judge others by a coercive power they are not doers of the Law but Judges This is meant only in Cases of Conscience relating to Jesus Christ not but that Magistrates may and ought to take cognizance of Civil things and sinfull actions flowing from the corruptions of men but matters Spiritual and Divine tending to Worship there it s the prerogative of God alone to judge 3. You querie What command we have to separate from the Churches which hold the foundation pure I answer None at all that I know neither do we separate from any such Churches but from Babylon and Egypt which hath been and is a cage of every unclean and hatefull birds not true or pure either in its Constitutions Members Ministery or Ordinances and we have a Command for what we do See and well consider 2 Tim. 3. from the first ver to the fift and Rev. 18 4. 4. You querie What command we have for Rebaptizing Ans I know no such thing as rebaptizing there is a command for baptizing believers and that which you call baptizing viz. sprinkling the faces of your Infants we take no knowledge of it you rantize them and say you baptize them so speak an untruth So that the just judgment of God is upon you that having changed the Subject from a Believer to an Infant you must change the very Ordinance it self from baptizing to rantizing from dipping to sprinkling So that you are wholly besides and have not the least ground to say we rebaptize for we baptize those you have rantized before it may be Thus have I endeavoured to giue you a brief account of things you desired and so I pass to your Sixth Argument p. 35. From Act. 2. 38 39. your Argument is To whomsoever the promise of grace belongs to them Baptism belongs But the promise of grace belongs to believers and their children Ergo Baptism belongs to them both This is but the same you have said before your Arguments being six in number are but two in substance Yet I shall see what you say to the business for your Minor is denied yet you are pleased to say p. 36. in confirmation of your Minor That the Minor flows from the Text the Parents believing and repenting he expresly commands them to be baptized both believers and their children Oh unheard of falshood is there ever such a word in the Text as and their Children He saith Repent and be baptized every one of you that is every one of you that are pricked in your hearts You
children had the spirit in their infancy John Baptist had faith in the womb the Scripture saith it not its only Thomas Hall's words Jeremiah sanctified from the womb c. and what of all this its not one swallow makes a Summer because John and Jeremiah were sanctified that is set apart from the womb to their particular offices therefore all Infants are sanctified a goodly conclusion because Balaams Asse did speak therefore all Asses may speak a likely matter You say The Promise is that in the Gospel times the childe shall die an hundred year old c. Isa 65 20. that is say you They shall be blest with spiritual life and light from Christ as if they had lived an hundred years in the Church of God when that relates to a spiritual glory in the Church of Christ which is yet to come not of the Natural but of the Spiritual Seed when they shall be freed from the former weakness and temptation this Scripture Answers Rev. 21. 1 2 3. 2 Pet. 3. 13. And whereas you say though Infants cannot lay hold on Christ yet he can lay hold on them We question not Christs laying hold on them but we are not to baptize them till they lay hold on Christ Pag. 49. you say Infants have faith repentance regeneration and before you confess they are children of wrath alike the children of wrath as heathens are pag. 10. yet now faith repentance regeneration unheard of contradictions If your preaching brethren had written such palpable contradictions you would have concluded that it had been either for want of learning or through much forgetfulness but you mend the business well you think It is virtually and potentially by way of inclination c. They have the spirit and seed of faith c. The truth of this appears apparently in Infants when they are grown doth the seed of faith appear or the seed of corruption Come forth O all ye that have any experience of the grace of Iesus and work of faith with power speak you knowledge in this particular whether there be in Infants an inclination and the seed of faith or whether there be not rather an inclination to every thing that is evil and the power of corruption remaining in them Be ashamed and blush to utter such known untruths and unheard of contradictions Children of wrath yet the seed of faith inclinations to believe I say no more but leave this Argument likewise to the wise consideration of the Reader The eleventh Argument That way which doth confound the two Sacraments and take away the distinction which God hath put between them cannot be the way of God But the way of the Anabaptists doth confound the two Sacraments and takes away that distinction which God hath put between them Ergo T is not the way of God Answ There is no truth in your Minor for first where is the Scripture that saith baptism is only for Initiation and not for Confirmation it s a fancy of your own brain may not baptism be be initiation and confirmation too 2. If it be truth what you say that Baptism is only for initiation into the Church what is become of your Mr. Baxters grand Argument That they are members of the Church then not initiated in by baptism one of your Arguments must of necessity be false I say both of them as relating to Infants 3. It was the Apostles practice to baptize believers and give them the Supper too and did they confound the two Sacraments as you call them bear with me for I know no Scripture cals them so So that the way of the Anabaptists as you falsely reproachfully call them doth not confound the Ordinances but preserve them in their place to the right end according to the right rule and you it is confound Ordinances observing neither rule place nor end The twelfth Argument Such as were typically baptized under the Law may be really baptized under the Gospel Infants were typically baptized under the Law Ergo. You reason from the type to the truth In this take a view likewise of your own ignorance in not understanding the difference between type and antitype type and substance type and truth and shew me if you can any one type in all the Scripture that typed out another type you may as well say that the Jewish Sacrifices typed out the Gospel Supper c. But all types related to substances and Christ was the substance of all legal types this truth will be clear in the resolving of these questions 1. If Christ be the substance of all types whether or no the baptizing of the natural seed in the type do not represent unto us the baptizing of the spirituall seed into the substance 1 Cor. 12. 13. Gal. 3. 27. 2. Whether or no as all the natural feed were baptized into Moses and into the sea and cloud so all the spiritual seed should be baptized into the profession of faith of Jesus Mat. 28. 19. Act. 19. 3. Whether to make the substance no other then the type the Covenant of the Gospel no other then that of the Law the seed of the Gospel-Covenant the same as the Legal the administration of Gospel-ordinance on the same subjects as of the Legal notwithstanding Christ hath given cleer rules to the contrary be not to make null the Gospel and to deny Christ to be come in the flesh and so to be the Antichrist Gal. 5. 2. Mat. 28. 20. Act. 3. 22. 1 Joh. 4. 2. 3. In a word if you will make this type the ground of your baptizing Infants first then you do not hearken to Christ the substance but honour him in the type deny him in his person and spirit secondly you are to baptize them as they were in the type viz. in the cloud and in the sea What is that to your sprinkling of Infants Thirdly you may from hence if that be your warrant from whence you ground your practise baptize your Cattel too for all passed through the sea and indeed not to be a pattern to you that you might hence take occasion to sprinkle Infants so denying Christ but a type of Christ the Saviour and Deliverer of his people that as the natural seed were saved in the type so the spiritual were and are saved in the substance viz. in Christ All you say to this Argument being thus untruly grounded is but a non sequitur and so I leave it The thirteenth Argument From the priviledges that Christ purchased for Infants Those who are subjects of Christs kingdom have right to the priviledges of subjects But some Infants are subjects of Christs kingdom Ergo Some Infants have right to the priviledges of Subjects You say The seal of the Covenant is a choise priviledge I have often said and say again that Baptism is no seal of the Covenant but the Spirit To your second Argument I say there is no truth in your Major for there is not a word of Baptizing in the Text and
therefore no ground to receive them to Baptism though Christ received them and blessed them I shall answer the Scripture more at large by and by As to the third Those that Christ invites the Church may not refuse Where doth Christ invite Infants Those Infants are gone long since He saith Suffer the Infants not all Infants 2. The Church are to receive those Christ hath given rule and command to receive viz. Believers Christ may receive some Infants because he knows them The Church doth not know them therefore the Church may not receive them 4. You say They that are capable of the Kingdom and Blessing which is the greater are much more capable of Baptism which is the lesser But Infants are capable of the greater Ergo. Ans Some Infants by vertue of Election may be capable of the greater yet not capable of the lesser 1. Because not capable to understand the lesser 2. Because we are not capable to understand and know them 3. Because there is no command for it for that is it we are to walk by and that capacity in which we are to judge 5. You say If the Kingdom of heaven receive them the Church may not exclude them Ans The Kingdom of heaven of glory receives none but the elect of God the Church doth not know them therefore the Church cannot receive them c. Now to your Scripture Mar. 10. 14. Suffer the little Children and forbid them not Note he saith not suffer little children but suffer the little children not all little children but the little ones that is those that were then brought unto him You draw a Conclusion from hence to have all p. 3 4 5. It 's evident in that that he would have them to come to him that so he might take an occasion to discover a Gospel-mysterie viz. That of such is the Kingdom of Heaven that is so qualified spiritually as they were naturally meek humble teachable helpless c. This is cleer compared with v. 15. Verily I say unto you whosoever doth not receive the kingdom of heaven as a little child he shall not enter therein that is as I said before so qualified spiritually as little children are naturally Hence 1 Pet. 2. 2. As new born babes desire the sincere milk of the word c. that is not as new-born babes desire the sincere milk of the word but as new born babes desire the milk of the breast so do you desire the milk of the word Mat. 18. 2 3 4. cleers the whole Except a man be converted and become as a little child he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven So that the substance of the whole in every Scripture mentioned by you to this purpose directly presents us with the same truth viz. the humble child like qualifications of his servants and not to fill up the Church with Infants contrary to Christs command and the practise of all his servants which is to be our alone rule and president In a word the Scriptures produced for proof of your Arguments have not a word of baptism in them nor the least hint that way and for you to draw consequences from such grounds especially those consequences overturning precepts and presidents is very dangerous and unsafe and that which we are bound in duty and conscience to renounce Christ knew what he had to do and hath left us a rule for what we should do he that forsakes this rule and will not hear Christ is to be cut off from amongst his people Acts 3. 22 23. They that will draw conclusions into practise from what Christ did contradicting what he hath commanded will be found enemies not permitting Christ to reign over them and what the danger will be of such conclusions see Luke 19. 27. The summe of all is this that although Christ knows the Elect Infants and receives them yet we do not know them it 's Gods secret and we are to walk by revealed rules and are to receive none before the manifestation of faith Mar. 16. 16. Act. 8. 37. and it 's evident the Church did receive none but such Act. 2. 41 42. The Apostle in his Epistles writing to the Churches cals them Saints not Infants 1 Cor. 1 2. 2 Cor. 1. 1. 1 Cor. 14. 23. If the whole Church be come together into some place and all speak with tongues the unlearned will say ye are mad but if all prophesie c. Where note the whole Church meets together and they may being thus assembled all prophesie and were here Infants think you They might all prophesie none excepted that had the gift but women And 1 Cor. 12. 27. The Church is the body of Christ and members in particular and this body is made up of many members v. 28 29 30. and Infants are none of them Apostles Prophets Teachers gifts of healing helps in government miracles interpreters c. There is never a true member in the Church of Christ but hath some one or other of these gifts more or less here are no Infants see v. 13 14 15 16 17. The fourteenth Argument From Rom. 12. 26. you say but I say 11. 16. If the first-fruit be holy the lump is also holy and if the root be holy so are the branches The sum of all you say is That by the root and first fruit is meant Abraham Isaac and Jacob. p. 62. If it appear that there is no truth in this assertion then your Argument fals to the ground But there is no truth in this assertion Ergo. I shall make it appear 1. In the Covenant made with Abraham his posterity stood not by faith but outward observation Circumcision keeping the Law If thou be willing and obedient thou shalt eat the good of the Land if thou be disobedient thou shalt be destroyed with the sword Isa 1. 19 20. But when Christ the true root Isa 11. 10. Rom. 15. 12. Rev. 5. 5. 22. 6. and first-fruits 1 Cor. 15. 20 23. was come they not believing were broken off because not by faith graffed upon the true root For when Christ the true spiritual seed was come the natural seed and membership was broken off and only that of saith was graffed in That as the natural seed stood members upon the account of the first Covenant and promise made with Abraham so the spiritual seed viz. the seed of faith Christ being come and is the substance of that Covenant they are ingraffed into that root he being holy they are also holy according to the words of Christ Joh. 15. 1 2. 2. That this is the truth intended will more cleerly appear if you consider v. 18. Boast not against the branches i e. against the branches broken off for thou bearest not the root but the root thee Now Thomas Hall what root is it that bears the believing branches Natural parents or Christ the true root Is not he the foundation upon which they are built and the true root and stock into which they are
make profession of his faith c. Ans 1. VVhen you have produced any Scripture that requires Infants of Believers to be baptized then shall I shew you a Scripture where they kept them back till they professed faith 2. There being no command for the practise of baptizing Infants there needs no record for the keeping them from it it s enough that there is neither precept nor president for the doing of it that was enough to them and should be to us 3. The not doing of a thing is no part of worship all worship consists in doing or suffering the will of God and suffering is a doing the will of God too in both of which the renewed mind is active as well as the body is in the one active in the other passive Heb. 10. 36. But the refusing to baptize Infants is no part of worship therefore cannot possibly be will-worship If baptism of Infants were a command of Christ as you say though never proved yet to neglect it is no more will-worship then to neglect prayer praising or the like is will-worship it s no worship not will-worship Thus have I briefly minded you of the simplicity and nonsense of your Argument in every particular and proceed to your Nineteenth Argument From the blessing of God upon the Churches that have practised Infant-Baptism Ans 1. If you mind by the blessing outward prosperity I suppose the Church of Rome whom you condemn for heretical in your separating from her hath had as great a share and the longest standing of any Church or State in the world And that is no trial of the truth of a Church outward prosperity and long continuance for the Churches of Christ in the Primitive times were and yet are under persecution reproach and contempt but little prosperity in the world Joh. 16. ult 2. If you mind as you seem to intimate Because so many bless God for their Infant-Baptism Answ 1. So did many bless God for Episcopal Government yet at last the very same blessed God for the fall of it 2. I suppose as many upright souls now are blessing God for his discovery of the vanity of it 3. It s not mens blessing God for things that proves the truth of these things but the approbation of him who is Truth it self 4. If you mind because those you falsly call Anabaptists have been condemned persecuted and afflicted as you intimate and the others justified upheld c. Answ 1. It s the likelier to be truth for that hath alwayes passed under reproach and contempt as for affliction Job suffered much the loss of all will you judge Job for his afflictions and justifie his wicked enemies yea and the Devil too that afflicted him for shame learn more civility then to reason thus did you never hear of Iobs losses was it because he was an Anabaptist think you or was it because God gave Satan liberty to try him for his good and may not God give Satan the same liberty to try his own servants and it may be to prove the Devil a lyar as he did in the trial of Iob have you never heard of great part of Cities Towns and Houses burnt and was it because they were Anabaptists think you As for your vile and rayling expressions I pass it by and leave it to the righteous Judge who will do right both to his servants and his enemies The twentieth Argument From the principles and practise of all reformed Churches That which is condemned by all the Churches of God and is contrary both to their principles and practise is unlawful But Anabaptism is condemned by all the Churches of God and is contrary both to their principles and practise Ergo. Answ Your Major is granted viz. That that which is condemned by the principles and practises of the Churches in Scripture and all those reformed or rather gathered upon the same principles and practises is unlawfull Your Minor is denyed for baptizing of believers hath been and is the principle and practise of the Churches of Christ whereas you produce 1 Cor. 11. 16. We have no such custome nor the Churches of Christ I say there was no such custome as the baptizing of Infants in the Churches of Christ and for those you call reformed Churches the most of them if not all brought their baptism of Infants from their mother Church of Rome So then it is not the practise of the Church of Rome or of her members that are rent from her that we look unto but the Scripture the word of truth which should be both their and our rule and when Churches or persons contradict that let them be Anathema Maranatha And whereas you are pleased as you pretend in confirmation of what you have asserted in this Argument to arraign the prisoner at the Bar so producing your reformed Churches and Divines so judging the servants of the Lord for their following of him and obedience to him Be assured you will one day know what you have done When the Lord Iesus shall appear to render vengeance to those who know him not neither obey his Gospel but to be admired in all those who believe and follow him 2 Thes 1. 8. When he will judge his enemies for all their hard words spoken against him Jude 5. and notwithstanding you can make so bold now to arraign the prisoner at the bar viz the servants of the Lord for their professing and practise of the truth yet the Lord will deliver them in his time and they shall judge their Judges And bind their Kings in Chains and their Nobles in fetters of Iron this honour shall all the Saints have praise ye Iehovah Psal 149. Although I could yet I shall in this trace you no farther but leave you to the Judgement of him who will judge righteous Judgement between us in the end referring those who desire to see more as to this particular to my book entituled The Pulpit Guard Routed So much briefly in way of answer to your Font Guarded with twenty Arguments Now I should proceed to the discovery of the weakness of your Answers to the Scruples Scripture-Objections and Answers mentioned by you in your Book in defence as you call it of Anabaptism But that first there are some Arguments not made use of that I know but are rather your own inventions And secondly because the summe of all you say hath been answered and confuted in what is written in answer to your Arguments and it would be indeed but a tautologie as you have very many in your Book and upon that account I have been necessitated to make use of many that so I might give some answer to you I shall therefore refer the Reader for satisfaction to what you say in this which follows to what I have written in answer to that which precedes that which succeeds being but the substance of that which is gone before only the second and last I shall say something unto The second Objection pag. 88. of your
it to Infants because of their health Answ First is not this Country hot enough to Dip they had winter who dipped as well as we but no wonder if it be dangerous to the health of Infants let it be administred to the right Subjects viz. Believers and you need not doubt of dipping Whereas you question it for sick and old folks pag. 115. I say there is no such necessity to Baptize such in Winter God will have mercy and not sacrifice let them stay till Summer but take heed change not the Ordinance from Dipping to Sprinkling that is a dangerous thing But you confess pag. 114. That dipping is a lawfull manner of Baptizing in this you have confuted all you have said to this particular either before or after For if dipping be a lawfull manner of Baptizing then first sprinkling is unlawfull for there is but one lawfull way of baptizing the Scripture I am sure mentions no more there is but one Baptism 2. Then our dipping is lawfull 3. You have done ill service in all you have said to render a practise so contemptible which is as you confess in it self lawfull 1. You say The Scripture cals sprinkling baptizing Ans No such thing Let any examine the Scriptures you produce see if you speak true or false Heb. 9. 10 13 19 21. You say the word signifieth washing as well as dipping Ans Granted but sprinkling is neither washing nor dipping 2. In Circumcision a little skin in one part only was cut off An. That was done according to the command so should Baptism which is a dipping as you confess and we may not make our selves wiser then Christ in inventing new wayes that he never required therein we do indeed shew our pride and are but fools 3. Washing sprinkling is a safer way c. Ans 1. Sprinkling is not washing but dipping is 2. As to safety in doubtfull cases I have answered already 4. Sprinkling is sufficient because the thing signified is set forth by sprinkling c. Ans There is no such thing for though the blood of Christ be one thing signified in Baptism yet there are other things signified in it and yet sprinkling doth not reach this of the applying the blood of Christ so fully as dipping which is a washing of the whole man representing that as truly as the whole body is washed by dipping in water so those who are baptized upon the true account shal be wholly washed from not only the guilt of sin but from the filth and presence of it Which shall be my 3. ground that dipping and not sprinkling is the true Baptism 3. Because the things signified are not so significantly resembled in sprinkling as they are in baptizing viz. in dipping 1. As I have already said the whole washing away of sin 2. An outward conformity to Christ in his death burial and resurrection wherein is represented our spiritual death to sin and resurrection to newness of life Rom. 6. 3 4 5. and this is not cannot be resembled by sprinkling And notwithstanding you are pleased in way of reproach to say Then they must drown themselves under water as Christ lay buried three dayes c. Note here you say they must lie three dayes under water yet before you confess dipping is a lawful way of baptizing You say Should you grant a necessity of this resemblance and representation yet why may not sprinkling represent it as well c Ans 1. I leave it to all rational men to judge whether sprinkling a little water in the face doth represent a death and burial with Christ as well as a dipping into and under water 2. I shall give you the Judgment of one approved and learned Mr. Tho. Goodwin in his Support of faith from Christs resurrection ch 7. p. 54. He saith Rom. 6. 3 4. We are said to be buried with him in baptism Col. 2. 12. Buried with him in baptism It is not simply said Like as he was buried c. but Buried with him So our communion and oneness with him in his resurrection is represented to us therein and not only our conformity or likeness unto him therein And so Baptism representeth this to us that Christ having once in himself sustained the persons of all the elect in his burial and resurrection that now upon the party himself is personally particularly and apparently reacted the same part again in his baptism thereby shewing what his communion with Christ before was in what was done to Christ that he then was buried with Christ and rose with him and upon that ground is now in this outward sign of Baptism as in a shew or representation both buried and also riseth again Thus far Tho. Goodwin You say If dipping be true baptizing which you have already granted that dipping is lawfull baptizing yet here you put an if to it as if you had forgotten what you had said before but it 's no wonder for it is usual with you then some that have been dipt by Popish Priests have been rightly baptized Ans We deny it for though you have lost the right way of doing it as well as the subject yet we do not say that those Infants that are dipt are rightly baptized because you fail in the right subject viz. Believers Only we cannot but take notice of the just hand of God in it against you that having transgressed in taking Infants in stead of Believers you should change the very thing and do another thing in stead of baptism viz sprinkle that so you might have the less to say in your own cause Thus have you fulfilled that word Isa 24. 5. Transgressed the Law changed the Ordinances broken the everlasting Covenant applying it to the natural seed when it belongs to none but the spiritual How you will avoid that curse I know not You say It is the custome and practise of all Reformed Churches to baptize by sprinkling c. Ans What of that if it contradict Scripture which is the rule of Saints You have confessed that dipping is a lawful baptizing and there is but one lawful baptizing therefore we must do that which is lawfull though all people in the world do contrary The 4. ground why sprinkling is not baptizing is from the custom retained from the Primitive times as it is probable And give me leave in this to conclude thus much that I may much safer conclude this it being so agreeable with the analogie of Scripture then you can take up the whole practise upon that account I say Dipping in all Ages hath been the practise whether Believers or Infants The History I mentioned before of Joannes Boemus in the Manners and Customs of all Nations p. 159. Infants were dipped in the holy Font. In Simpsons History of the Church in the fourth Councel of Toledo it was ordered that there should be but one dipping in baptism p. 527. An 639. And the Church of Rome from whence you came retains by tradition Dipping and Sprinkling is
Not against the Ministry of Christ but of the World and of Antichrist 14. He reproacheth the Army making them all Independents and Anabaptists Ans It s a great untruth to say I make them all so that I say is that those whom you falsely call Anabaptists and Independents are the Instruments by which God hath given a being to you and the Nation I deny not what was done by any at first but I know not how it would have been at last if God had not raised up the Spirits of some to stand in the gap and your selves had like to have been the great Instruments for self-ends to have drawn on ruine had not the Lord prevenced 15. He dishonoureth and abuseth the present Power by Dedication of an absurd Heretical Blasphemous non-Licensed Pamphlet called a Discourse at Axbridge Answ I do affirm that none dare give such vile titles to such apparent truths but those whose eyes are blinded and whose hearts are hardned filled with all enmity against the truth of Jesus Christ I refer those who desire further satisfaction to the discourse it self And truly we had need appeal to the Authority of the Nation for a civill preservation it being our Birthright there being so many of your generation men of blood that will say nay swear blasphemy Heresie any thing that so you might be rid of us Finally I say no more to all your perverse and raging accusations but the Lord rebuke thee Some few Queries presented 1. Query Whether or no in all that Tho. Hall hath said he hath in any case answered the Pulpit-Guard-Routed or relieved his own Guard 2. Qu. Whether or no all that Tho. Hall hath said in his Font-Guard doth amount to so much as either a Precept or President for his Practise 3. Whether or no if not his Practise in sprinkling Infants be not Will-Worship 4. Whether the upholding of an outward Covenant and a natural Seed in that Covenant be not to deny Christ to be come in the flesh 5. Whether or no there be any Seed in the days of the Gospel accounted for the Seed but the Spiritual all the Promises made to Abraham being dissolved into Christ coming forth from him to the Spiritual Seed none being accounted the children of Abraham but those that do the works of Abraham 6. Whether or no Tho. Hall tells true or false when he saith he will prove Tho. Collier of above a thousand lyes and can name but fifteen upon his own account 7. Whether or no in those fifteen he mentions being rightly considered as before Tho. Hall be the lyar or Tho. Collier 8. Whether Tho. Hall have spoken true or false in these things following 1. In asserting that none ought to preach the Gospel but men in Office 2. In saying there is both precept and president for Baptizing Infants when he can produce neither 3. In saying that the Covenant of the Law is the same as the Covenant in the Gospel when the Scripture saith the contrary Isa 31. 31. Heb. 8. 4. In saying that baptizing Infants is a tradition from the Apostles when he cannot prove the Apostles baptized any 5. In saying that sprinkling is baptizing when they are two things 6. Whether the bringing in of all the People into an outward Covenant and form of Godliness without the power be not the way of delusion and confusion 7. Then whether the Leaders of the People do not cause them to erre A Word of REPLY to Iohn Ferriby in an Appendix to The Lawfull Preacher called The Pulpit-Guard-Relieved SIR You call your Appendix The Pulpit-Guard Relieved But whether it be A Relief in good earnest I leave to the Reader to judge If chiding railing and reproaching be A Relief then you have Relieved it else not And notwithstanding your great swelling words you 'l find there is so much in that Pulpit-Rout that neither you nor all your Gang will ever be able to extinguish it Rage you may but ruin it you cannot You say Page 2. That he is so bitter in his Expressions against the Gentleman so loud in railing against the Coat that he deserves no Answer But you are mistaken Sir they are not railings but true discoveries of Wolves in Sheeps cloathing But you say You forbear lest in this the Proverb should be verified Like to like quoth the Devil to the Collier And who is worst think you the Devil or the Collier By your own confession you are the Devil I the Collier The Devil it is it seems speaks to the Collier and surely if the Collier did the Devils work he would never reprove him for it But if the Collier do the work of Christ the Devil will fall upon him You say You will not meddle with the Looking-glass nor will you examine the Tryal and Verdict nor take notice of the strength of his Arguments I wonder what then you will do here 's like to be a goodly Relief anon A Pulpit Relief yet take no notice of the force of the Truth that lieth against it It 's just like to a company of men that will pretend they relieve a besieged Garison yet take no notice of the Besiegers or will stand at a distance and give great words and so go away boasting that the Work is done and the mean time the Besieged perish Thus have you dealt with your Pulpit-Guard And truly had not I had other occasions to write I had never troubled my head or pen to have given you a word of Answer And in this I shall give you but a word or two Thus having shifted your self from the substance of what is said in The Pulpit Guard-Rout you pretend to give a Glympse of his skill in the interpretation of Scripture The First is that of the Priests of the Law and the Ministers of the Gospel The Priesthood under the Law typed out Christ and he is the alone Priest by office I deny not Ministers by office under the Gospel but that Ministry that is of Christ never forbiddeth the preaching of the Brethren who have received the Gift though they never meddle with the office but rather encourageth to it 1. Pet 4. 10 11. And it is a truth that Corah's guilt was in doing that which was forbidden but the Saints are Commanded to and Commended for preaching Commanded to it Rom. 12. 3 6. 1 Cor. 14 31. 1 Pet. 4. 10. Commended for it 1 Cor. 11. 2. One Ordinance or Tradition and that not the least too was that they might nay that they ought to bring their gifts to the Church for the good of the whole There are diversities of gifts in the Church and all for the good of the whole 1 Cor. 12. And this Monopolizing spirit that hath so long reigned in those who call themselves Ministers hath been the cause of so much blindness in the World as hath been almost to this day And as for the Calling of the Worldly Ministry I leave the Reader to what is wrtten in The Pulpit-Guard Routed
as any president for it you would feign presidents for sprinkling of Infants if you could but you endeavour to overturn Presidents of preaching Brethren that they should not be usefull to us let the people judge of what Spirit you are of And the reason I judge is this your own standing depends so positively upon it that unless you can uphold the one and suppress the other you are like to fall together Observ 4. That in my pleading for a general liberty of Preaching in a constituted Church I do not inform how far I extend it Whether it be with the consent of the Pastor and people or whether he may Preach whether they will or no Answ I leave the truth of this likewise to the Reader to judge whether it be not often asserted in my Book pag 29. The Churches freedom or desire is Call enough if the party be gifted to it all lawfull Calls to Preach either within or without are sutable to the Gift pag. 30. The Church hath power to Call forth a gifted Brother to do service for the Church and in the Postscript at the end it is thus written In what I have written I intend that only Brethren that have Gifts may exercise them in an orderly way that is with the desire or consent of the Church as any man might easily understand so there is no truth in your observation Obser 5. That in most of his Answers he doth not reply to the Scripture reason alledged against him but declining that as a little too hard for him That I leave to the Reader to judge whether I have declined a positive Answer to all both the Arguments and Scriptures and who hath declined the Argument and Scriptures most I in my Answers to Tho. Hall or Rich. Sanders in his answer to mine So you come you say to open several Scriptures from giving any countenance to that Babel and the two first that you will speak to is Act 8. 4. and Act 9. 20 but in this you will ohserve two Rules 1. That in weighty things of God a Christian must have a certain Rule or warrant for his practise c. I like it well and if you held firm to this truth you must deny all your own practise 2. That Arguments drawn from examples in Scripture are of credit according to the credit of the persons whose examples they are c. This I own for truth likewise But you say Those examples are of men not infallible c. How prove you that dare you question it and doth not the Scripture say the hand of the Lord was with them yet dare you question the spirit by which they were guided Acts 11. 21. All the rest you say to this is nothing at all therefore I say no more but refer the Reader to what is at large answered in the Pulpit-Guard Routed as for the second Scripture Act. 9. 20. you confess That he Preached before he was solemnly set apart to be an Apostle to the Gentiles 2. You say he was sent by an immediate voice to Ananias that he should tell him what he should do but Ananias did not bid him preach but arise and be baptized c. You minde what you have from Sauls own mouth ch 22. 14. Ananias saith to him Thou shalt be a witness to all men of what thou hast seen and heard ver 15. This was no setting of him apart to the Office he told him that he should be a witness c. but did not Ordain him unto it and upon your account Saul should have been silent till he had been ordained but he was not as before and Act. 26. 16 17 18. Gods immediate sending him was nor the outward Office as you pretend You say the other Scripture he often urges and why not having often occasion 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. Rom. 12. 6. 7. These you say are far fetcht consequences Answ They are no consequences man but plain Scripture Precepts Christians must administer their gifts therefore they must be publick Preachers c. Why not publick do the Scriptures make a difference And what you say further to these Scriptures hath been answered already therefore I say no more The ntxt Scripture is Psal 145. 10 11. All you say to this is very learnedly As though this hath any relation to publick preaching when he saith they shall make known to the sons of men his mighty Acts and the glorious Majesty of his Kingdom but this you have left out you durst not put it in your Book lest the Reader should see your folly The next Scripture is 1 Cor 14. 31. This you pretend to prove was extraordinary Prophesie and not ordinary as the Pulpit-Guard Routed sayes And you say That your great work shall be to prove that prophecy 1 Cor. 14. 31. was extraordinary and not ordinary as the Pulpit-Guard-Routed sayes 1. You say You read p. 60. that the reason why prophesie was extraordinary in the Law and this ordinary 1 Cor. 14. 3. is because its a speaking to edification exhortation and comfort c. The substance of what you seem to answer to this is 1. Because such as were prophets did speak to edification therefore those who speak to edification are prophets In this you say is some Sophistry c. But give me leave to shew your Sophistry and that first in pretending an Answer when t is nothing to the purpose the end of my using these words was to present the Reader with the difference between the Prophesie of the Old Testament which was to foretell things to come and this of the New this 1 Cor. 14. is an ordinary way of prophesie for the building up of the Church that so all may be instructed and all may be comforted 2. I answer that those Saints that can speak to edification c. are prophets nay all the Lords People are prophets therefore your Sophistry nor yet your Logick will not hold for though the ground may be wet without rain yet it is not often wet without water and if a Saint a Member of the Church can speak to edification exhortation and consolation he is a Prophet if he have the Testimony of Jesus he hath the Spirit of Prophesie 2. You say The Prophets under the Law spake to edification I answer There is none questions that but that their prophesyings had that end in it and it s so to us at this day when we come to understand them but the prophesying mentioned 1 Cor. 14. was a common and ordinary prophesying in the Church for the edification of the Body That in the Law was a foretelling of things to come and therefore written to be kept on Record to posterity this not written because ordinary and as Thomas Hall confesseth it was such a prophesie as in it they might err c. So that I say again they under the Law took not their denomination from this kind of prophesying viz. an ordinary speaking to build up souls in the present knowledge
and Prophesying are put together 1 Cor. 11. 5. Was it extraordinary praying too You answer You will put in that too for his Learning 1 Cor. 14. 14 15. If I pray in an unknown Tongue c. Is not here extraordinary praying Doth the Scripture call it extraordinary anywhere and may we not say truly as the Apostle saith of Prophesie greater is he that prophecieth then he that speaketh with tongues and the reason is because he speaketh to edification so say I greater was and is he that prayeth in a known tongue then he that prayeth in an unknown tongue and the Apostle upon the same account disswades them as well from praying or praising in an unknown tongue as from speaking in an unknown tongue and if that prayer had been extraordinary surely he would not have perswaded them from it for I think that prayer is most extraordinary that is most prevailing with God and that is the prayer of Faith not of an unknown tongue You now come to give your Reasons why this Prophesie is extraordinary 1. Because it is joyned with extraordinary gifts 1 Cor. 14. viz. The gift of Tongues Ans 1. Those gifts as hath been already shewed were not so extraordinary as you pretend For greater was be that prophesied then he that spake with tongues But 2. Were what you say truth that that Prophesy in this Chapter were intermixed with extraordinary gifts as that of tongues for which you say its unlikely that Prophesy should be ordinary I say were what you say in the first place truth yet the second doth not follow For in Scripture its ordinary to place or intermix those gifts or offices which you call ordinary and extraordinary together And I wonder you had not so much in you as to see it That might have saved you the labour of setting down this Reason See 1. Cor 12 29. Are all Apostles are all Prophets are all Teachers are all Workers of Miracles c You affirm Apostles Prophets Miracles are extraordinary and Teachers placed in the midst to be ordinary or by way of ordinary office So Rom 12. v. 6 7 8. v. 6. he speaks of Prophesy You say that it is extraordinary yet it s joyned in with that you call ordinary Teaching and exhortation v. 7 8. you parallel with it for your proof Ephes 4. 11. which Scripture makes as much against you as any I know when rightly understood For 1. these are not extraordinary offices as is discoursed at large in the Pulpit-Guard Routed But the ordinary standing gifts and offices in the Church of Christ And Secondly if otherwise upon your own account Apostles Prophets Evangelists which you say are extraordinary are reckoned up with Pastors and Teachers which you say are ordinary and continuing offices in the Church of Christ And 3. I wonder how you dare to divide and with Tho. Hall to pick out what you please and to call one ordinary and another extraordinary when the Scripture presents them all as standing in the Church upon the same account gifts given forth by the Spirit from Christ to the Church And you would take some and leave others so rob the Church of Christ of those gifts orders Priviledges and Officers that Christ hath given to it but no wonder for you own neither Church Ordinances Gifts or Officers according to the mind of Christ but what you have received by Tradition from Antichrist You say that he sayth Apostles are not extraordinary and as for Evangelists he hath nothing to say of them c. Truly had you not been blind or forgetfull there is enough said of them It seems I must say it again Pag. 70. An Evangelist is not an extraordinary but an ordinary work a cryer or publisher of glad tydings which is proper to all the servants of the Lord that preach glad tydings to men and as for Apostles they are not extraordinary but ordinary I say it again and I wonder you durst to oppose so clear a truth those who are sent of God to preach the Gospel for converting souls and gathering Churches are Apostles viz. sent ones and the Twelve Apostles did not take their denomination from their extraordinary gifts of the Spirit but from their mission from Christ to do his work so that notwithstanding none are so sent as those Apostles were 1. immediately or by an immediate mission from his own mouth 2. So immediately inspired and abilitated from above nor 3. to do the same work in every particular though the same in substance viz. to be the first Planters of the Gospel to establish it by signs and miracles c. Yet there is the same in truth and men sent for the gathering of Churches are as truly Apostles as they were as the sons of God are as truly the sons of God as Christ himself though not filled with the same fullness And that you may see there were more Apostles then those Christ was the great Apostle Heb. 3. 1. and he sent the Twelve and other Apostles it s more then probable there were Rom. 16. 7. the Scripture saith that Andronicus and Junias were of note among the Apostles 1. It s probable that they were Apostles c. else how should they be of note or reckoned among them 2. That there were Apostles there and it could not be of the Twelve For Paul was the only Apostle to the Gentiles and the others of the Circumcision they were of note among the Apostles of or belonging to the Church in Rome But Secondly It s apparent that there are or shall be both Apostles and Prophets at the Fall of Babylon which work I believe is now begun and the Lord hath his sent ones abroad in the World in and by whom he will effect his work who shall rejoyce in the fall of Babylon Rev. 18. 20. Rejoyce over her ye holy Apostles and Prophets for God hath avenged you on her So that notwithstanding all your scuffling shifts you make to help your self and to keep up your honour with the people yet know that God is truth and every man that opposeth him shall be found a lyar and that he hath left these ordinary standing gifts and offices in his Church Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastors Teachers c. And whereas you say that I argue against it p. 70. that those scattered brethren Act. 8. were not Apostles though sent to gather Saints c. That I say is as a blind man may understand that they were none of the twelve Apostles for they tarried at Jerusalem in answer to Tho. Halls assertion that they might be Apostles whereas it is said that the Apostles tarried at Jerusalem but that they were Apostles viz. sent forth by the Lord not in a common way though not of the twelve Apostles The second Reason Because this word Prophet hath been alwayes used to signifie a person extraordinarily inspired of God when taken in a good sense c. Ans 1. Because Prophets were ordinarily taken in this sense
it is of God not a wolf but a sheep not a false but a true Prophet speaking to edification exhortation and consolation they may with comfort hear and approve the speaking of such in the Church Your fourth Argument is If to appoint to the office of a Minister and the work of a Minister be all one then no man is appointed to the work of a Minister but he that is appointed to the office But to appoint to the office of a Minister and the work of a Minister be all one Ergo. Ans Your Minor is denied A man may be appointed to the work of a Minister yet never be appointed to the office For 1. Richard Sanders himself in his own practise shall confute this Logick for he saith That he Preached a long time before he was Ordained c. but he mends the matter It was in order to the Ministry But in case Richard Sanders had died before he had been ordained then Preaching and the Office of the Ministry had not been one there had been a great deal of Preaching without Office So that in this your practise you contradict your reason and you allowed your self in the thing which you condemn 2. Were these Act. 8. 4. appointed to the office they did the work but the office you read not of And those 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. they were commanded to the work but not to the office for then every one must have been officers c. 3. You have given your Argument but never a Scripture to confirm it but you endeavour to confirm one Reason by another without Scripture Take heed Richard of outing Scripture with your Reason be content to fall down under the power of truth let God be true and all fleshes wisdom so far as it opposeth God be a lye You now come to his 7. Error That Humane Learning is no way necessary to the Ministry of the Gospel and that I affirm p. 38. 39. 41. Pulpit-Guard Routed that the power of the Spirit of Christ in Saints is sufficiently able to make them to divide the word aright and to convince gain-sayers And dare you deny this Truth Is not the Spirit of Christ sufficient dare you derogate from the Holy Spirit and do you find any other Ministery or Teacher then the Spirit in the Scripture 1 Cor. 12. Joh. 14. 26. 16. 7 8. But you seem to help this again you deny not the ability of the Spirit but you question the will or if he please to do it I think that needs not be the Question but rather whether you are in the Scripture directed to any other way for the attaining of the minde of God then the Spirit and the Scripture but you question pag. 126. Whether the main and principle Doctrine of the Scriptures be so plainly laid down as that a Christian may attain unto the knowledge of the same without humane Learning you grant that if he have a Translation he may and have not we a Translation in English and is it not true but false then the Translators have done wrong but is it not true in the substance is there any material fundamental mistake if not then an English man in the English Translation may understand the minde of God as much and more if he have a greater measure of the Spirit then an Hebritian and Grecian can understand in those Languages 2. I answer that I do not quarrell against Tongues but at the abuse of them to make an Idol of them I know you may come to the knowledge of the Letter of Scripture in an ordinary way more fully with it then without it but it is the abuse of it that I quarrel at because you set it up in the room of the Spirit as if none could understand Scripture but those that have Tongues then the Faith of all others must be an implicite Faith built upon the credit of men which would prove very weak in the end 3. It s the use of Philosophy in the things of God as some of you affirm that there is a necessity of studying Arts Sciences Logick Rhetorick c. to make them Ministers as Tho. Halls Pulpit Guard make use of your tongues bring forth the truth of the Original to the people help those that want it and make not an Idol of it c. You proceed to produce some Scriptures A good account of which cannot be given without the help of humane Learning Answ In this you shew so much weakness that I would not say a word unto it were it not for one or two of them and I shall say but a word or two 1. Is there any thing material in any of these Scriptures Put case a man knew not the Emphasis of the Original as Rich. Sanders cals it Is any thing laid open by him material or 2. if so it s that which may be easily attained But to the Scriptures the first is Apostolos and what if a man never knew that it signifies Sent why might he not understand as much as your self in it for every man that knows any thing knows that the twelve Apostles and Paul were Apostles and you know no more you do not know that all that are sent of Jesus Christ are Apostles viz. Sent. The second Scripture of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Rock you seem to give a learned interpretation as if Christ intended to build his Church upon Peter so much is clearly hinted in what you say I trace you no farther in this I leave the weight of what you say concerning those Scriptures to the Reader because I am in haste As to that you say concerning Ghost I perceive you know well what the word is in the Greek and what if it were alwayes so translated in English and I think it is one of the greatest wrongs to our English translation the mispronouncing of words in pronouncing Hebrew and Greek instead of English Messias from Mesha instead of Anointed Emmanuel instead of God with us In Greek Christ from Christos instead of anointed Jesus instead of Saviour Apostle instead of Sent Baptize instead of Dip or Wash c. and Ghost instead of Spirit though that 's no Greek word Why do you not reform these things with your learning unless it be done on purpose to keep people in ignorance But you have something farther to say it seems and that very learnedly page 134. and you have much to say to this particular That there is not any Scripture understood by spiritual Christians the grammatical sense of which a man that hath not the Spirit of Christ may attain unto and page 135. That Scripture is sufficient to discover its own sense to all men diligently improving the outward helps afforded by God and that if it be the Spirits work to discover the sense and meaning of Scripture then the Spirits work is to make Notionists c. Answ And is this your spiritualness indeed That a natural man without the Spirit may understand the mind
of God for if he understand the sense and meaning of the Scripture then he understands the mind of God and this is contrary to the Scripture For the natural man doth not understand the things that are of God neither can he understand them 1 Cor. 2. 14 But we have the mind of Christ 2. If this be truth that you affirm then what is the reason that you with all your humane Learning do not yet understand the sense and meaning of the Scripture and that first in common and ordinary things as that the Covenant made with Abraham and Moses c. is not the same as the Gospel-Covenant when the Scripture saith plainly that it is not the same but another Covenant not such a Covenant as the first was but established upon better promises c. What is the reason that you do not understand that Command of Christ that it is Believers that are to be baptized and not Infants and that you understand not that when Christ saith That upon this Rock will I build my Church he means not Peter but the Rock of Peters confession viz. Christ Jesus who is so often in Scripture called The Rock or foundation stone of Sion but Pope-like think it s meant of Peter And are there not many Prophesies and much of the Revelation which is yet a sealed mysterie to you and John saith expresly Rev. 5. that the Scripture viz Christ the mysterie of God in Scripture is a sealed book that none could open it but the Lion of the Tribe of Judah Yet you say that a natural man can do it I leave it to the Reader to judge of the truth of this And 3. Whereas you say if the Spirits work be to teach men the sense of Scripture it is to make them Notionists I answer first then upon your own account your humane Learning doth but make you Notionists for you say that helps you to the knowledge of the sense of Scripture It s no wonder then that you are so far from the power of truth for you confess that with all your learning you are but Notionists at the best and truly you are but bad Notionists neither for there is much of the sense of Scripture that you are not acquainted withall You say Knowledge puffeth up Answ True fleshly knowledge such as you are pleading for but not the true saving knowledge of the Spirit of Christ for the Scripture saith expresly That without knowledge the heart cannot be good and for want of knowledge the people perish And that its life eternal to know God and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent and the more a soul knows of God and Christ of God in Christ the more he comes to abbor himself Isa 6. Act. 9. And whereas you are so much upon this That the Scripture expressions are plain and express their own meaning page 137. Else they cannot be a perfect rule and if men must understand them by or in the light or teaching of the Spirit what were this but to make the Scripture a nose of Wax as the Papists do plyable to any sense c. Answ 1. It s true the Scripture expressions are plain and express their own meaning yet not so plain as you pretend that every one may attain the sense of them for you confess that there is need of means and help to understand them Then I querie which is the likeliest means to help us to understand the meaning of the Scripture in comparing Scripture with Scripture the Spirit of Christ or humane Learning Who best knows the meaning of the Scripture that Spirit by which it was given or that humane spirit so much pleaded for that never did nor never shall know the Lord 2. The Scriptures are no perfect rule to ignorant and carnal men or hypocrites it s a perfect rule only to such who by them know the Lord and his mind by the teachings of the Spirit and so walk according to it for if it be a perfect rule then it s so to those who know it You say a naturall man may know it then a naturall man may have a perfect rule and if he walk according to it he must be saved for who so walks by a perfect rule and answers it in his walking must be justified by that rule Now the Scripture is no perfect rule of justification of life to any but the Saints not that there is imperfection in the Scripture but none comes truly to know it but those who are taught from above 3. To say that the knowledge of the mind of God in Scripture by the teachings of the Spirit is to make it a nose of Wax c. is a fond imagination For first though its true upon this account men that have not the Spirit of God may abuse it thinking they have the Spirit of Christ when they have it not Yet 2. The Spirit is truth and is at unity in and with it self and speaks but one thing I mean he doth not contradict himself though there are contradictions amongst the Saints yet it is not from the Spirit who dwels in unity but from the worldly spirit not yet subdued in them and I thought you had known at least the Scripture Zeph. 3. 9. that saith God will turn to his people a pure language that they may serve him with one consent it s not the work of fleshes wisdom but I will do it saith the Lord and how think you if not in helping them to know his mind c. And 2. Doth not your humane wisdom indeed make a nose of wax of the Scripture do you not wrest iâ— and turn it which way you please and is it not for want of the clear teachings of the Spirit there are such rentings and divisions amongst us at this day Is it not about the sense of the Scriptures all the differences in the world are at this day And do you seek to God to guide you into a oneness in the understanding of the meaning of it or to your humane Learning Oh be ashamed for ever so much to undervalue Scripture and overvalue mans wisdom as that its sufficient to find out the meaning of the Scriptures When you have joyned up all together yet notwithstanding all your Learning yea and the Spirits teaching too you have not yet attained to all the sense of the Scriptures if you had there would not be division but unity not that I question the sufficiency of the Spirits teaching in its own time but certainly you are very much to blame having gotten that which is able to teach you the sense and meaning of the Scripture with your own endeavour yet to know so little of it as you do you must needs be very sluggards or else able to resolve infallibly any place of Scripture you having that which is able as you say to help you to understand it and you think you have the Spirit of Christ besides these two being by you joyned up together in you
the least of which is able to help you to the infallible sense c. What then hinders that you are not infallible and yet that you are not infallible is clear for what need a difference then between Papist and Protestant yet both Learned between Episcopacie and Presbyterie yet both Learned Presbyterie and Independency yet both Learned Independency and the Baptists yet some of both Learned between them all and those that deny both Church and Ordinances yet some of them Learned too Oh be ashamed for ever of these Fopperies and let all who know the Lord look to him for the teachings of the Spirit that so we may come to know his minde and will that so we may worship him with one shoulder and let all that love the Lord Jesus say Amen This shall suffice at present as an answer to what you say of your humanity I deny not the use of means but the abuse of it I leave it to the Reader to judge You come to the 8. Error That the Ministry of England is Antichristian Answ This is a dangerous one with you it seems but because I have said so much to this in the Pulpit Guard Routed I shall wholly wave it in this place seaving both Tho. Halls assertions my answers to him and yours again to mine to the judgment of the Reader a word to the wise is enough it s a word that you cannot yet well bear therefore I shall at present forbear only give me leave to minde you with two words 1. You answer but one of my six Arguments to prove them Antichristian the rest you pass by as if the naming of them as Tho. Hall said in contempt were answer enough to them if it be I leave it to the Reader I am satisfied 2. In that which you pretend to answer what do you more or less then say the same that I have said You confess 1. It came from Rome but you think to mend it with this because the Scriptures came from Rome but if by the hand of Gods grace the Scripture was kept pure in Rome and not defiled then the case is altered but they were so kept Ergo that it is so I prove If the Scriptures preserved by the Romans have sufficient in them to overturn the very practise and Religion of the Romans then they had not a power to corrupt it for their own ends But the Scriptures preserved by the Romans have sufficient in them to overturn all the Religion of the Romans viz. Papists Ergo. The Minor I prove Those who use to corrupt Scripture do it for their own ends and interests but the Papists have not corrupted it for their own ends and interests Ergo. I mean in the Hebrew and Greek which I suppose must necessarily be that which you intend for you say the Scriptures as well as Ordination was very much corrupted by the Papists p. 169. but among us hath been restored by degrees now our Work hath not been to restore the Popish Translators but to Translate out of the Greek and Hebrew Copies which I do not believe were or are materially or substantially corrupted so that by this you teach the People to deny the Scripture and at best to take it upon the account of man reducing it from corruption I must tell you if the Collier had written as much as black as you make him he must have expected to have had all the black-Coats in the Nation about his ears and that justly too So that the Case is altered now the Scripture in its essence was kept pure but the very essence of Ordination was Antichristian and how you could bring a clean thing out of an unclean I leave to the Reader to judge As to the Argument you confess the truth of it that the Calling came from Rome but you restore it by degrees Now which is better to come to the Scripture for Ordination Ordinances c. or to retain that which is Antichristian I leave to the Reader to judge as for Austin the Monk you confess what I say only you think you mend the matter in saying that Monks were not so bad then as now and that Rome was a true Church then the truth of this I leave to the judgement of the wise these things considered 1. When Austin came into England here was some that owned Christ as History relates for as you say the Gospel had been preached in England before both by Joseph of Arimathea and afterward Lucius King of the Britains desiring it not Elutherius as you affirm but Fugatius and Damianus being sent by Elutherius Pope or Bishop of Rome they Preached and Baptized in England that King being the first King that History mentions that was Baptized in England but when Austin came those Bishops you mention with the People because they would not submit to the pride of Austin were by him persecuted and brought to ruine by this you may judge a little of the truth of Romes being a true Church and Austin a true Minister 2. Whereas you say You hope Rome was then a true Church I say you have but little ground for it for I do not believe that ever Rome was a true Church My Reason is because I do judge that never a Nation Province or City was a true gospel-Gospel-Church its true there was once a true Church in Rome but the Scripture never calls Rome a Church for a true Church of Christ are a People gathered out of the world by the power of the Gospel to believing in Christ and professed obedience to him but this was never any Nation Province or City therefore no true Church of Christ Rev. 5. 9 but such Churches were at first and so it hath hitherto continued gathered by the authority of the Civil Magistrate compelling all to come in or else they must not live under their Authority fulfilling in a measure Rev. 13. 17. by which means the true Church in Rome and all other true Churches in Relation to Form Order and Worship have been extinguished so that I say Rome was never a true Church since it became a Church nor any Nation in the World besides its inconsistent with the true Church of Christ who are a People gathered out of Nations as before c. But to draw to a conclusion The other five Arguments you pass over as having no weight in them c. I leave it to the Reader to judge if there be no weight in them I say no more only aword to your Postscript You say There is another dangerous pestilent blasphemous Book of this Colliers against Ordinances c. which you heard of but never saw it Answ I suppose you did but dream a second time and this proves false too give off dreaming or lying for shame for I suppose none dare lye so grosly as to tell you so though you dare dream a lye and publish it but there is a hand of God in it that the world may know what you are My Books are not in private if there were any such it might be gotten assuredly let this satisfie I do declare that I never writ any such Book and if any have done or do gather from any passage that I deny Ordinances though I know no passage in any from whence any can draw such a positive conclusion I do affirm that I never writ any thing in which I denyed the Ordinances of Jesus Christ and it is my judgement and practise to walk in the use of them Thus at present have I done leaving the Premises to the publick view and censure of those to whom it comes desiring the Lord to give understanding c. FINIS