many Proselites which in David's and Solomon's days joyned themselves in the presence of private persons and the Judges of the great Synedron had aâ— care of them they drove them not away after they were Baptized out of any place neither took they them neer unto them until their after-fruits appeared Ob. 2. If none but the Regenerate or sincere Believers have Title to Baptism and the Lords Supper then none can seek or receive them till they have Assurance of their sincerity which would exclude abundance of upright Christians Answ. 1. God layeth his commands upon us conjunctly and our casting off one will not authorize us to cast off another Upright Christians are obliged both to judge themselves to be what they are and to receive the Seals of the Covenant And if they judge themselves not to be upright when they are or question their integrity as a thing to be doubted of this is their sin and cannot be done inculpably And this sin will not justifie them in forbearing the Sacraments For one sin will not excuse another The thing therefore that such are bound to is first to use right means to know themselves and then to judge of themselves as they are and then to seek and receive the Sacraments And if he say I have tried and yet I cannot discern or I fear I am unfound yet that will not free him from the blame of mis-judging nor from the obligation of judging more justly of himself 2. There is a true discerning of a man 's own faith and repentance which is far below a strict Assurance and he that truly discerneth that he repenteth and believeth hath a clear ground to profess it though he have much doubting and fear of the contrary The judgement of few or none is in aequilibrio but it swayeth and determineth either to judge that they are sincere or that they are not If it judge that they are not when they are their duty is to rectifie that judgement out of hand If they judge that they are sincere though they attain not a full Certainty they have reason to act according to that judgement Mans heart is a dark piece and much unacquainted with it self and if Mr Blake or any of his opinion will prove that a man must suspend all his Actions which are not guided by a certain assured judgement he will evacuate most of Gods service in the Church I doubt not but he will confess that it is only the penitent that should profess themselves penitent in that Condition and only they that truly desire Christ and Grace that should say they desire them and only they that have received saving grace that should give God thanks for it as a received benefit And yet if no one should confess sin with profession of penitence but they that have full assurance that they are truly penitent if no one should beg grace with profession that he desireth it till he have full assurance of the truth of those desires and if no one should give thanks to God for Redemption in the special sense and effectual Vocation and Conversion and Justification Adoption Reconciliation Sanctification c. but those that have a full assurance that they have received these I doubt God would have little Confession Prayer or Thanksgiving of this sort from his people Is it unlawfull to say Lord I believe as long as we have any Vnbelief to be removed When Peter knew not but that he might shortly deny Christ with cursing and swearing yet might he lawfully confess his belief in him A man may warrantably speak and profess the Truth which he is not fully certain of as long as he doth it bona fide and really meaneth what he speaketh and uttereth his very heart so far as he knoweth it 2. And as long as he is not negligent in his endeavors to know it but faithfully labors to be acquainted with it All such ordinary Professions do imply this limitation This is the truth so far as I know my own heart And if it were not lawful to go on this ground I must give up almost all my duties For I finde so great darkness in my own heart and strangeness to my self that it is few things that I say of my own heart which I can speak with such assurance as this When Christ commanded me Matth. 5.24 to Leave my gift before the Altar and go my way and first be reconciled to my Brother and then come and offer my gift as I am uncertain when my Brother's minde is reconciled to me so if I should never offer my gift till I had full assurance that my own minde is sincerely reconciled to him perhaps I might sometime be put upon a long forberance For many a one that can say I know nothing by my self is yet so conscious of the falsness of his heart that he is forced to add yet am I not thereby justified and I judge not my own self c. Christ hath told us that God will not forgive us unless we truly repent and believe and from our heart forgive one another If none may thank God for remitting their sins till they have undoubting assurance of all this God would have little thanks for forgiveness Then the scruples of those that reject singing Psalms would turn off almost all Who durst say or sing Psal 116.1 I love the Lord c. Psal. 119.10 with my whole heart have I sought thee c. Psal. 138.1 91. 111.1 I will praise thee O Lord with my whole heart c. unless so few as would make but small melody Many particulars might be instanced in to shew that this ground would evacuate most duties 3. As Mr. Blake is uncertain of every one of his hearers that seeketh Sacraments whether he have indeed a Dogmatical faith or not so I doubt he would Baptize but few Children in comparison of what he doth if none should seek it but those Parents which are undoubtingly certain that they do truly Believe with that Dogmatical faith 1. Certain I am upon much sad tryal that a great number of the Parishioners that have long been our constant hearers and have presented many Children to Baptism have not a Dogmatical faith it self as to the essentials of the Christian Religion For many tell me that they Believe not that the Son or the Holy Ghost is God or that any one hath suffered for us or made satisfaction for our sins and that they trust only in Gods mercy and their praying and amendment for Pardon 2. I meet with the most humble Godly learned and judicious men of my acquaintance who manifest more doubtfulness about the Dogmatical part or Assenting Act of their faith then any other or at least their doubt of the rest is most here grounded because they doubt of their truth in this And though they are comforted in this consideration that even Assent is imperfect in the Saints on earth and mixt with doubtings and that they lament their
profess the pure Religion and make it appear at least to the judgment of man that they are Godly in Christ Iesus this is an inseparable Mark of a true Church as we may see 1 Cor. 14.33 See further Mr Vines in his Treatise of the Sacrament p. 150 151. saith That the Separatists laid the foundation viz. That only Visible Saints are fit Communicants which is true as to the Churches Admission That real Saints only are worthy Communicants which is true too as to the inward Grace or Benefit And 151. There is a great difference between Christs real Members and Guests at this Table and as I may say the Visible Churches Members or Guests If he be a visible Professor of Faith unshipwrakt of capacity to discern the Lords Body of Life without Scandal he is a Guest of the Church And p. 205. Though I should rest in serious Professsion of Faith and Repentance which is not pulled down again by a wicked Life or scandalous Sin yet when a man lieth under the charge of our censure for some scandalous sin the case is otherwise c. Read the rest And p. 324 329. The Covenant of God with us is that all that believe in Christ that died and receive him for their Lord and Saviour shall have remission of sins c. Answerable to this act of God the Believer accepts of and submits to this Covenant and the Conditions of it viz. to believe and to have God for our God and thereof makes a solemn profession in this Sacrament giving up himself to Christ as Lord and Saviour restipulating and striking hands with him to be his and so binds himself and doth as it were seal a Counterpart to God again and not only so but comes into a claim of all the riches and legacies of the Will or Covenant because he hath accepted and here declares his acceptance of the Covenant The Seal is indeed properly of that which is Gods part of the Covenant to perform and give and is no more but offered until we subscribe and set our hands to it and then its compleat and the Benefits may be claimed as the benefit of any conditional promise may be when the condition is performed And lest you should stumble at that word I must let you know that the Will accepting and submitting to the Conditions is the performance of the Conditions required NB. And pag. 249 250 c. Though as to admittance which is the Churches part to the outward Ordinance he make Profession as I do sufficient yet to the question whether the Sacrament be a Converting Ordinance he concludes that It is not an Ordinance appointed for Conversion His Arguments are 1. Because no effect can be ascribed to this Ordinance which fals not under the signification of it c. as Vasquez 2. This Sacrament by the institution of it appears to praesuppose those that reap the sweet and benefit of it to be Converts and in grace namely to have faith in Christ and to be living members and if this be presupposed by this Ordinance then it is not first wrought by it 3. The Word is the only Instrument of God to beget Faith or work Conversion c. And he answereth the Objections of the contrary minded and to them that argue that the Lords Supper is a Converting Ordinance because its possible a man may be then converted he saith they may as well make Ordination or Marriage Converting Ordinances because by the words then uttered a man may be converted He citeth the words of learned Rich. Hooker Eccles. Pol. l. 5. pag. 5â—6 The grace which we have by it doth not begin but continue grace or life no man therefore receives this Sacrament before Baptism because no dead thing is capable of nourishment that which groweth must of necessity first live And for further Authority he addeth And to this purpose all our Learned Divines have given their suffrage And the Papists though they differ from us in denying remission of sins in this Sacrament in favour to their Sacrament of Penance yet they hold it to be an Ordinance of Nutrition and so do all their Schoolmen and so doth the Church of England The strengthening and refreshing of our souls c I need not number Authors or Churches It is so plain a case that I wonder they that have stood up in defence of it as a converting Ordinance have not taken notice of it There is an Army to a man against them and the antient Christian Churches are so clear in it So far Mr Vines Hooker in him Concerning the Distinction of Forum Dei Ecclesiae and its sense see that judicious Agreement of the Associated Ministers of Cumberlanâ— and Westmerland pag. 47. where they take notice of Mr. Blakes questioning it Since these Papers were in the Press I was told by a Reverend Brother that Mr Blake professeth to hold the Necessity of the Profession of a saving Faith as well as I and by one of his special acquaintance in the Ministry who heard me express my mind that Mr Blake's was the same I durst not omit the mention of this lest it should be injurious to him And yet how far the reporters are in the right and understand his meaning I am no further able to tell you but that they are credible persons For my part I defended my own Doctrine against the charge which in two Volumes he brought against it And I supposed he would not write so much of two Volumes against a Doctrine which he judged the same with his own And I medled only with his books and not his secret thoughts Whether I have been guilty of feigning an Adversary that took himself for none I am contented to stand to the judgment of any impartial man on earth that will read our books Surely I found it over each page that a Faith short of Iustifying entitleth to Baptism and I never met with any such explication in him as that by A faith short of Iustifying he meant A Profession of Iustifying faith And sure Faith and Profession be not all one nor Iustifying and Short of justifying all one Nor do others that read his books understand him any otherwise then I do so far as I can learn sure the Ministers that were Authors of the Propositions for Reformation of Parish Congregations Printed for the Norwich Bookseller understood him as I do p. 17. where they say thus Obj. 3. But a dogmatical Faith may entitle to Baptism as Mr Blake Treat on Con. speaks though there be no profession of a justifying faith repentance Answ. We cannot think so seeing the faith required to be professed before Baptism is such a Faith as hath salvation annexed to it Mar. 16.16 It is a Faith of the whole heart Acts 8.38 Repentance is also required to Baptism as well as Faith Acts 2.38 and the Church in the usual form of Baptism enjoyned the baptized person not only to profess the doctrine of Faith but
any shall grounldesly so presume and be mistaken this makes not the Profession Null as to the use which the Church makes of it though it be Null as to the real internal Covenant of man with God or to the Benefits of such a Profession by any grant or Gift from God for in in foro Dei it is no Profession or worse 2. We must take nothing for a Profession but that which hath a seeming seriousness For if it be Notoriously or apparently ludicrous or in a scorn or not meant as it is spoken it is then apparently false and we are not to believe apparent falshoods 3. It must seem to be voluntary or free I deny not but some force may stand with a valid Profession but that is only such a force as is supposed to prevail with the Heart it self and not only with the tongue when the heart is against it If any should say to a Jew If thou wilt not Profess thy self a Christian I will presently run thee through with my sword the words that should be forced by this threat are not to be taken for a true Profession when it is apparent that they are meerly forced by fear So that which done in a passion of Anger or the like contrary to the ordinary prevailing bent and resolution of the heart is not to be taken as a voluntary and valid Profession 4. It must be a Profession not prevalently contradicted by word or deed Otherwise still it is an apparent or notorious lie which no man can be bound to believe If a man say in one breath that he believeth in Christ and in the next will say that he doth not believe in him he nulleth his own profession by a revocation and if he revoke it in the direct sense it is all one as if he did it in the same terms As if he say that he believeth in Christ but withall that he believeth him to be but a man or a Prophet or not to have died to ransom us from our sins c. so if he should say I am a Christian but yet I love the world and the flesh more then Christ the same must be said of a Practical contradiction which is effectual to invalidate a Verbal Profession If a man should profess to the Prince that he honoureth him and when he hath done should spurn at him or spit in his face or if a man should profess that he loveth you and desireth your safety and withall shall discharge a Pistol at you or run at you with his sword I leave it to your selves whether he be to be believed Yet some Contradiction there may be which may not nullifie a Profession As when the terms of Contradiction seem not to be understood by him that useth them or not to be meant in the contradicting sense or when he seem's not to discern the contradiction but thinks both may consist and seems to hold the truth practically and so contradicts it speculatively or ignorantly or when the contradiction is more weak and not seemingly prevalent as I believe Lord help my unbelief 5. When a man hath utterly forfeited the credit of his word the Profession of that man must not be meerly verbal but practicall This is all clear in the Laws of Nature When a man may be justly said to have forfeited the credit of his bare word is a matter of consideration The common reason and practice of men is against trusting a perjur'd mans bare word till he give sufficient evidence of his repentance for that perjury And the like may be said of one that hath often violated Promise and given no Evidence of any effectual change upon his heart but that still he hath the same disposition The Novatians thought that those who lapsed hainously after the Baptismal Profession were not again to be absolved and admitted into the communion of the Church but they did not exclude them from Gods pardon as is commonly believed to them Clemens Alexandrinus and others of those ancient Churches do seem to exclude all from pardon of sin after twice or thrice offending but I suppose they meant it only of hainous sin and of pardon in foro Ecclesiae and not of pardon in foro Dei a distinction that was not then detested The truth is the temper and quality of persons and the nature of the fault and many circumstances may so vary the case that it is not the same Number of promise-breakings or sins after promises that will prove the forfeiture of each sinners Credit Ordinarily in case of gross hainous sin if a man have oft broke his promise his bare word is no more to be taken but an actual Reformation must prove the validity of it But there are some cases in which once or twice breach of promise may forfeit credit as to the Church and some cases wherein more then three or four brecahes may not do it But as for an Infidel that newly comes to the Profession of the Faith or a notorious ungodly man that newly comes to the Profession of godliness we must take their first profession though their lives were never so vicious before because though they have oft committed other sins yet not this of Covenant-breaking with God and they seem to be recovered from their former unconscionableness Perhaps some one will say that if all this be to be look'd after before the validity of a Profession can be discerned then this is an uncertain Rule for us to proceed by in administring the Sacraments for Ministers will be uncertain when all these qualifications are found in mens Professions Besides that it puts tyrannizing power into Ministers hands which you tell Mr. â—ombes of in your book of Infant-Baptism Answ. I have there shewed that the danger is greater in the Anabaptists way of using this power than of ours 2. This objection is as much against them that are for the title of a Dogmatical faith as for us that require the Profession of a saving faith For they cannot be certain of their lower faith it self and therefore must take up with the profession of it and if they will not require all these qualifications forenamed of that Profession then they may as well admit professed Jews and Heathens and they will openly subject Gods ordinances to profanation 3. Because it is a variable case and requireth Judgement in the Administrators therefore hath God made it a considerable part of the office and work of his Ministers to Judge rightly of mens profession that they may discern the meet from the unmeet and therefore hath he required so much prudence and piety in Ministers that they might be meet to judge in such cases To bear these Keyes and wisely and faithfully to discern who are to be admitted and who to be excluded is no small part of their Trust and Power and Work The great necessity of Church Officers and the nature of its Government would be the better understood if this were well considered It is not a
signs is truly a â—hristian 7. The Essentials primary in the Matter are to all the same but the Terms of Necessity for expressing them are not the same to all either for number of words or sentences seeing one can receive that in ten words anoâ—her cannot in twenty And hence is it that if twenty men be set to draw up the Essentials of Christianity they may do it in twenty several forms of words and yet all express the same essâ—ntial Matter and one Confession may be in ten lines and another in more pages and yet both speak the same Fundamental Truâ—hs one more concisely or generally and the other more copiously and plainly 8. Whatever other words may be necessary to some besides those that directly express the above-said Matter of Belief in God the Father Son and Ghost they are not to this end necessary that we may have more matter of Faith than is there contained as if it were not all that is essential but that this may by the ignorant be better understood so that those other particular Articles which some call Fundamentals are but expositions of those three Fundamentals that indeed we may receive them 6. In point of duty a Minister must require a more full and large expression of his Faith from one man than from another viz. From those that he hath apparent cause to suspect of not understanding or not believing what the more Comprehensive Concise Terms do express but yet if either he neglect that duty or his previous inquiry and examination though sinfully or if the party that gave no cause of suspition be yet ignorant or an unbeliever it doth not follow that the Concise Profession was a Nullity for want of larger Explication He that professeth to believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost hath made a Profession of saving Faith in all the Essentials as to the sense of the words and it is to be taken as valid in foro Ecclesiastico in the Judgement of the Church if there be not some of the above-named particulars apparent to invalidate it as Contradiction apparent Ignorance Derision c. May it not be the safest way to imitate the Scripture examples in such cases where we alway find Profession in order to Baptism made but in few comprehensive terms for as by this way we follow the surest Guid so are we most likely to comprehend all the Essentials and leave none out when spinning out a Profession to a Volumn in more particular Explicatory termes if these same generals be not among them may leave out much of the Essence of Religion which these do comprehend Not that I would have the people hear no longer discourses for Explication but it is one thing to put them into a Sermon or Discourse and another thing to put them into the Profession of Faith If notwithstanding all that is said any shall still be prejuced against the requiring of a Professon of saving Faith because of the difficulty of discerning when it is that all the Fundamentals are professed let such consider that it doth as much concern those that differ from us to untye this knot if they can as us We have long shewed the Papists that themselves must be forced to distinguish between those points of Faith which some may be saved without and those which none can be saved without and so indeed Bellarmine and others of them confess And those that say it is a Dogmatical Faith that must be professed must needs comprehend all the aforesaid Essentials in their Dogmatical faith or else they cannot call it the Christian Faith So that as to the Object of Assent they are equally concerned in the difficulties 2. And then for the second part of Faith which is the Wills consent or Affiance or Entertainment Receiving Acceptance Embracing or what other term to that purpose you will use of the Good proposed in the Gospel the same forementioned words do also comprehend all that is Essential to the Object of this Act for the Will as well as the Intellect to Believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost is all our Faith that is To receive God as our God our Creator our Soveveraign and Felicity and Jesus Christ our Saviour from the guilt and power of Sin and to bring us to everlasting Glory and this by Ransoming us by his death and merits By Rising Interceding Teaching Ruling us and at last Raising and Judging us and to receive the Holy Ghost as the witness of Christ the inspirer of the writers of his Word and as our Sanctâ—fier Thus is the Object of true Christian faith expressed as containing the Objects of the Will To conclude in a doubtfull case it is safe to be as express and particular as we can in our Instructions and Examinations and not barely to keep to the meer Essentials because there are many of the Adjacent truths or superstructures which are of so great use as that the fundamentals are hardly and seldom well entertained without them And yet when we play not the part of Instructors and preparers but of Administrators of Gods Ordinances then we must take heed of exacting more as necessary then is indeed necessary and in difficult Cases when the difficulty lyeth in the Darkness of the persons heart and you doubt by reason of the scantness of his expressions whether he believe as he speaketh we must give credit to his own words as far as reason will permit and to judge the best though we may fear the worst and this will be our Duty and if we should be deceived it will not prove our sin but his that makes the false profession And this leadeth me up to the next part of my Task which is having thus explained the Nature of the requisite Profession to prove the Affiâ—mative of the Question THESIS Miâ—isters mâ—y admit persâ—ns into the visible Church of Christ by Bâ—ptism upon the bare Verbal Profession of the true Christian saving faith such as before described without staying for or searching after any further Evidences of sincerity ordinarily and as of necessity to this end This Proposition I prove in short by these Arguments following Argum. 1. We have the warrant of their approved Example in Scripture whom we are to eye as our Pattern in Administrations for the administring of Baptism upon a bare Verbal Profession therefore we may so Administer it I here suppose the Practice of the Church before Christs Incarnation which is out of all doubt Moses took the Verbal profession of all Israel to be a Covenant between God and them wherein they avouched the Lord to be their God and God avouched them to be his people On the like terms did Joshua Asa and others renew the Covenant of God with that people and on the same terms was circumcision administred On these terms did John Baptize multitudes whose lives he knew not before and of whom he required no further Evidence than these present Professions to satiâ—fie him of their
the Credit of their wordâ— hath Evidence of Credibility therefore they ought to be believed The Major is undeniable taking the measure of belief to be according to the measure of that Evidence The Mâ—nor I prove 1. From the ordination of nature 2. From the consent of the world and certain experience 1. Nature hath not given one man an inspection into the breast of another nor hath God made any Minister a searcher of hearts and beholder of mens thoughts 2. God hath made man capable of knowing in his own thoughts though its true that the heart is so deceitful that there is a great difficulty of knowing them of our selves yet the meaning of that Text Jer. 17 9 10. is concerning others who can know it that is who can know anothers heart But yet for all the deceitfulness a certain measure of knowledge may be had For 3. Man hath a certain knowledge of the Evil of lying and so a certain credibility naturally or by the light of nature as the examples of the very Heathens can witness 4. The tongue was created to be the Index of the mind Though mans actual language be acquired yet his tongue was made for that use All this set together shews ex natura rei that though the Evidence be imperfect yet an Evidence it is Moreover if there be such a thing as fides humana due among men then there is such a thing as Evidence of Credibility But the Antecedent is true Therefore so is the Consequent He that denyeth the Antecedent 1. I suppose will consent that no man believes him 2. And would not sure have any more converse used in the world 3. And I would put it to the consideration of the contrary-minded whether if ordinarily there be no Evidence of Credibility in mens word and Professions be not to be taken as signs of the thing professed it were not best either to cut out mens tongues or else forbear teaching our children to speak and so let language perish from the earth For if it be ordinarily understood as meer lying it would seem the best way to extirpate it by this means 2. And I have also the consent and experience of the world on my side of the Credibility of the words even of common men in general 1. All Societies are established on the credit of mens words Princes and people enter their Covenants upon the credit and confidence in each others words 2. All affairs are managed on this Supposition The freest men in England do hold all their Estates and Lives upon the credit of the words and common fidelity that it is even in unregenerate men They are sufficient Witnesses at any Bar. Two of these by a false oath might put a man to death and yet how seldom are such things done Moreover how much doth all History depend upon the word of of man Yea how much of humane credit do we make use of to assure us that these which we now have are the same Scriptures that the Apostles writ and that they are uncorrupted and how far and that these only are Cannonical c. Argum. 5. It is most suitable to the End of Baptism that the Adult should be Baptized upon a bare Profession For Baptism is to be the Sign and means of their solemn Entrance into the Church and reception of a Sealed pardon of sin c. Now if you would stay till men prove their sincerity by their holy lives you will have them grow before they are well planted and give you full Evidence of Church membership before they are rightly entred Members And sure this is not like to be a regular course Argum. 6. My last Argument is from the continued Custom of the Church of God which with Paul was somewhat I confess the Churches after the Apostles daies did for divers ages prepare men long before they baptized them True they were Catechumeni before they were fideles or baptized But 1. That was not that they might have experience of the sanctity of their lives as the necessary qualification of the persons to be baptized but it was that they might instruct them in the Christian Faith that they might know what they did and be fit to make an acceptable Profession and then when they were prepared for such a Profession they took the bare Profession it self as the evidence of the truth of the thing professed still supposing that it was such a Profession as is before described and were not invalidate by contradiction or the like and therefore they did indeed expect that those that lived in notorious scandalous sins should stop their course and forbear the committing of them as well as profess Repentance for them because that it would have nullified their Profession if they had commited the sin even when they professed to repent of it Therefore Austin in his Tractate de fide operibus on that subject would have none baptized that were guilty of living with Concubines in fornication unless they would actually put them away and then promise to forsake them for the time to come but he did not advise that they should after all this delay yet longer to see whether they would make good that promise by their performance I conclude therefore that the Apostles and all the Church having so long accepted of a bare verbal Profession we must do so too Objection 1. If we shall believe the Professions of all or most men we shall believe that to be true which is not true and we shall believe more Lyes than Truths for there are more that make false Profession then a true and moreover we shall administer the Ordinances of God upon the credit of a Lye which seemeth a prophaning them Answ. 1. A known Lye you may not you cannot believe and should you administer the Ordinances upon a Profession which is notorious false you should prophane them 2. But if I believe a Lyer when I cannot prove him such that 's none of my sin nay its mâ— duty God made mens tongues to shew their minds and so I am to take their words but if they will abuse them to lying that 's their own sin and not mine 3. If you would believe no man till you are sure that he saith true then you must believe no man in the world For though you may know the thing to be true by other Evidence yet belâ—eving him can give you no certainly of thâ— truth for belief dependeth on the credit of the speaker Your Argument therefore tendeth to the destroying of all humane faith which is not to be endured 4. It is but with a humane faith that we believe them and therefore we believe them but as deceitful fallible men who may possibly deceive us It is not with such a faith as we owe to God wherein we conclude the thing revealed to be so unquestionably true as that it cannot possibly be false because God cannot Lye yea it is with a divers degree of Faith that
we believe divers persons who are to us of divers degrees of Credibility And if after all this we be deceived in the most the sin is only in the deceiver And as for us 1. We proceeded upon that evidence which Nature it self directeth us to take even a mans words as the sign of his mind 2. And upon that Evidence which the holy Examples of the Apostles of Christ have directed us to take who were not rashly venturous nor prophaners of Gods Ordinances 3. And if we be indeed deceived in the most or in many it s rather a sign that we are in Gods way than out of it for as Charity believeth all things credible so Christ hath told us that the tares and wheat must grow together and that many are called and few chosen and that in the end he will take out of his Kingdom all things that offend and them that work Iniquity therefore such there will be Object 2. But it is now the custom of the Countrey and a matter of credit to be Christians in Name and therefore all will be so and if you ask them whether they Repent or Believe they will say Yea Therefore this is no credible Profession though theirs was in the dayes of the Apostles when it hazarded their lives Answ. 1. The hazard that attendeth a mans words is not necessary to make them simply credible though as to the Degrees it makes them more credible else we must believe no man but he that speaks to the hazard of his life 2. The Prosperity of the Gospel will not warrant us to alter the Rule of Nature and Scripture else the Church must Incurre greater difficulties in prosperity than in Adversity if prosperity forfeit all mens credit and so men should be kept out in prosperity who may be admiâ—ted in adversity when the Church had peace and were edified Act 9 31. the Apostles altered not their practice 3. We have great cause to rejoyce when Christianity is in so good credit as that all profess it and so respectively we may be glad when there are so many Hypocrites that is when persecutors befriend the truth which they persecuted and when the Gospel is in so much honour And though I am not of their mind that think it the first prescribed End of the Institution that Sacraments and Church-state should be the means of Conversion yet I doubt not but God foreknowing that many hypocrites would unjustly Intrude hath so fitted his Ordinances as to be advantagious to their Conversion when they have Intruded He calleth not any to come into his Church without saving Faith and Repentance nor is he consenting to any mans lying Profession nor unworthy approach to Baptism or the Lords Supper but yet they that do come unworthily and unwarrantably do find that there which tendeth to their Conversion and frequently effecteth it and this I think is the true mean between their Doctrine who maintain that the Sacrament is prescribed as a converting Ordinance and the unconverted are called to it and theirs that say simply it is not a converting Ordinance Object 3. This is the way to fill the Church with hypocrites and ungodly ones and that breeds all our stir while they scandadalize their Profession and will not be ruled Answ. 1. It is Gods way and then no Inconvenience will disgrace it 2. We are foretold as is said that many are called and few chosen and the Church will have many unfound Professors to the end of the world 3. When they are in the Church they are under teaching and Discipline to inform them or if they be oâ—stinate in gross evil to reject them 4. God will have a wide difference between the Church in heaven and on earth Object 4. Then we must admit a drunkard or whoremonger that still lyeth in his sin if a bare Verbal Profession will serve the turn Answ. No. You must see that with his Profession of Repentance he do forsake the sin repented of or else he contradicteth and invalidateth his Profession If a man in his drunkenness come to be baptized and profess to hate drunkenness he actually giveth his tongue the Lye If a man swear that he hateth swearing he contradicteth himself and we have no reason to believe him If a Whoremonger keep his Concubine while he professeth to repent he doth one thing and saith another so that this doth not follow Object 5. It was believing with all the heart that Philip required of the Eunuch and such a believing aâ— had the Promise of Salvation as Paul and Silas required of the Jaylor Answ. True and it s such that we require But Philip and Paul took a bare present Profession as the Evidence of that faith which they must accept and so must we Object 6. But then we shall apply the Seal to a Blank Answ. By a Blank if you mean One that you ought not to apply it to and that hath no right in foro Ecclesiae I deny it but if you mean one that is not actually the subject of Gods promise and to whom God is not actually obliged but conditionally as he is to Heathens and one that hath no proper right coram Deo or Deo judice as shall justifie his claim and receiving before God so I grant that we set the seal to a Blank But that 's not our sin but his And here I desire the Objectors carefully to note that it is Gods design in the Gospel so to order things that the actual Application shall first be the act of the sinner himself God by his Ministers indeed will be the first offerer and the Spirit in the Elect shall be the first Exciter But the first actual apprehender must be the sinner and then the Ministers application by the seals is in order to come after mens own application For man is to be the chooser or refuser of his own salvation which Clemens Alexandrinus giveth as a reason why in those times of the Church When some as the custom is have divided the Eucharist they permit every one of the people to take his own part For every mans own conscience is best fitted to the act of choosing or refusing Stromat lib 1. pag. 2. so that we are but to follow them with the seal and therefore the applying or refusing act must be first theirs and theirs as professed is the Director of ours And therefore as it is their sin and not ours if they reject Christ and their faith and not ours by which he is chosen to be theirs so it is their sin and not ours if a misapplication be made of the External Ordinance by them and so we take not an invalid profession we are bound to follow their profession for God never appointed heart searchers to administer his seals Object 7. But wicked men know not their own hearts and therefore are uncapable of making a credible profession Answ. They may know them better them I can The Intellect hath naturally a power of knowing it self
as to their more profitable use of Ordinances but make no other conditions of their Right then God hath made 4. It is onely a Profession that 's serious voluntrary not contradicted prevalently by word or life which you must take as is before described And do you take it to be so unreasonable a matter to believe a man fide humana who speak's of his own heart which another cannot see when you can bring no evidence to disprove his words If you know any thing by his life that certainly proves his Profession false admonish him of it in the order that Christ hath directed you to till he either hear the Church or be rejected by the Church or at least by not hearing the Church do give you cause to take him as a Heathen or Publican but be not so much against the Scripture and 2. All discipline that ever the Church hath used And against common justice and reason as to do this by men on your own private judgement without evidence and a just tryal and once hearing them speak for themselves and many do that will unchurch a whole Parish and gather a new one on supposition of the invalidity of a bare Profession and on supposition that most are ignorant and ungodly before they have ever once accused them particularly or dealt with or excluded any of them in the way that Christ appointeth If I certainly knew that in this Parish there were 4000 unregenerate Persons and not 400 or 100 truly regenerate and yet knew not particularly which the unregenerate Persons were I ought not to cast out one man from the Church upon any such account Object But with what comfort can the Godly have communion with the societies that are so mixt with multitudes of the ungodly Answ. If they do not their duty in admoishing the offenders and labouring to heal the diseased members and to reform the Church in Christs appointed way Mat. 18.17 Then you may well ask With what comfort can such Professors live in the sinful neglect of their own duty But if they faithfully do their own part how should the sins of others â—e their burden unless by way of common compassion And how have Gods servant in all ages of the Church to this day received comfort in such mixt Communion These Objectors shew that they seek more of their comfort in men then is meet or that they discomfort themselves with their own fancies when they have no cause of discomfort given them from without but what must be born to the end of the world by al that wil walk in the waies of Christ. Object But it is the Communion of Saints that we believe and must endeavour Answ. True internal spiritual Communion with hearty Saints and External communion with professed Saints For real Saints in heart are unknown to us Ob. But the greater part do not so much as Profess to be Saints Answ. They that profess to believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and to renounce the world the Flesh and the Devil do profess to be Saints so do they that profess to repent of all sin and to be willing to live according to the word of God But I meet but with very few that will not profess all this Object They will say these words indeed but in the mean time they will scorn at godliness or disclaim it by their lives Answ. Those that do so must be dealt with in Christs way as Church-members till either they hear the Church or be rejected for their impenitency but you must not dare upon this account to unchurch whole Parishes nor ordinarily any one Person that hath not been dealt with in the order that Christ hath appointed To conclude this Disputation I find that the two things before mentioned are great occasions of the proneness of many godly people to schism The one is because they do not understand that Christ hath so contrived in it the Gospel that every man shall be either the Introducter of himself by Profession or the Excluder of himself by the rejection of Christianity And so that all Church admissions or rejections shall be but the consequents of his own choice that the chief comfort or the blame may be upon himself And this is partly from the admirable freedom and extensiveness of Gospel Grace which the sons of Grace should glorifie and rejoyce in and not murmur at and dishonour and partly from the wise dispensations of our Legislator that he may deal with men on clear grounds in their absolution or condemnation before all the world 2. The other cause of the schismatical inclination of some godly people is the great mistake of too many in confining all the fruits of Christs death and the mercies or graces of God to the Elect and so not considering the difference that there ever was and will be between the visible Church of Professors and the invisible Church of true Believers Alas Brethren in the name of Christ let me speak it to your hearts do you grudge a few common Priviledges to common Professors when you have the best and choysest part your selves you have Christ himself and do you grudg them the name of Christians or the bare symbole or signs of his body and blood You have sincerity of faith and Repentance and answerably you have true Remission and Reconciliation They have the profession of Faith and Repentance and do you grudg them the empty signs of a Remission which they have lost by their hypocrisie and Unbelief You have Inward communion with Christ in the Spirit as you have Inward faith Do you grudg an Externâ—l communion with the Church to them that have the External profession of Faith O Remember that the Net of the Gospel bringeth good and bad to the shore and the tares must grow with the wheat till harvest and then is the time that you shall have your desire The second Disputation Quest. Whether Ministers must or may Baptize the Children of those that Profess not saving faith upon the Profession of any other faith that comes short of it IT may seem strange that after 1625. years use of Christian Baptism the Ministers of the Gospel should be yet unresolved to whom it doth belong yet so it is And I observe that it is a Question that they are now very solicitous about And I cannot blame them it being not only about a matter of Divine appointment but a practical of such concernment to the Church I shall upon this present occasion give you my thoughts of it as briefly as I can which contain nothing that I know of which is new or singular but the Explication and Vindication of the commonly received truth We here suppose that Baptism is still a needfull Ordinance of Christ and that Infants are to be Baptized and that Ministers are the persons that should Baptize them so that it is none of our work at this time either to defend the Ordinance it self against the Seekers nor the
with water to Repentance therefore it is but an engagement of them to it for the future Answ. Our expositors have fully shewed that this signifieth no more but I baptize you upon your present Profession of Repentance to newness of life For that this Profession did go before is proved already and then the rest can be no more then the continuance of Repentance and exercise of it in newness of life which they are engaged to for the future Only if any falsly profess it at present his own confession is an engagement to it as a duty Grotiuâ— saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 potest non incommode exponi hoc modo Bâ—ptizo vos super professione poenitentiae quam facitis The plain meaning it is in a word I do by baptism initiate you into the state of Repentance or of Penitents but Christ shall give the Holy-Ghost as it was poured forth And so as Pelargus speaks on Mat. 3. against Salmeron we maintain Johns baptisme to be â—ffectual being the baptism of Repentance to Remission of sin And that it was true Repentance that he required appeareth further by the fruits of it thaâ— he calleâ—h for from the Pharisees Mat. 3.6 7 8 9 Lastly I shall prove anon that God hath not appointed us to baptize any upon a promise of Repentance or faith before they profess actual faith and Repentance nor are they fit for such a covenant Argum. 2 For the proof of the necessity of a Profession of Repentance before baptism is this If Jesus Christ hath by Scripture precept and example directed us to baptize those that profess true Repentance and no other then we must baptize them and no other But the Antecedent it true therefore so is the consequent All that requireth proof is the Antecedent which I prove from an enumeration of those texts that do afford us this direction besides the forementioned 1. Jesus Christ himself did by preaching Repentance prepare men for baptism and for his kingdom as John before began to do Matth. 4.17 so Mar. 1.15 The Kingdom of God is at hand Repent ye and believe the Gospel And to that end he sent his Apostles and other preachers Mar. 6.12 Acts 17 30. Luke 24.47 Repentance and Remission is to be preached to all Nations in his name And baptism which is for the obsignation of Remission of sin according to the appointed order comes after Repentance And when it is said by John I baptize you with water to Repentance but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost Mat. 3.11 Mar. 1.8 Luk. 3.16 It implyeth that Christs baptism comprehended Johns and somewhat more in Act. 2.37 38. when the Jews were pricked in their heart which was a preparatory Repentance and said to Peter and the rest of the Apostles men and brethren what shall we do Peter saith to them Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins so that we must require and expect true Evangelical Repentance to be professed before baptism for ver 41. it s added then they that gladly received his word were baptized so that he baptized none that to outward appearance did not gladly receive that word which could not be without a profession of that Repentance And he that here perswadeth them to repent and be baptized for remission doth in the next chapter ver 19. require them to repent and be converted that their sins may be blotted out shewing what kind of Repentance it is that he meaneth And as the work of General Preachers to the unbelieving world is sometime called a discipling of Nations which goeth before baptizing them Mat. 28.19 20. So is it in other places called a Preaching of Repentance and commanding all men everywhere to Repent Acts 17.30 An opening of mens eyes and turning them from darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto God that they may receive Remission obsigned in baptism Act. 26.18 to repent and turn to God ver 20. And it was the sum of Pauls preaching to the unbaptized Repentance towards God and faith towards the Lord Jesus Christ Act. 20.21 So that it is apparent that they took the profession or appearance of both Faith and Repentance as pre-requisite to baptism And still this same repentance is it that hath the remission of sin connexed Act. 5.31 Luk. 24 47. It s repentance unto life Act. 11.18 And when the Apostles compare Johns baptism with Christs they still acknowledge Johns to be the baptism of Repentance Act. 13.24 and 19.4 and when the Apostle doth purposely recite the principles of our religion he doth it in this order Heb. 6.1 2. The foundation of repentance from dead works and Faith towards God the doctrine of Baptism c. Argum. 3. They that before they are baptized must renounce the world the flesh and the devil must profess true Evangelical Repentance I mean still such as hath a promise of pardon and salvation but all that are baptized must by themselves or others renounce the world flesh and devil of which we shall have occasion to say more anon Argum. 4. They that profess to be buried with Christ in baptism and to rise again do profess true Repentance but all that are baptized must profess to be buried with him and rise again therefore c. The Major is proved in that to be buried and risen with Christ signifieth A being dead to sin and alive to God and newness of life and it is not only as is feigned by the Opposers an engagment to thâ—s for the future but a profession of it also at the present This with the rest we thus prove Col. 2.11 12.13 In whom ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ buried with him in baptism wherein also you are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God who hath raised him from the dead and you being dead in your sins the uncircumcision of your flesh hath he quickened together with him having forgiven you all trespasses where note 1. that this is spoken to al the Church of the Colossians therefore they are presumed to be what they profess and appear to be 2. that the putting of the body under the water did signifie our burial with Christ and the death or putting off of our sins And although we now use a less quantity of water yet it is to signifie the same thing or else we should destroy the being of the Sacrament so also our rising out of the water signifieth our rising and being quickened together with him 3. Note also that it is not only an engagement to this hereafter but a thing presently done They were in baptism buried with Christ and put off the body of sin and were quickened with him and this doth also suppose their own present Profession to put off the body of sin and their consent to be baptized on
confessed their sins 1. He saith some will have it to imply no verbal Confession but virtual c. which gloss carrieth a strong Probability c. Answ. 1. Such presumptuous glossing contradicting the Text upon such inconsiderable reasons as is the multitude of the baptized deserves no answer 2. It is so much the stronger against him if Baptism be in the very reception a virtual Confession then no man can be Baptized without it 2. He addeth I require more an Engagement to leave sin which their taking on them the name of Christ doth Imply Answ. If the Engagement be only for some distance of time it is such as God accepteth not nor must we If it be an Engagement to forsake sin from that present time forward it is withall a plain Profession of present true Repentance or conversion and consent to leave it yea renunciation of it resolution to take it up no more More to this purpose followeth which I think contains nothing that requireth any more than what is said already to disable it Argum. 2. My first Argument was from the Necessity of a Profession of true Repentance the second shall be from the Equipollent terms or Description to the thing Described Thus. We must baptize no man that first professeth not to believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost To believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost is saving Faith if sincerely done therefore we must Baptize no man that first professeth not saving faith The Major is proved from Mat. 28.19 Where this is made the form of the words in baptism or at least the End and that which we must insist on Calvin on the words yields the Anabaptists that faith is put justly before baptism Nam alioqui Mendax esset figuraque remissionem peccatorum Spiritûs donum offeret incredulis qui nondum essent Christi membra And that non abs re patris filii spiritûs expressa hic fit mentio quia aliter baptismi vis apprehendi non potest quà m si à gratuita Patris misericordia initium fiat qui nos per filium sibi reconciliat deinde in medium prodeat Christus ipse cum mortis suae sacrificio Et tandem accedat etiaÌ„ spiritus sanctus per quem nos abluit regenerat Denique suoruÌ„ omnium bonorum consortes faciat It appeareth by comparing Mat. 28.19 with Rom. 6 3. and 1 Cor. 1.13 14 15 10.2 that to be baptized into the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is not only to be baptized by their Authority but also to be thus Initiated into the Relation which the Church standeth in to them and to be consecrated to the Father Son and Holy Ghost as Musculus Diodate the Assembly of Divines Annotations and the generality of Expositors do express See Dr. Hammond Pract. Catech. l. 6. § 2. And especially on Mat. 28.19 Grotius at large and that it comprehendeth or presupposeth a Profession of believing in the Father Son Holy Ghost For no man can devote himself solemnly by our Ministry to the holy Trinity that doth not first Profess to believe in them Therefore the Church ever taught the Câ—techuâ—â—eni the Creed first in which they profess to believe in God the Father Son Holy Ghost And before they actually baptized them they asked them whether they believed in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost To which they must answer affirmatively or not be baptized And for the Minor that this believing in the Father Son and Holy Ghost is saving faith if sincerity done as it is professed is proved 1. In that to believe in God in Christ in the Holy Ghost signifyeth not only the act of the understanding barely assenting but also the consent and Assiance of the Will 2. True saving faith is so expressed in Scripture and the promise of eternal life is added to it Joh. 14.1 Ye believe in God believe also in me Joh. 1.12 To as many as received him he gave power to become the sons of God even to them that believe in his name where believing in his name is made equivalent with Receiving him and hath Adoption immediately annexed to it And all that are baptized must first Profess to believe in his name and so receive him and not only promise to do it hereafter Joh. 3.14 15 16. Whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have eternaâ— life But all that are Baptized must Profess to believe in him Joh. 3.36 He that believeth on the son hath everlasting life and he that believeth not the son shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him He that will distinguish now and say that it is not this believing on the Son here mentioned which must be Professed by all that will be baptized but another believing on him which leaveth him among those that shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him must prove and explain his distinction better then those that have undertaken it have done Joh. 5.24 Verily verily I say unto you he that heareth my words and believeth on him that sent me hath everlasting life and shall not come into condemnation but is passed from death to life If any words of Christ can put us out of doubt that believing in the Father and Son is saving faith these asseverations and plain expressions may do it especially being a thing so oft rehearsed So Joh 6.35 He that cometh to me shall never hunger and he that believeth on me shall never thirst Verse 40. And this is the will of him that sent me that every one that seeth the Son and believeth on him may have everlasting life and I will raise him up at the last day Ver. 17. Verily verily I say unto you He that believeth on me hath everlasting life So John 7.38 and 11.25 26. and 12.44 46 and 14.12 Acts 10.43 To him give all the Prophets witness that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins Rom. 3.20 That he might be just and the Justifier of him that believeth on Jesus Rom. 45. To him that workâ—th not but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousness Rom. 9 33. Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed So 10 11. 1 Pet. 2.6 1 Joh. 5.10 Tit. 3.8 with many the like From all which it is evident that Believing on or in God the Father Son and holy Ghost is saving faith having more frequent and as express promises of life as anything whatsoever And it is believing in God the Father Son and holy Ghost that we must profess in baptism To this I suppose it will be answered for I know not what else can that there are two sorts of believing in or on God the Father Son and holy Ghost and the Texts mentioned speak of one sort which is saving and that which we must necessarily profess in Baptism is another sort that is a faith not joyned with Charity or
credere in Dominum nostrum credimus Filium Dei mihi quoque esse Dominum me quoque esse ejus subditum h. e. me quoque ejus sanguine esse redemptum servari perpetuò ac proinde me obligatum ei esse ad gratitudinem Dominium ejus mihi esse salutare me servari ab eo tanquam possessionem charissimam Pag. 229. Quid est credere in Christum crucifixum est credere Christum pro me factum esse maledictioni obnoxium ut me ab ea liberaret So Pag. 240. to the Question Quid est credere in Christum mortuum◠he gives more largely the like Answer And Pag 268. he gives the like answer to the Question Quid est credere in Jesum Cristum qui ascendit in coelum I am loth to weary my self others with citing Testimonies in a known case It s well known that this or to this purpose is the common Exposition of the Protestants of the Creed and Baptismal Profession and that they maintain it against the Papists to be true saving faith that is meant in the words I believe in God the Father in Jesus Christ in the holy Ghost I doubt not to cite forty forty more to prove this when any shall shew me that it will be worth the labor Yet I must say that I approve not fully of some of their descriptions of justifying or saving faith which they hereupon give in but yet they truly maintain that it meaneth saving faith I believe and if they had but put the Wills Consent to the severall Articles and Relations and works of God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and our Affiance instead of a perswasion that they are ours c. I should have yielded to their descriptions I conclude then that believing in or on God the Father Son and Holy Ghost is an Act of the Will as well as of the Understanding and is saving faith And therefore all that profess this profess saving faith But all that will be baptized must profess this therefore 3. It is agreed by all Divines that I know Protestants and Papists that to believe in the Trinity is not only to believe in Gods Essence or the three Persons but also the Relations and great operations of each person for us As to believe in God the Father is to believe in him as our Creator and Soveraign Lord and chief Good To believe in Jesus Christ Is to believe in him as Redeemer and Saviour To believe in the Holy Ghost is to believe in him as a Sanctifier and as the great Witness and Agent of Christ. Now it is most certain that to Profess Assent and consent that God be my God Christ my Saviour the Holy Ghost my Sanctifier is to profess Saving Faith And bare Assent is not meant in the words believing in or on God as is proved by our Divines at large And if present consent be exprest saving Faith is exprest for no wicked man can truly consent that God shall be his God and chief good and Christ his Saviour to save him from sin it self as well as from punishment and the Holy Ghost his Sanctifier I may truly say according to that of Peter Martyr before cited that never any but a true believer that had Justifying Faith did truly say I believe in God but speak falsly in so saying To take God for his God is a thing that no man can truly do but those that are called effectually by his Saving Grace Argum. 3. The foregoing Argument was taken from the prerequisite Profession the next shall be taken from the very work it self viz. the Presenting and offering our selves to be baptized and willingly receiving baptism Thus If it be the very Nature or appointed Vse of the external part of Baptism it self yea essential to it to signifie and profes◠among other things the saving faith and Repentance of the Baptized being at age then true Baptism cannot go without such a Profession But the former is true Ergo so is the later The Antecedent which only requireth proof I prove thus 1. It is of the Instituted Nature of Baptism to be in general a Professing sign as well as an Engaging sign de futuro this I promise as granted by all Christians that I know of that have written of Baptism And then let us consider of the several parts of the sign or external Ordinance with the signification of each That it is essential to it to be significant and Obligatory on our part as well as on Gods part is commonly confessed And 1. The Minister doth baptize him into the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and the party doth by himself or Parent consent thereto 1. Voluntarily offering himself to be so baptized and then 2. Voluntarily Receiving that Baptism And his offer of himself hereto goeth before the Ministers baptizing him and his Reception of that Baptism is Essential to it so that Baptism essentially containeth on his part a Signal Profession of consent to that which is meant in the form used by the Minister I baptize thee into the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost And that is that God the Father Son and Holy Ghost be mine and I be theirs in the Relations in which they are offered in the Gospel to Mankind For all confess that it is a Covenant that is here Sealed and so a mutual consent which the Signs are Instituted by Christ to signifie Christ offereth himself to be Related to me as my Jesus Christ and by offering my self to Baptism and by voluntarily receiving it I do actually profess my Acceptance of his Offer that is of himself so offered God the Father offereth himself to be my God reconciled in Christ and so my chief good and by voluntary receiving Baptism I do signally profess my Acceptance of him so offered The Holy Ghost is offered to be my Sanctifier and Guide and by voluntary Reception of baptism into his Name I do signally profess my Acceptance of him so offered Of all which I shall say more anon And if this be not the Faith which is Justifying and saving then I know not what is yea I may boldly say then there is none such so that it it a most clear case that baptism as baptism according to it s Instituted Nature and use doth contain the Persons actual signal Profession of present Assent to the truth of the Gospel and Acceptance of God the Father Son and Holy Ghost as therein offered And it containeth as our Divines commonly maintain an actual signal Profession that we there presently consecrate or Devote or Dedicate our selves to God the Father Son and Holy Ghost in the foresaid Relations 2. Another part of Baptism is the Ministers washing the Person and the Person first offering himself to be washed and after actually receiving it doth thereby signally profess his consent Now this washing doth essentially signifie our washing from our former filth of sin together with the guilt our putting off the old
man which is corrupt accordâ—ng to the deceitful lusts of the flesh He that signally professeth his present Consent to be washed by the blood of Christ from his former filthiness and guilt and to lay by the filthiness of Flesh and Spirit doth eo nomine profess saving faith and Repentance But all that are baptized with the baptism of Christs Institution do by the very voluntary Reception of Baptism so profess therefore they do thereby profess saving Faith and Repentance 3. Quo ad modum It s commonly confessed by us to the Anabaptists as our Commentators declare that in the Apostles times the Baptized were dipped over head in the water and that this signified their Profession both of believing the Burial and Resurrection of Christ and of their own present renouncing the World and Flesh or dying to sin and living to Christ or rising again to newness of Life or being buried and risen again with Christ as the Apostle expoundeth in the fore-cited Texts of Col. 3. Rom. 6. And though as is before said we have thought it lawful to disuse the manner of Dipping and to use less water yet we presume not to change the use and signification of it so then He that signally professeth to dye and rise again in baptism with Christ doth signally profess Saving Faith and Repentance But this do all that are baptized according to the Apostolical practice therefore c. Object about Nullity But it will be objected that this Argument goeth so high that it will prove that all mens baptism is a Nullity who do not profess Saving Faith and Repentance and so that they must be baptized again Answ. 1. This concerneth the Opponents to answer more than me 2. There are no such persons that I know of and therefore they are not to be re-baptized We distinguish between the secret Intention of Professing and the signal Interpretative Professing which the Church is bound to take as really intended And so I say that when Christ hath Instituted baptism for such a signification if any man seek and receive that baptism he doth thereby Interpretatively profess to seek and receive it as such to the use and Ends to which it was Instituted seeing then all the baptized do apparently as far as the Church can judge profess Saving Faith and Repentance even by receiving baptism there is no room for the conclusion of this Objection When they bring us forth one baptized Person who did not make such a signal Profession then we shall give them a further answer 3. If they did by word of mouth say that they believe with a saving Faith these words are but signs of their minds and whether counterfeit or not the Church cannot tell And the same may be said of the Baptismal Action and Reception 4. Therefore the Church must not take the external Sacrament for a Nullity every time a mans secret Intentions agree not with his signal Profession for then we should not know whether ever we baptize any one But when it is discovered after that he had other Intentions that which was wanting must be yet done viz. his sincere Intentions or saving faith and not that which was not wanting be done again viz. The external Administration and Reception of Baptism 5. It is confessed to be essential to the Sacrament that the Receiving of the washing by Water doth signifie the receiving of the souls washing by the Blood of Christ. Now suppose I can prove it of abundance of Parents that when they presented their Children to Baptism they did not understand that the water signified the blood of Christ or the washing our cleansing by it from sin and therefore had no such Intention in Baptism would the Opponents baptize all these again Let them answer this for themselves and they shall answer for us Or if the Case of Infant-baptism be quarrelled at let them suppose that it were the Person himself that had been so baptized though I am satisfied that its all one Argum. 4. If we must baptize none that profess not their Consent to enter themselves presently into the Covenant of Grace with God in Christ then we must baptize none that profess not saving faith But the former is true therefore c. Also if the very Reception of Baptism be a Profession of present entering into the Gospel-covenant with Christ then is it a Profession of saving faith But so it is therefore c. This Argument was implyed in the former but the Medium that I now use is the Identity of this covenanting and the profession of saving Faith supposing the Identity of Heart-covenanting and saving faith it self The Antecedent I think will be granted by many of the Papists and it is the common doctrine of the Protestants and therefore as to them I need not prove it I confess some of the Anabaptists and some few others do question whether Baptism be a Seal of the covenant of Grace But the quarrel is mostly if not only about the bare word Seal for they confess that in sense which we mean by sealing and particularly they confess that we do in Baptism enter into the covenant of God and that it is a professing and engaging sign on our part as well as an exhibiting notifying confirming sign on Gods part The consequence is thus proved He that doth ore tenus or by profession enter into the covenant of God doth profess saving faith therefore if we must not baptize them without a professed entering into covenant then nether must we baptize them without a profession of saving Faith Only the Antecedent requireth proof And if I prove either the Identity of profest covenanting and profest true believing or else the inseparableness of them I prove the Antecedent But I shall prove the Identity or the inseparability yea I doubt not of the first which is the most full proof And here we must first consider what the Covenant is we are to enter 1. And it is confest it is the covenant of Grace and that there is but one covenant of Grace This Mr. Blake aknowledgeth for all the mention of an outward covenant 2. It is also a confessed thing on all hands that it is God that is the first Author and Offerer of the covenant that it is he that redeemed us who made the promise or covenant of Grace upon the ground of Redemption and that this is frequently called a covenant in Scripture as it is a divine Law or constitution without respect to mans consent as Grotius hath proved in the preface to his Annotations on the Evangelists Much more out of doubt it is that it is called a covenant before man consenteth as it is a covenant offered and not yet mutually entered In the former sense the word is taken properly but in another sense and for another thing then in the later But in the later it is taken Tropically viz. Synecdochically it being but a covenant drawn up and consented to by God conditionally and offered to us
actually upon our acceptance And I should hope that few Protestants think that our actual Justification and Adoption our Interest in God Christ and the Holy Ghost are suspended upon any future condition which in our covenanting with God we must promise to perform I think I have made it plain now that our Heart covenanting with God is principally our present consent that Christ and Life shall be ours God Christ and the Holy Ghost ours and that this is nothing else but Justifying faith and therefore that they are all one and therefore the Profession of each of them is all one and so that where one is required the other is so being indeed not another Argum. 5. We must not baptize any without the profession of that faith and Repentance which are made the condition of Remission of sins But only the faith called justifying or saving and the concomitant true Repentance are made the condition of Remission of sins therefore we must baptize none without the profession of that justifying faith c. The Minor needeth no proof And the Major I prove thus If we must not baptize any but intentionally for present Remission of sin then must we not baptize any without a profession of that faith and Repentance which is the condition of Remission But the former is true therefore so is the later The consequence is past all doubt for else we should Imagine that men may have present Actual pardon without that Faith and Repentance which are the condition of it which subverteth much of the Gospel The Antecedent I prove thus If God hath Instituted no Baptism but what is Intentionally for the present Remission of sin then we must not baptize any but Intentionally for the present Remission of sin But the former is true therefore so is the later I say intentionally in contradistinction from Eventually or certainly and Infallibly attaining that end Where further note That I speak not of Gods absolute Decrees as if his Intention in that sense could be frustrate but of his ends as Legislator speaking of him after the manner of men but principally of the Instituted ends of his Ordinances that is the Ends which he requireth the Minister and people to use them for and so it is Our Intention principally that I mention As the Gospel it self is said to be Intentionally to save men and though it condemn most that is besides the first Intention and but by Accident And though this be principally to be spoken of the prescribed imposed Intentions of their Conversion and Salvation yet Christ is pleased in the Word to ascribe such Intentions to himself as attain not their ends as professing that he came not into the world to condemn the world but that the world through him might be saved that is To condemn them is not his direct principal Intent but only on supposition of their willfull final rejecting of him And this he speakes partly in the habit of a Rector or Promiser and partly as man or after the manner of men And of the intention imposed on us there is no doubt Now I shall prove the Antecedent for the consequence is past doubt And first we are confirmed in this truth because the Opponent whom it concerneth hath not proved any other Baptism instituted by God but what is for present Remission of sins If they can shew us one Text of Scripture that speaketh of any other we shall give up all the Cause but yet they have not done it that I know of In the mean time we shall prove the contrary God hath instituted but One Baptism that one Baptism is for the present Remission of sins therefore God hath instituted no Baptism but what is for present Remission The Major is proved from Eph. 4.5 There is one Baptism In the Minor we take the words for Remission not to speak of somewhat accidental or to be intended only by the Administrator uncertainly or but sometime And I prove it from Scripture Acts 2.38 Repent and be Baptized every one of you in in the name of Jesus Christ for the Remission of sins and ye shall Receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost As Remission is here made the end of Baptism so it is present Remission For. 1. It is such as is the consequent of the Repentance which Peter exhorteth them to but that was present Remission 2. It was to precede the giving of the Holy Ghost in the sense there mentioned therefore it was present Remission The great Reasons that are brought to the contrary I shall answer afterwards and more fully then prove the vanity and foul consequents of their opinion that make a future Remission to be the intended end of our Administration of Baptism and therefore I must desire the Reader to suspend his expectations of my further Reasons à Natura rei till their due place Beza in loc saith in nomen Christi id est dans Christo nomen cujus mortis sepulturae ac resurrectionis simus in Baptismo participes cum peccatorum Remissione Nec enim hoc declarat formulam Baptismi sed finem scopum So Deodate In the name viz. Not only for a Mark of our Profession of the Gospel but also to participate of his spiritual vertue in the washing away of your sins with which he accompanieth and ratifyeth the external Ceremony in those who are his Bullinger in loc saith Baptizari in nomine Domini Jesu Christi est Baptismatis signo testari se Christo credere ad Remissionem peccatorum 1. Mark it is not only an engagement to Believe hereafter but the Profession of a present Faith 2. And that not a common faith but that which hath Remission of sin 3. And this was not an accidental separable use of Baptism but he makes this the very exposition of Baptizari in nomine Jesu Christi And next addeth Vel est in Baptismo per Christum recipi in gratiam Mark then that even Baptism into the name of Christ it self doth signifie that we are received into Gods favor by Christ And thus he expoundeth the Covenant in the next words Est enim Baptismus pactum seu foedus gratiae quod init inter baptizandum nobiscum Christus And that it is a Professing sign of our true Repentance he shews before Et rectissimè conjungitur Poenitentia Baptismus quia Baptismus Poenitentiae signum est Marlorate in loc goes further and shews that Remission doth in order go before Baptism and multitudes of our Divines say the like as may be seen in the abundant citations of them by Mr. Gataker against Doctor Ward and Bishop Davenant Tametsi in contexu verborum Baptismus Remissionem hìc praecedit ordine tamen sequitur quia nihil aliud est Mark nihil aliud quà m bonorum quae per Christum consequimur obsignatio ut in conscientiis nostris data sint The words are Calvins in loc owned by Marlorate The same Cal. in loc to shew that Remission of sin goeth before baptism
addeth Caeterùm longa expositione non indiget quòd baptizari jubet in remissionem â—eccatorum Tametsi enim semel homines sibi reconciliavâ—t Deus in Christo non imputando illis peccata 2 Cor. 5 19. nunc hujus reconciliationis fideÌ„ cordibus nostris per spirituÌ„ suum imprimit quia tamen Baptismus sigilluÌ„ est quo hoc beneficâ—uÌ„ nobis confirmat adeoque arrka pignus adoptionis nostâ—ae meritò dari nobis in remissionem peccatorum dicitur Nam quia fide percipimus Christi dona fidei autem confirmandae augendae Baptismus adminiculum est illi tanqua inferiori medio remissio peccâ—tâ—â—uÌ„ quae fidei est effectus annectitur I hope I need not stand to shew what Calvin here supposeth the use of Christs Baptism to be or what faith it presupposeth And that you may see what he takes to enter the very Definition of Baptism he addeth Porrò non est sumenda ex hoc loco Definitio Baptismi quia ejus partem duntaxat Petrus attingit Per Baptismum ut Paulus docet crucifigitur vetus homo noster ut in vitae novitatem resurgamus Rom 6.4 8. Item induimus Christum ipsum Gal. 3.27 1 Cor. 12. passim docet Scriptura esse Poenitentiae quoque symbolum Indeed Calvin doth often fall upon the Papists that make baptism to have no force against any sin but those before Baptism But 1. He makes actual Baptism ever to be first for washing away our past present sin not then to pardon future sin but to put the person into an estate wherein he hath a remedie for future sin at hand and certain 2. And he intendeth that Baptism as reviewed by faith afterward may be usefull to confirm our Belief of Forgiveness of renewed sin which made Bellarmine fall upon him and other Protestants as holding that the very remembrance of Baptism is effectual for pardon of sin Also on the same 38. verse Calvin takes special notice of the order of Peters words and gives it us as the summ of Christianity Primò hortatus fuerit Judaeos ad poenitentiam Deinde eroxerit eos veniae fiducia nam peccatorum remissionem illis remisit 3. Quia non reconciliamur Deo nisi intercedente Christi morte nec aliter quà m ejus sanguine peccata nostra expiantur delentur ideò neminatim Petrus ad ipsum nos revocat Quarto loco baptismum ponit tanquam figillum quo gratiae promissio confirmatur Quare in his paucis verbis totam ferè habemus Christianismi summam Nempe ut homo sibi renuncians mundo totum se Deo addicat Deinde ut gratuita peccatorum remissione à reatu mortis liberetur adeóque adoptetur inter filios Dei Piscator in loc saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id est in Testimonium Remissionis peccatorum ut habentes scilicét Testimonium Divinum quòd Deus vobis remiserit peccata vestra propter Jesum Christum in queÌ„ creditis Non autem ad consequendam RemissioneÌ„ peccatorum per hoc mediuÌ„ sive instrumentuÌ„ Baptismus est medium sen instrumentuÌ„ quo Spiritus sanctus utitur ad fidem confimanduÌ„ Vid. ultr The next Text we shall cite is Act. 22.16 Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins calling on the name of the Lord. Though the Papists vainly would hence gather that Baptism doth wash away sin ex opere operato yet we may well gather 1. That it washeth it away by Confirmation and Obsignation 2. And this is the instituted use of Baptism and not to signifie what may or will be done hereafter Calvin on this Text saith non dubium est quin fideliter rudimentis Pietatis Paulum imbuerit Ananias neque enim verae fidei expertem baptizasset After he shews that it was a confirmation of the pardon that Paul had before Joh. 3.5 Exceâ—t a man be born of water and of the spirit he shal not enter into the kingdom of God Though we are agreed against the Papists that Christ intendeth not here to place the same necessity in Baptism as there is in or of the New birth by the spirit yet it is by most acknowledged that Christ doth here speak of the New Birth as signified by Baptism and so hath respect to Baptism as the ordinary confirming sign And so the text fully sheweth us that Baptism is instituted to be the sign of our present Regeneration Or else it could not be said that we must be born of water and the spirit And that Remission of sin is here included I have said somewhat to prove in a Treat against infidelity Part. 4. initio Calvin saith most are of Chrysostoms mind who took it to be meant of Baptism And so did the generality of antient Expositors And though himself and some more think otherwise yet as long as they take it to be a Metonymical expression the sign being put for the thing Signified it doth as well acquant us with the use of Baptism as if it were a proper speech Bullinger in loc saith Hâ—nc Christi sententiam omnes penè de Baptismo interpretantur Beza believeth that the Text speaks of Baptism either Christs or some other but rather Christs Piscator on the text hath these words Nam ipsa Baptismi perceptione saluteÌ„ consequimur quuÌ„ non sit institutus nisi ad Remissionem peccatorum sanguine Christi partam itemque Regenerationem spiritus testandam Baptismus additur fidei non quòd parem rationem ac vim habâ—at sed quòd ad fidem testandam confirmandam adhibeatur Ita hìc Baptismus additur spiritui quod forès testetur id quod spiritus intus peragit though he rather interpret the Text as Calvin I have shewed before from Mar. 1.4 and other places that Johns Baptism was for Remission of sins that is saith Gataker to seal us the pardon which we have received And if the very Scripture description of it was The Baptism of Repentance for Remission of sins then it was not an accidental or separable use as to the Intention which the Administrator and Receiver are bound to And justly doth Beza in Mat. 1.4 fall upon Erasmus sharply for saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Praepositio Praeparationem significat non effectum because Repentance and Remission saith Beza cannot be separated so that he took it not to be a common preparatory Repentance or Baptism Piscator on Mar. 1.4 saith it s called the Baptism of Repentance for Remission of sin because John preached Remission of sin to the penitent and believers praecipiebatque ut in hujus rei testimonium atque professionem baptizarentur And that it s called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est Qui resipiscentiae testificandae atque profitendae adhibebatur Neque enim baptizabat nisi eos qui confessione pecatorum edita resipiscentiam suam testatam reddebant Caeterum nomine Resipiscentiae per Synecdochë membri simul intelligenda est fides in Christum And he
expounds the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus Id est praed cabat baptisma resipiscentiae quod ad Remissionem peccatorum pertinet seu destinatum est ut Act. 2.38 sed hoc est rectè intelligenduÌ„ viz ad Remissionem peccatoruÌ„ testificandam sive obsignandam non autem ad illam consequendam hoc opere And on Mal. 3.11 Observe he shews that Christs Baptism and Johns are the same in that both have the same end and use viz. Obsignatio Remissionis peccatorum Resipiscentiae that is as already extant as his Judgement is oft delivered As in his Schol. on ver 11. he expresly saith In resipiscentiâ—m id est in testimonium Resipiscentiae ut nimirum susceptione baptismi testatum faciatis vos resipuisse indies magis ac magis resipiscere velle sed simul hìc intelligendum Joannem baptizasse quoque in remissionem peccatorum hoc est in remissionem peccatorum ut nimirum nomine Dei testatum faceret resipiscentibus in Christum credentibus peccata ipsis remissa esse propter Christum agnum Dei. And I pray mark his observation on Mat. 3.6 8 10. concluding our present Question Baptismus nulli adulto conferendus est nisi prius ediderit confessionem peccatoruÌ„ fidei in ChristuÌ„ ac praeterea promissionem sanctae vitae which he proves And as he shews that it is Saving Faith and Repentance that he means which hath the promise of remission so the promise of a holy Life cannot be sincerely made by any till he have a Regenerate heart See Doctor Hammond on Mark 1.4 Calvin on Mat. 3.6 saith ergò ut se ritè ad Baptismum offerant homines peccatorum Confessio ab illis requiritur alioqui enim quà m inane esset ludicrum tota actio If I had charged the guilty so of making the whole work of Baptism ludicrous they would have been highly offended Calvin shews his judgement that it is a true special Repentance which he would require this Confession to manifest And he addeth Notandum est de adultis hic verba fieri quos scimus non promiscuè in Ecclesiam esse admittendos nec Baptismo initiandos esse in corpus Christi nisi examine prius habito viz. about the said Repentance and Faith Paraeus on Mat. 3.5 shews that the order was that Confession as a testimony of true Repentance go first and then Baptism for Remission of sins confessio post ponitur sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 constructionis Confesii baptizabantur pro Cum confessi essent peccata baptismum accipiebant Sacramentum remissionis peccatorum Non prius baptizabantur postea confitebantur Auditores igitur primò in testimonium Resipâ—scentiae confitebantur sua peccata deinde baptizabaÌ„tur tertiò fide Baptismi fructum suscipiebant RemissioneÌ„ peccatorum Docet hic locus varia 1. Quod Baptismus sit sacramentuÌ„ Remissionis peccatorum ex parte Dei spondet enim Deus ceu jurejurando baptizatis remissionem gratuitam peccatorum propter Christum 2. Quod sit etiam sacramentum Resipiscentiae ex parte nostra Restipulamur enim Deo fidem poenitentiam pro tanto beneficio That is both profess it at present and engage to continue in it answering the interrogation Credis with a Credo and not only a Credam 3. Ad Sacramenta non esse admittendos Impoenitentes He speaks of the Repentance which had the promise of Remission Hoc enim damus Anabaptistis in Ecclesiam suscipiendos baptizandos non esse nisi praevia confessione Fidei Poenitentiae by the adult quem morem vetus servavit Ecclesia nostrae hodie observant si vel Judaeus vel Turca adultus baptismo sit iniâ—i indus And on verse 7. he saith which will be harsh to our Opponents Ex concione ipsa datur intelligi multos illerum simulata poenitentia etiam baptismuÌ„ petivisse Horum hypocrisin cùm non ignoraret non passus eos latere in turba nec ad baptismum indignos admisit sed acri objurgatione hortatione comminatione ad seriam resipiscentiam extimulat ad baptismum praeparat where he goeth three steps beyond our Opposers who 1. will not have us require as necessary so much as a shew of this Repentance 2. Much less the sincerity of it 3. nor to deny them Baptism as unworthy till they are prepared After he shews that Hypocrits will creep in among the good partly such as we cannot discern and those are to be left to the judgement of God partim manifesti quos Pastores admittere non debent sine examine nè Sacramenta prostâ—tuant sibi Ecclesiae reatum attrahant How little do our confident opposers fear this Facite fructus dignos Poenitentiae Pro Cavete mihi vel Deo hypocrisi illudere sed videte ut veram poenitentiam agatis ab erroribus peccatis vestris siâ— baptismum Novae Ecclesiae sacramentum suscipiatis Fructus poenitentiae vocat ut palam erroribus sectis vitiis suis renuncient emendatione vitae se novos homines deinceps testentur Non enim satis est foris poeniteÌ„tiaÌ„ simulare quod etiaÌ„ hypocritae solent c. And p. 56. against Maldonate he proveth the Baptism of Christ and John all one and when Maldonate saith that John baptized in poenitentium baptismus praecedebat poenitentia sequebatur confessing that in Christs Baptism Repentance precedes he answereth that it is false Nam etiam in Joannis baptismo praecedebat poenitentia sequebatur baptismus If then it be certain that Johns Baptism was for present Remission of sins even the obsignation of a Remission already conferred by the promise it will be at least as evident that Christs Baptism is so to and accordingly to be administred Hence it is that the Faith which the Apostles before they baptized men did perswade them to was still a Justifying Faith as Act. 13.38 39. passim as that which they were to annex the Seal of Baptism to or to Gods promise on mens believing 2 Pet. 1.9 It is said of the barren ungodly Professor that he hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins where I take it for a clear case that it is the Baptismal Washing which the Apostle there intendeth wherein all profess to put off the Old Man and to be washed from their former filthiness For I suppose we shall be loth to yield that it was an actual cleansing either of Remission or Mortification which the Apostle meaneth left we grant that men may fall from such a state And therefore it must be a Sacramental washing or Cleansing wherein the matter was appearingly and sacramentally transacted From whence it is plain that the Apostle took it for granted that as all the Baptized were visibly Church-Members so were they all visibly washed from their old sins which sheweth both what was their own Profession and what was the stated end and use of the Ordinance The Apostle saith
profess to assent to the truth of that Doctrine and no moâ—e unless as that Assent may imply the Consent of the Will are not Saints But let us peruse some other Texts besides these that Mr. Blake citeth The Congregations of the Saints are mentioned in the Old Testament as Psal. 89 5 7. and 149 1. But what Saints these were may appear by the Promises made to them Ps. 149.5 9 4 16.3 37.28 97.10 132.9 16. 145 10. The Children of Israel a people neer unto him are called Saints Psal. 148.14 but it is because they are a part of them his people in heart and the rest profess themselves to be his People in a saving sense And if there were any that did not so he was not an Israelite by Religion nor to be of that Common-wealth but to be cut off from his People Acts 9.13 The Saints at Jerusalem that Paul persecuted were such as not only professed saving Faith but also had the witness of Martyrdom and Persecutions to testifie their Sincerity They that continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship and breaking bread and prayers having all things common selling their possessions and goods and parting them to all men as every man had need praising God c. did profess more then a Faith and Repentance short of that by which we are saved But so did the Church at Jerusalem Act. 2.41 42. to the end yea the multitude of them that Believed were of one heart one soul and great grace was upon them all c. Acts 4.32 to 36. so that we may see what Saints the Church at Jerusalem were And if all were not such we see evidently that the whole was denominated from such The Church of Rome were all called Saints Rom. 1.7 True But what was meant by that word and what Saints did they appear to Paul by their Profession to be Even such as were beloved of God whose Faith was spoken of throughout the world that were dead to sin but alive to God that had obeyed from the heart that form of Doctrine delivered to them and being made free from sin became the servants of Righteousness and of God having their fruit to holiness and the end everlasting life Rom. 1.7 8. and 6 11 14 17 18 21. whose obedience was come abroad to all men Rom. 16.19 Here is more then the Profession of a common Faith The Corinthians are called Saints True But what is meant by Saints such as called on the name of the Lord Iesus Christ having much of his grace enriched by him in all things coming behind in no Gift waiting for the coming â—f our Lord Iesus Christ who shall confirm them to the end that they may be blameless at his coming 1 Cor. 1.2 to ver 10. all was theirs 1. Cor. 3.22 23. They were such Saints as were washed and sanctified and justified in the name of the Lord Iesus and by the Spirit of God and such as were to â—udge the World and the Angels Chap. 6.3 11. delivered from that unrighteousness that would have kept from Heaven ver 9.10 11. such as had no temptation but what was common to man whom the faithful God would not suffer to be tempted above their strength c. Chap. 10.13 such as were not so much as to eat with the notoriously wicked Chap. 5 11. and therefore doubtless Professed Godliness themselves in whom godly sorrow had wrought carefulness clearing of themselves zeal c. 2 Cor. 7.11 in whom the Apostle had confidence in all things ver 16. Object But Paul saith they were carnal and taxeth them with some gross Errors and Sins Answ. 1. So are all the Regenerate carnal in part and guilty of too many sins And it is not Impenitency after admonition that he chargeth them with Their sin was no worse to our eye than David's or Solomon's 2. If any were so bad as to be notoriously ungodly those are not of that number whom he calleth Saints as they are not of them that have the following Descriptions of Saints which I have cited but only were among them but not of them The Galathians I find not called Saints but to call them a Church of Christ or Believers is Equipollent And what Saints were they Why they were all the Sons of God by Faith in Christ Jesus having been baptized into Christ and put him on and were all one in him and were Abraham's seed and heirs according to the Promise Gal. 3.26 27 29. And because they were sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into their hearts by which they cryed Abba Father and therefore were no more servants but sons and if sons then heirs of God through Christ. Object But Paul was afraid of them lest he bestowed upon them labour in vain Answ. 1. It appeareth by what is said that it was not such a fear as made him take them for ungodly 2. This confirmeth what I maintain that the Apostles judgement of them proceeded according to the Evidences of probability He took himself bound to believe their Profession so far as they contradicted it not and according to the prevalency of their Errors which were against it he was jealous of their condition and if they had proceeded so far as to have declared themselves certainly ungodly Paul would have denominated them a Church no more The Church of Ephesus are called Saints Eph. 1.1 But what Saints such as were blessed with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ chosen before the foundation of the world to be holy and without blemish before him in love pâ—edestinated to the adoption of Children by Jesus Christ according to the good pleasure of his will to the praise of the glory of his Grace wherein he made them accepted in the beloved in whom they had redemption through his blood the remission of sins and have obtained an Inheritance being predestinated c. Who trusted in Christ and were sealed with the Holy Spirit of Promise which is the earnest of their Inheritance they were such as believed in the Lord Jesus and loved all the saints and were quickened who had been dead in trespasses and sins were raised up together and made to sit in heavenly places If Mr. Blake while he abhorreth the name of a Saint or Church equivocally so called would not make all words equivocal that in Scripture are used to denominate or describe a Church or Saint we might easily be resolved by such passages as these what Paul meaneth by a Church or Saint See further Eph. 3.18 All Saints comprehend what is the breadth and length depth height and Christ dwelleth in their hearts by faith and they rooted and grounded in love Eph. 3.17 18. But Mr. Blakes Saints do none of this therefore they are no Saints in Scripture sense With this text compare Eph. 2.19 and see what a Church is and what it is to be fellow-Citizens with the Saints and of the houshold of God and
what persons have such a thing The like testimonies the Apostle John gives of them as may quickly be seen But all the doubt is Whether the seven reproved Churches in Rev. 2. and 3. were such or not To which I say 1. All of them professed the foresaid saving Faith 2. There is no sin charged on them that was visible and inconsistent with true saving Faith 1. For the Church of Ephesus we heard what they were esteemed by Paul a little before and here their grace is mentioned and the faults expressed are consistent with true grace 2. The same I say of the Churches of Pergamus and Thyatyra And for the Nicolaitans and other Hereticks whom they are blamed for suffering as the former is commended for hating them they are such as were to be cut off from the Church and while they were in it were not of it Nor are they any where called Believers Saints Disciples or Church-members But it is the Church of Sardis that Mr. Blake takes special notice of And it is said of her indeed that she had a Name to live and was dead But 1. in that they had a name to live it seems it was a living faith which they Professed and not only one short of it 2. Their death was not a death in reigning sin such as is the death of the unsanctified But a declining condition comparatively called death as the children of God do oft complain of deadness And therefore its next said Be watchful and strengthen the things that remain that are ready to dye And it s exprest that their deadness was in that their works were not found perfect before God that is that many or most of them had defiled their garments with some Heresie or vice which the rest had not done 3. How far this was notorious to others is of further enquiry 4. If they had gone on so far as by obstinate impenitency after admonition to shew themselves void of saving faith they had been unchurched as appeareth by the threatning The Church of Philadelphia is so far commended as that the case is put out of doubt And the Church of Laodicea though discommended hath nothing visible charged upon it inconsistent with sincerity and the luke-warmness which is charged on them they are threatned to be spewed out for and so to be unchurched And thus we see what a Church was and what Saints were and what Believers and Disciples were supposed to be by the Apostles and what is the signification of these words in Scripture for they are all of the same extent Mr. Blake saith He is a believer in Scripture that is a visible Professor that puts himself in the number of those that expect salvation by Jesus Christ. Answ. 1. A Professor of what Of true saving faith 2. Not that puts himself among them locally only for so may an Infidel but that becomes one of them as far as to a Profession of it And if they expect salvation by Christ either they profess that faith which salvation is annexed to or else they give God the lye and contradict both Scripture and themselves even in their very Profession As if they should say I look to be saved by Christ but I will not take him for my Saviour nor be saved from sin by him And sure such a Profession makes no mâ—n a Saint Believer or Church-member Thus much I have said to prove that all the Baptized are accounted Saints and therefore Professed a saving Sanctity The second Title which I mentioned follows of which I shall be more brief All the Baptized are accounted to be dead and risen with Christ even dead to sin and risen to newness of life therefore they all profess a saving faith The proof of this is full in the two Texts already cited Rom. 6. and Col. 2.11 12. Rom. 6.33 c. How shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death Therefore we are buried with him by Baptism into death that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father so we also should walk in newness of Life For if we have been planted together into the likeness of his Death we shall be also in the likeness of his Resurrection Knowing this that our old man is crucified with him that the body of sin might be destroyed that hence forth we should not serve sin for he that is dead is freed from sin Now if we be dead with Christ we believe that we shall also live with him Likewise reckon ye also your selves to be dead indeed unto sin but alive unto God through Iesus Christ our Lord. Here is a full Report of the use of Baptism and the Profession of all that are Baptized and the state that they are supposed to be in so that I cannot speak it plainlier than the words themselves do Calv. on the Text saith Extra Controversiam est induere nos Christum in Baptismo hâc lege nos baptizari ut unum cum ipso simus Imò docet hanc mortis societatem praecipuè in Baptismo spectandam esse Neque enim ablutio sola illic sed mortificatio quoque veteris hominis interitus proponitur Vnde palà m fit ex quo recipimur in Christi gratiam mortis ejus efficaciam statim emergere Porro quid valeat haeâ— cum morte Christi societas continuo sequitur ut scilicet nobis emortui si amus novi homines Nam à mortis societate transitum merito facit ad vitae participationem quia haec duo inter se individuo nexu cohaerent veterem hominem Christi morte aboleri ut ejus resurrectio justitiam instauret nosque efficiat novas creaturas Haec autem est Doctrina Quod Mors Christi efficax est ad nequitiam carnis nostrae extinguendam ac prostigandam Resurrectio vero ad suscitandam melioris naturae novitatem quódque per Baptismum in istius gratiae participationem cooptamur In summa Qualis sit Baptismi ritè suscepti veritas docet So Col. 2.11 12. which I shall not stay to recite because it is to the same purpose and before cited The third Title mentioned in the Argument is this All that are Baptized have Professedly put on Christ therefore they have professed saving Faith The Antecedent is expressed Gal. 3.27 For as many as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. The Consequence is proved in that to put on Christ heartily is to be made true partakers of him and living members of him therefore to Profess this is inseparable from the Profession of saving Faith yea by that faith is he truly put on Putting on Christ is the same with Putting on the New man which after God is created in Righteousness and true holiness being renewed in the spirit of our minds Ephes. 4.20 21 22 23 24. Col. 3.10 It is putting on the New
neer Learned Friends have done for more than I will speak of It s like he will hardly exact a Profession of saving Repentance from the lapsed for their Restoration to the communion of the Church if he will not do it of the Church themselves in their Sacramental communion Argum. 4. Furthermore they that will not profess true Love to Christ as a Redeemer are not to be admitted to the Lords Supper But no man can Profess true Love that will not Profess true faith Ergo c. The Major is proved in that it is a Sacrament of communion in Love We receive the highest expressions of Christs love and are to receive them with gratitude which hath alwaies love in it Argum. 5. They that profess not true Pope of Christs coming in Glory are not to be admitted to the Lords Supper But none can do that but the Professors of a saving faith Therefore the Major is proved because it is the very end and use of the Sacrament to exercise Hope of Christs coming Do this in remembrance of me till I come which Implyeth Expectation or Hope Argum. 6. No man is to be admitted to the Lords Supper that Professeth not a sincere love to the Saints as Saints But so can none do that Profess not a saving faith without contradicting himself Ergo. The Major is proved in that the very business of that Church there next their communion with Christ is to have communion with the Saints in Love and if they be at variance but with one they must leave their gift at the Altar and go first and be reconciled to their Brother and then come and offer their gift But Mr. Blake is so far from excluding the ungodly that he would not have us so much as disswade them from coming Pag. 196. he saith to that 1. It is as I suppose without all Scripture Precedent to warn men upon account of want of a new life by the Spirit wholly to keep off from this or any other Ordinances of Christ that we should warn men upon this account upon this very ground to hold off from all address to Ordinances I have not learnt Answ. That we should disswade them to come till they have that Faith and Repentance and Love to the Brethren which is the fruit of a new life I have proved and more have done it than you will ever well answer And it will not follow as you pretend that then none must come that have not the certainty of their sincerity in the Faith as I shall further shew when I come purposely to your Objections And where you talk of unregenerate mens being incapable of examining themselves it s a great mistake else no wicked man could despair if he be not able to find himself to be wicked And then it would be a sufficient Evidence of Grace for a man to find himself graceless which is a contradiction And it s an unhappy confusion that Mr. Blake is guilty of almost all along while he pleadeth against the Interest of the Regenerate only in the Sacraments that he confoundeth most commonly the Professors of Justifying Faith and holiness with his Professors of a faith short of Justifying and thus in his arguing against Mr. Hooker and Galaspie and others carrieth on the matter in the dark as if these were all one or the arguments will serve for the one that will serve for the other which is meerly to lose his own and his Readers labour or leave him deceived which is worse How many leaves of that volumn and his former of the covenants are guilty of this dark misleading work I could willingly here answer his Arguments for unregenerate mens right to this Sacrament but 1. I shall meet with much more about their pretended right to baptism anon and the answer of those will serve for both 2. And he hath so mixt the two Cases of Professors of saving faith and of not saving together that if I deal with him on the later he may say he speaks of the former The first Argument of Galaspies 201 which he answereth is from the Nature of Sacraments which are to signifie that we have already Faith in Christ Remission of sin by him and Union with him The sense of the Argument is That seeing Sacraments according to Christs institution are confirming signs presupposing the thing signified both on our part and on Gods therefore none should use them that have not first the thing signified by them at least those at age To this Master Blake answereth This to me is as strange as new that Sacramental signs declare shew that we have Faith remission of sins The Sacrament now in question is a sign of the body blood of Christ in whom by faith remission of sins may be obtained I know but that it is a sign either that we do believe or that we have remission of sin otherwise than upon believing to which this engages but not presupposes I know not Repl. Though I undertake not to defend all the Arguments that other men use in this Case yet this doth so much concern the cause of baptism which I am now debating that I shall give you this reply to it 1. The sacramental Actions are signs as well as the substance of bread and wine The Offer with Take eat signifieth the offer of Christ to us to be received and applyed the Taking and Eating and Drinking signifieth our Acceptance Application of him With himself is offered the pardon of sin and given to all that Accept him which by Taking Eating and Drinking we profess to do It is my duty to tell you that it is sad that a Treatise of Sacraments should profess not to know that our believing and Remission is here signified It s pity but this had been known before you had written of them at least Controversally What Divines are there that deny the Sacraments to be mutual signs and seals signifying and sealing our part as well as Gods and how ill do you to wrong the Church of God by seeking to make men believe that these things are new and strange If it be so to you its pity that it is so But sure you have seen Mr. Gatakers Books against Doct. Word and Davenant wherein you have multitudes of sentences recited of our Protestant Divines that affirm this which you call new It is indeed their most common doctrine that the Sacrament doth pre-suppose Remission of sin and our faith and that they are instituted to signifie these as in being though through infancy or error some may not have some benefits of them till after it is the common Protestant Doctrine that Sacraments do solemnize and publikely own and confirm the mutual Covenant already entered in heart as a King is crowned a Souldier listed a Man and Woman married after professed consent so that the sign is Causal as to the Consummation and Delivery as a Key a Twig and Turff in giving possession but consequential to the Contract
other and they ever lye under all this Obligation You next instance in Prayer and conclude that As for Prayer there is no more ground or colour to make it a converting Ordinance than the Supper c. Repl. 1. A man that hath but common desires may be perswaded to ask for what he so desires Though he have no Promise of Acceptance you do not find him threatned with judgement for such a Prayer so it be not groslâ— hypocritical or wicked as he is for unworthy receiving the Supper without a discerning the Lords Body 2. When we exhort any man to pray for Christs pardon the Spirit c. we therein exhort him to desire them for desire is the soul of Prayer and the chief part of its essence Now the first of these desires which we exhort them to is conversion it self even that they would turn to God by a change of their wills and express them in Prayer 3. I can shew you where the wicked are commanded to seek the Lord that is by Prayer to express their returning hearts which implyeth their returning it self but you cannot shew where ever they are commanded to communicate with the Church in the Sacrament but in this order first to be converted and repent and so baptized and so communicate or if Baptized already to be Penitents first and Communicants next But if you would have all exhorted to the Lords Supper for conversion whom we are bound to exhort to Prayer for conversion you would do that which I confess I dare not do The 11. Argument was that Ordinance which is Eucharistical and consolatory supposeth such as partake of it to have part and portion in that thing for which thanks is given c. but c. To this it s answered that the assumption might as well have bin of the Word and Prayer which are Eucharistical and Consolatory Repl. 1. To hear a Sermon is not to give thanks 2. The Application of the Word must be according to mens various states An unregenerate man may take this for consolation If I be converted and repent and believe I shall be saved A true believer may apply it to another measure of consolation because I am a believer this Promise is mine that is secureth me of the benefit Now if the Impenitent and unbeliever shall do the later he sins such another sin as if he received the Sacrament which is an Ordinance Instituted for personal assumption and application of the general Promise 2. As for Prayer 1. To petition is not to give thanks 2. And for Thanksgiving it self an Impenitent man may not give thanks for true saving faith Repentance part in Christ and hope of Glory though he may for the mercy that he hath because he may not lye Now in the Lords Supper we must give thanks for our part in Christ and pardon and life through him or at least for the present Gift of Christ to us which we consent to accept It s added This Ordinance is not wholly Eucharistical c. It is for humbling as well as for comforting Repl. But if the other use be common to it with other Ordinances and here Inseparable from the Eucharistical then other Ordinances may be used to that end but this may not by him that may not do both because if he receive the Sacrament he signally Professeth both The substance of the twelfth Argument with its answer is spoke to before where Mr. Blake saith that The unregenerate may so far be suitably worthy for this work that he may know himself called to it and that it would be his sin to hold back from it and he may hopefully expect a blessing in it I reply 1. That he is called to it remotely that is first to repent and believe and to communicate we yield and that it is every mans sin that keeps off that is that comes not in this order But that he may lawfully come before this Repentance you never proved nor shall do I think 2. I would you could shew us on what ground he may hopefully expect a blessing in it True hope goeth not beyond the promise but the unregenerate have no promise unless the Arminians be in the right of a blessing on any Ordinance much less on that which they cannot prove that they may use till they are converted Yet Hope in a larger sense they may have where they can prove that God hath set them a work though they have no promise But that 's not here The 13th Argument is That Ordinance which was instituted for Communion of Saints is intended only for Saints c. It s answered by distinguishing of Sants as such by calling and separation for God or regeneration and that the Lords supper is the priviledge of the Church as visible Repl. Its one thing to ask Who may demand it and come there and another to ask To whom may we give it We may give it to all professedly separated for God None may ask or take it but those that are heartily separated to God But your Professor of a lower faith is neither of these and therefore may neither seek it nor may we give it him if he do seek it Whoever professeth himself separated for God doth profess saving sanctification which consisteth therein Self and Earth is highest in all the unregenerate therefore they are not separated heartily to God The 14th Argument was If Baptism it self to the adult is not regenerating or converting then not the Lords supper but c. This Argument Mr. Blake hath no more to say to but that this seemeth to suppose an opinion of Conversion by the very work done which he disclaimeth But here is no such supposition at all intimated and he should have dealt with it as he found it and not so have bawkt it especially when Mr. Gilaspie had so explained and confirmed it And because Mr. Blake thought best to silence Mr. Gilaspie's proof of his Assumption and I think it worthy the Readers observation at least that he may see how far Mr. Blake is from truth in his affirmations of the singularity of my opinion I shal here transcribe them Aaron 's Rod blossoming pag. 514.515 The assumption that baptism it self is not a Regenerating Ordinance I prove thus 1. Because we read of no persons of age baptized by the Apostles except such as did profess faith in Christ gladly received the Word and in whom some begun work of the Spirit of Grace did appear I say not that it really was in all but somewhat of it did appear in all 2. If the baptism of those who are of age be a regerating Ordinance then you suppose the person to be baptized to be an unregenerate person even as when a Minister first preacheth the Gospel to Pagans he cannot but suppose them to be unregenerate But I believe no Conscientious Minister N. B. would adventure to Baptize one who hath manifest and Infallible signs of unregeneration Sure we cannot
that I know not of any man else living esteemed a Christian Pastor that baptizeth upon any lower faith without the profession of a justifying faith and that Repentance which is its constant concomitant I had gathered a great many expressions of the Antients which I had thought to have inserted to shew their judgement But perceiving it wholly needless because of the forementioned Evidence I supersede that labour And it seems not very necessary to mention the judgements of our reformed Divines as expressed in any of their particular sayings when their publike Confessions and Practises are so satisfactory herein I have recited many of their Testimonies before and more that conduce to this end I shall reserve to the following Disputation and therefore shall here add the fewer Calvin in Act. 8.37 saith Quòd non admittitur Eunuchus ad baptismuÌ„ nisi fidem professus hinc sumenda est universalis regula Non ante recipiendos esse in EcclesiaÌ„ qui ab ea prius fuerant alieni quam ubi testati fuerint Christo se credere Est enim Baptismus quasi sidei appendix ideoque ordine posterior est Deinde si datur sine fide cujus est figilluÌ„ impia nimis crassa est prophanatio Here note 1. That Baptism as received is the seal of our faith how much soever denied by Mr. Blake as it is the seal of Gods Promise as administred 2. that the constant order is that baptism follow faith 3. And that it is no better than an impious profanation of it if it go without faith that is 1. If the party seek it without the Presence of faith 2. If the Pastor administer it without the Profession of Faith And that it is no other than true Christian saving Faith that he means appears by his following words Sed scriptura totum cor saepe accipit pro sincero non fucato cui opponitur Cor duplex Ita non est quod perfectè credere imaginemur qui ex toto corde credunt quando infirma pusilla sides in eo esse poterit cui tamen integer erit animus omni fictione purus Sic accipere convenit quod David juctat Se diligere Dominum ex toto corde c. Fides ergo totius cordis est quae in corde vivas radices habens ad quotidiâ—nos tamen profectus aspirat The foresaid passage of Calvin is lately cited by some Ministers that put forth certain propositions tending to Reformation of the Parish Congregations in England pâ—inted for the Norwich Bookseller 1655. p. 16. who p. 17. answer Mr. Blakes opinion Calvin in Act. 2.38 Tametsi in contextu verborum bâ—ptismus remissionem peccatorum hìc praeceâ—it ordine tamen sequitur quia nihil aliud est quam bonorum quae per Christum consequimur obsignatio c. See the rest there before cited See him also at large Institut lib. 4. cap. 15. where he shews that Baptism is appointed to seal up the present pardon of sin and to shew our mortification and newness of life c. And so that it is to be administred to them that believe Yet he maintaineth that the use of it is also for the pardon of sin through all our life after but that is only to be given as the consolation of the truly penitent Beza confess sid cap. 4. § 46 17. pa. mihi 28 29. knows no faith but one and that the saving faith which all must bring to the Sacrament that will have the thing signified and all that are without it he reckoneth hypocriets and knows no other baptized ones but elect believers and hypocrites and saith that upon the confession of true faith in baptism we are to take them for faithfull till they shew themselves hypocrites Affiâ—mamus signa exteriora naturali modo percipituÌ„ à fidelibus tuÌ„ ab infidelibus sed contâ—aâ—io proâ—sus eventu Fidâ—les praeter signareâ— ipsas percipiunt c. Res ipsa baptismi est aspersio sanguinis Christi in missionem omnium peccatorum Mortificatio Regeneratio c. Fides antem illud unum est per quod homines rem Sacramenti sibi applicant c. Fides haec non oritur à nobis sed gratuito communicatur electis c. Interea Charitas jubet ut pro fidelibus agnoscamus quotquot veâ—ae fiâ—ei ConfessioneÌ„ edunt tantis per duÌ„ hypocritae patefiant Also in his Absters Calum Heshusiit pag. 333. ad 7 mam Cal. he is more full shewing that Faith and Adoption go before Baptism yet that the Church doth judge ex probabilibus conjecturis an aliquis ad Christum pertineat putà in infantibus si quis ex infidelibus sit prognatus in adultis si quis Christianam fidem se amplecti profiteatur Ecclesiae per baptismum inseri roget And by the next words he shews that he means by being in Covenant and belonging to Christ believing that which is proper to the elect Nam potest quidem esse ex Reproborum numero qui ex fidelibus est prognatus potest aliquis simulare se ChristianuÌ„ sed occulta haec Deo c. Et postea Meritò arbitramur infantes FideliuÌ„ in peculio Domini censeri Spiritu sancto profundi that is before baptism And yet more fully in his Question Respons n. 106 c. pag. 343. Q. Quid significat In Nomen R. Sic declaratur Baptismus esse solenne jusjurandum quo baptizandus sese totum addicit uni Deo trino c. Vid. reliq Now it is certain that he that professeth se totum Deo addicere professeth no less than a saving faith 6r else there is no profession of it Pag. 345. Q. 123. Sed multos etiam ex sanctissimis prognatos ad Foedus nihil pertinere declarat Esavi exemplum quotidiana experientia Mark that he makes ad foedus pertinere proper to the elect R. Multi quoque ex adultis fidem ore profitentibus hypocritae sunt He talks of none but sound believers and hypocrites sed occulta illa particularia judicia Deo relinquenda sunt Benè autem sperare nos inâ—genere de iis omnibus qui ex fidelibus noscuntur foederis forma indefinita jubet charitas monet And the next Question and Answer shews that he speaks of saving Faith And pag. 346. Q. 127. Ergò servantur omnes ex pio parente oriundi R. Certè meritò praesumuntur servandi ut qui in foedere comprehensi videantur probabili neque imaginariâ duntaxat conjecturâ Sed hoc interea nihil praejudicat occultis particularibus Dei judiciite excipiendos esse liquet qui cùm adoleverint illam Gratiam suâ incredulitate excutiunt Pag. 347. Q. 133. Sed quum is qui Papista est non sit verè Christianus non ejusmodi hominem adulium nec dum baptizatum ad Baptismum admitteres R. Nequaquam nisi priùs Catechumenum factum Papismo renunciantem Q Ejusmodi verò
we have no natural capacity of judging but according to evidence and we have no evidence for a certain judgement concerning the estate of another mans heart 2. I have elsewhere made it appear and more abundantly might easily do that when God mentioneth any person qualified with such a Qualification which to us is uncertain to be the object of our Act his meaning is that we should rationally and charitably judge of men according to evidence whether they are such or no and so take them and use them accordingly the Apparere being here as the Esse to us So when he bids us if a Brother wrong us oft and oft say It repenteth me forgive him it is all one with that other If he repent forgive him We know not certainly whether he repent or not but we must take him probably to repent that giveth us the evidence of a probable profession So if we are to baptize those that repent and believe or their children how can we judge of them but by a probable profession 4. It is therefore granted that though such a degree of Ungodliness as is consistent with sincere Godliness be Notorious yet that 's not the subject of our Question for that doth not denominate a man ungodly seeing it is from the predominant part that he must be denominated The Doubt remaineth therefoâ—e abouâ— Ungodliness in the proper sense Notorious as is before explained And I shall now defend the Negative as followâ—th Arg. 1. We have no word of God commanding or Authorizing us to baptize the children of the notoriously ungodly as theirs Therfore is it not our duty or lawfull What command or warrant is pretended from Scripture we shall examine anon Arg. 2. We may not baptâ—ze them who are Notoriously without true Covenant Right to Baptism But such are the children of notorious ungodly Parents Ergo. The Minor is proved before the Major needs no proof I think We should give each his Right Arg. 3. If it be the very reason why we must Baptize the Ungodly and theâ—r Seed who profess Godliness because that by professing it they seem probably to be godly then must we not baptize them who do not seem probably to be godly or if you had rather to be true Believers But the Antecedent is true Therefore so is the Consequent For the Antecedent I have said enough for it to Mr. Blake If it were not propter fidem significandam that profession were required but propter se as the condition of the Covenant then 1. God would not have said He that believeth and is baptized c. And if thou believe with all thy heart thou mayst be baptized and Repent and be baptized c. but rather if thou wilt but say thou believest thou mayst be baptized c. 2. And then all that profess should be justified For all that be in the Mutual Covenant with God actually are justified 3. And then such profession would be of flat necessity to Salvation as well as faith which it is not but on supposition of Opportunity a Call c. I think I may take it for granted that Profession is required sub ratione signi as a sign of the thing professed nor can any man I think give a better reason of its necessity though another after this may be because God will have the outward man to serve him by thus signifying by its operations what are the Elicite Acts and dispositions of the Will The Consequence of the foresaid Major proposition is past doubt I suppose If any think otherwise the next Argument may rectifie them Argu. 4. He that is not to be judged a credible professed Christian or the child of such is not the just object of our act of baptizing Or We ought to baptize none but those whom we should judge true professed Christians and their children But the notoriously Ungodly are not to be judged true professed Christians nor their Children the Children of such therefore not to be baptized As the word Profession signifieth a pretended discovering of the mind with an intention to deceive so I confess it may be called a profession Physically or Metaphysically true But it is not this natural Truth that we here mean nor yet do I stretch the word so high as to comprehend the full gradual correspondency of the Act to the Object but I plainly mean a Moral Truth opposed to a Lye or Falshood And being speaking about moral-Legal things the terms must be necessarily understood according to the Subject So that it were proper in this Case If I simply maintained that such are Not Professors of Christianity at all because in a moral Law-sense they are not such For no man is to give credit to a notorious lye so to speak is equal to silence as to any obligation that it can lay upon another either to believe him or to use him as one that is believed My meaning therefore is that we are not to baptize that man or his child upon a profession which is notoriously false so that our selves and the Congregation do certainly know or have sufficient Reasons to be confident that the man doth lye For the proof of the Minor which I know will be denied thus I prove it If either the Profession be evidently but Equivocally called a true Profession or the Christianity professed be but equivocally called Christianâ—ty then the notoriously ungodly are not to be judged true professed Christans But the one of these is so with all notoriously ungodly persons Ergo. The Major is past doubt seing there must be the true profession of true Christianity that must justly denominate a man at age a true Professor of Christianity If he notoriously want the first he is morally no Professor If he want the later he professeth not â—hristianity To prove the Minor we will begin with the later We speak not now of any Accidentals that pertain not to the Being but tend only to the well-Being of a Christian. Now I hope it is past controversie among us all that it is essential to our Christianity that it be in the Intellect and Will whatever we say of the outward Man and for the Intellect that we believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost And it is essential to our believing in God that we believe him to be our Creator Chief Ruler and chief End and Happiness And to believe in the Son Essentially containeth a believing that he is Jesus Christ our Lord that is that he is the Redeemer of the world who shed his blood to save his people from their sins by pardon and sanctification and who will raise them from the dead and judge them to everlasting Blessedness and who is their Lord and Ruler on this ground and to this end to believe in the Holy Ghost essentially containeth a believing that his Testimony of Christ was true and that he is the Sanctifier of those that shall be saved It is as much essential to Christianity to consent that
God the Father Son and Holy Ghost be such to us as we profess them to be as aforesaid which is included in believing in God and in Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost And therefore the sum of the Covenant is I will be your God upon Redempition by Christ and you shall be my people Now the Notoriously Vngodly do either profess to believe and consent to all this or but to part If to All then they lye of which more anon If but to part then 1. it is not the Christian Faith no more then a heart or a lâ—ver is a man it is but part of it 2. and our Divines wilâ— say that he that doth not believe and consent to the whole Essence of Christianity doth not truly believe or consent to any Essential though for that I determine it not But were their Faith never so firm in any one part it is not Christianity or the Christian Faith without the whole If it be the Christian Faith to believe in God the Father only then those that deny Christ are Christians If it be the Christian Faith to believe only in Christ though they deny the Father or the Holy Ghost then men worse then Infidâ—ls or most Heathens are Christians Indeed there is so necessary a connexion that it is not possible truly to believe in God the Son without believing in the Father and the Holy Ghost and believing the Eternal Glory to which he hath Redeemed us and will lead us If it be Christianity to believe all the Creed by meer Assent then first the Devils are Christians for they believe and tremble Secondly and then it would be a Profession of Christianity to say I do believe Christ to be my Lord by right of Redemption but his Laws are so strict and cross to my pleasures that I am resolved he shall not rule me and I will venture all rather than I will take him for my Ruler on such terms Or to say I believe the Holy Ghost is the Sanctifier of Gods Elect but I will not consent that he shall Sanctifie me Or to say I believe that Christ dyed to save his people from their sins but he shall not save me from mine because I cannot spare them Who dare say that any of these were a Profession of Christianity We must believe with the heart if we be Christians Christianity is not a bare Opinion It lyeth in the covenant of the soul with God and it is the consent of the Will that is that covenanting It is therefore sometime expressed by loving Christ above all They that said This is the Heir believed in a sort with the Assent of the brain but when they add Come let us kill him that the Inheritance may be ours I think they shewed that they professed not Christianity He that saith I will not have this man to raign or rule over me disclaimeth Christianity He that disclaimeth an Essential part disclaimeth the whole It is not the Being without these part All this laid together shews us that Christianity or the Christian Faith truly and properly so called which denominateth a man properly a Christian is specifically distinct as to a moral specification from the faith of the highest unregenerate man When Mr. K. wrote a digression against me on a mistake that I had denyed this I did not think that others would so call me out to the defence of it And seeing that they differ by a moral specification it is clear that they admit not of the same Definition and that the term Faith or Christianity applyed to both these cannot mean the same thing but must here be an equivocal Thus I have cleared it that to profess the belief of one part of the Christian faith only is not to profess the Christian faith or to profess to be a Christian and therefore such are not to be baptized seeing we must baptize them into the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost if we will baptize them with Christian Baptism 2. Next I shall shew that if any Notorious ungodly person do say he believes the whole even in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost such saying is not a true Profession nor valid to its uses To this end let us enquire what it is to Profess Profiteor is publicè fateor Fateor inquit Perottus est à fando quasi vehementer loquor affirmo Fateri enim est sponte aliquid affirmare Confiteri aliquo modo coactum Profiteri ad Gloriam aliquid prae se ferre Martinius rather a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicendus fandus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fatenda so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est sermo Now the natural use of speech is to signifie our mind to others And the very essence of a Profession lyeth in the open declaring of the mind in the very signifying use of the words or actions For it containeth as other signs do 1. The thing signifying or the matter of the sign and that is either words writings or other Actions capable of this use of which there are divers 2. the thing signified which is our Internal Assent and consent 3. The party to whom we signifie it 4. The actual signification or Aptitudinal that is that it be a sign Aptitudinal in it self and actual when rightly observed by others in which Aptitude lyeth the very formal nature of the sign This being so it is most evident that if it have not an Aptitude to signifie our mind it is not a sign You may say if he dissemble yet he may make profession yet profession is no sign of his mind I answer it is no true sign of the thing professed but the end which he pretendeth to use it for is to be a sign and as a sign we expect and receive it and did we know the heart as God doth we need not ask men whether they believe but presently go to their hearts and see and so baptize them or refuse them or their Children It being then the very use that the Church makes of mens profession to signifie mens minds it is clear 1. that where there is nothing that we can justly take as the signification of a mans mind that he believeth as a Christian there is no moral profession of it and where a man signifieth his mind that he doth not so believe there he professeth not to believe And if he make two contrary professions one that he doth believe and the other that he doth not if we know one to be certain and undissembled and the other to be false the later is Null and the former to be received All this being evident it next followeth that we shew that no Notorious ungodly man doth make true profession of Christianity For 1. If it be evident that he useth words not understood as a Parrat then is it not a profession For Ignorantis non est consensus and so nec Professio else a Parrat may be a Professor 2. He maketh openly the contrary Profession
For he doth by words or deeds or both profess that he will not be ruled by Christ that he will not be sanctified or released from his sin that he will not take God and Glory to come for his chief Good but the things of this life and will obey the flesh before God It it be in plain known sins which they can find no vain excuse for some of them will say words of equal force to these but though most will not do so yet their Actions openly profess it But because this is the thing that will be denyed I add further 1. Actions are capable of signifying a mans mind as well as words though not ordinarily so soon or easily yet some Actions do yea and much more certainly 2. God plainly tels us of some that profess that they know God yet in works they deny him so that works can speak as plain as words and deny God and unsay what a deceitful tongue hath said 3. If these persons in question do not thus deny Christ by their works or do not Profess to be no Christians then either it is because ungodliness is consistent with Christianity or doth not comprehend or imply Infidelity or else because the Notoriousness of this ungodliness is no Profession The first cannot be said For 1. As Godliness in a Christian sense comprehendeth Christianity and even the true acknowledgement of the God-head it self so ungodliness containeth the disowning of God and the refusing of all true Love of him or seeking him as our End and it comprizeth in it the refusal of Christ to bring us back to God and of the Spirit to conform our souls and lives to his Will As therefore God is the Ultimate End and Christ as Mediator but the means or way and as loving God is a more excellent duty than believing in Christ in it self considered so ungodliness which is contrary to the Love of God is a greater sin than unbelief in it self as to Jesus Christ the Mediator yea and ever containeth this unbelief as its second and lower part though it be denominated from the opposition to God as the greater part of the sin 2. However no man will deny but that they are concomitant and that every ungodly man is an unbeliever 3. Yea as ungodliness is contrary to our subjection to the Lord Redeemer it is a real part of Infidelity it self I may well conclude therefore that to be Notoriously ungodly is to be Notoriously no Christian but an Unbeliever 2. And that this Notoriousness is a certain profession is evident For 1. the mind is declared by it Christ himself telleth us that out of the heart come Murthers Adulteries c. and out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh If you say men may do such and such things against their will I answer 1. Then they are not Notoriously ungodly if they do not Notoriously shew their wilfulness 2. The Will hath the command of the outward man 2. And as it declareth the mind so doth it certainly declare it For first else still it were not notorious ungodliness 2. Words may be easier counterfeited than Deeds especially the scope of a mans life 3. And hence it is that the Lord Jesus himself when he comes to Judgement will try more by Deeds than verbal Profession and will reject such Professions when they are contradicted by evil actions as Mat. 7. Not every one that saith unto one Lord Lord shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven but he that doth the will of my Father Mat. 25. Christ will convince those by their not feeding cloathing c. his members that they were no true Believers who still go about to justifie themselves And they that shall say Lord have not we eat drunk c. Cast out Devils preacht in thy name shall be answered with a Depart from me ye workers of iniquity I know you not Men shall all be judged according to their works It is clear then that Notorious ungodliness is a Profession or signification of the very mind and will yea and a profession most certain for it cannot be dissembled He that is notoriously ungodly is most certainly no true Christian But the profession which this contradicteth is not so certain nay it is most certainly false So that as God doth so man must take mens works and lives for a Discovery of their mind and judge them by it I have stood the larger on this because that profession of Christianity is the common title that is pleaded for such persons and therefore I have shewed that they are not to be reputed for credible Professors If it be not a probable sign it is not to be taken for a valid profession But words contradicted by the Notorious tenor of the life are no probable sign but these works are a certain sign of the contrary Ergo. If any man yet do think that any words though not probably signifying the mind are a valid profession and to be taken for a Title then it will follow that if a man should laugh in your face and foretel you that he will come and make a profession in scorn of Christ or if he tell you that though he speak such words it is not from his heart but through fear or to get some honour with men or if when he baptized his child in the name of Christ he tell you that he intendeth not that he shall serve him or if he say of himself he will baptized in tht name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and renounce the world flesh and Devil but he intendeth not to stand to it nor to do as he promiseth c. any of these must be taken for a Profession and this man for a Christian which no wise man I think will affirm If an affirmation presently contradicted by words as express and certain be not to be taken for a profession then much less is an affirmation more certainly contradicted by the tenor of the life yea and too oft by professed impenitency The sum is this We must not baptize him into the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost or his children for his faith who we are sure doth not believe in the Father Son and Holy Ghost But such is every Notorious Ungodly man Ergo Or we must not baptize him or his child as a Christian that certainly decâ—areth himself to be none But so doth c Ergo. So much of the fourth Argument Arg. 5. We must not baptize those that certainly declare to us that they repent not nor any for their sakes But all notorious ungodly men do certainâ—y declare that they repent not unless equivocally Ergo. The Major is proved in that Repentance is a necessary condition in him that hath right to Baptism before â—od and the Profession of it necessary to him that we muâ—â— baptize The Apostles râ—quired it The Minor needeth no proof I think Arg. 6. We must not bapâ—ize him or any for his sakâ— that will
arguing why may not you say that the child of every Turk and Indian on earth hath Right for their Parents did no more divest them of it than these and their sins can no more be transmitted But though it be not necessary to be asserted to the upholding of the present Cause yet I must tell you that I believe that Parents transmit more of their sin than of their Graces to Posterity and I am somewhat confident that you say what you can never prove and deny a Guilt which it better beseemed you to acknowledge and lament Next to the proof of the Minor of the main Argument viz. that notoriously ungodly persons are excommunicated from the society of Christians as such ipso Jure or are to be pronounced no members of the Universal Church To be excommunicate ipso Jure is when the Law is so express and so fully applyeth it self to the case of the offending person that there may or must be an execution of it by the people though there do no sentence of the Judge intervene when the plainness of the Law and the notoriousness of the Case may warrant an execution without Judgement And that it is so here I prove thus The Case is supposed Notorious and the Law is plain and commandeth all men to execute it whether there be any Judgement or not Therefore such are ipso Jure excommunicate 1. In a lower sort of Excommunication the meer Law may require our execution without a sentence therefore much more in a grosser and plainer case We must not eat with the scandalous 1. Cor. 5.11 We must avoid them that cause Division Rom. 16.17 We must note such men as are disobedient and have no company with them that they may be ashamed yea we are flatly commanded in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that we withdraw our selves from every brother that walketh disorderly 2 Thes. 3.6 14. All this we must do though no Ecclesiastical Judge do sentence them when the case is notorious We must reject a known Heretick after the first and second admonition we must turn away from wicked Livers though they have a form of Godliness 2 Tim. 3 5. 2. Concerning those that are not Christians we are bid come out from among them and separate our selves and touch no unclean thing 2 Cor. 6.17 18 For what communion hath Light with darkness and Christ with Belial or a Believer with an Infidel ver 14. we have the estates of Infidels Apostates and ungodly men described to us and we must judge them to be as they undoubtedly appear to be and use them accordingly John bids a woman that If any come to them and bring not this doctrine receive him not into your house neither bid him God speed for he that bideth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds Here is an Excommunication ipso Jure for he doth not name the persons but leave them to discern them and execute according to evidence And these seem to be persons much in the case as now we have to do with such as professed themselves Christians in name and yet denied the fundamentals and lived wickedly v. 7.8 9. of Ep. 2. Mary deceivers are entered into the World who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh This is a very Deceiver and Antichrist whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ hath not God whether this was written to a Lady or a Church whether of the Gnosticks or other Sect it differs not much as to our case Also God calls all his people whom it did concern to come out of Babylon that they pertake not of her sins receive not of her plagues Rev. 18.4 But I need not prove I hope that we are not of the same body with known unbelievers and that unbelieving expresseth as small if not a smaller evil than ungodliness and is comprehended in it I have already manifested And it s known that we are to shun the company of a wicked man that will take on him the name of a Christian Brother more then of an unbeliever that pretendeth not to be one of us For with the later we may eat 1 Cor. 10 27. though we may not communicate with him in his false worship ver 16.17 18 20 21. but with the former we may not And whether the ungodly be any more of our Body or fit for our communion than Infidels that so profess themselves in words let Scripture judge When God separateth his own People from others it is not only as from unbelevers but he most freqently giveth the reason from their Pollutions so that it is from them as from the unclean Lev. 20 24. I am the Lord your God which have separated you from other People Ye shall therefore put difference between clean beasts and unclean c. which I have separated from you as unclean And ye shall be holy unto me for I the Lord am holy and have severed you from other People that ye should be mine So answerable hereunto all Gods People under the Gospel are called Saints as well as Believers and Paul tels all the Corinthians not only that they are changed from Infidelity to Faith but such were some of you that is wicked Livers but ye are washed ye are sanctified ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God 1 Cor. 6 11. And he is blinde that seeth not how in all the ceremonial Institutions of Moses which were Types of Christs cleansing his Church the Lord doth most eminently declare his Purity and hatred of sin and the necessity of Holiness and Purity in his People as well as the necessity of pardon by Christ Answerable whereunto in the Gospel Christ is as eminently declared the sanctifier as the Pardoner of men He saveth his people from their sins themselves and washeth and sanctifieth and cleanseth his Church that he may present it spotless to God Lev. 15.31 12.2 3 5 c. Neh. 13.3 9.2 10.28 Ezr. 6.21 Exod. 33.16 Lev. 5.2 11. throughout 13. 14. Num. 19. Isa. 52.1 the Gospel-Church is accordingly described Put on thy beautiful Garments O Jerusalem the holy City for henceforth then shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and unclean Ezek. 22.26 Her Priests have violated my Law and profaned my holy things they have put no difference between the Holy and Profane neither have they shewed difference between the unclean and the clean Ezek. 44.23 Jer. 15.19 If thou wilt take forth the pretious from the vile thou shalt be as my mouth let them return to thee but return not thou to them Eph. 5.5 2 Cor. 12.21 Ezek. 36.29 I think it is clear that those whom Paul describeth 2 Tim. 3. are to be avoided by all Christians as not in the Christian body and he describeth them by their unholiness and particular vices and saith of their Teachers that they are Men of corrupt minds reprobate concerning the faith
ungodly ones as being as Notoriously no Christians 2. But if all this were unproved yet still it is sufficient to our purpose in hand that the Church-Guides are at present bound to Excommunicate them And sure they cannot at one and the same time be bound to cast out him and take in his child upon his Right into the number of Christians It s Objected The Excommunicate are members under cure Ans. Those that are but pro tempore suspended from some particular acts or parts of communion are so and those that are only cast out of an Incorâ—orated Church and not the Universal or from among Christians as Christians But for the rest that are so cast out the case is otherwise Many different acts of the Church and cases of the persons are usually confounded under this one word Excommunication Object Austin complains of one that had Excommunicated one Classicanus and with him his whole Family which he dislikes because the son must not suffer for the fathers sin Answ. What is this to our business We plead not for Excommunicating any child for the Parents sin but for not Admitting them at first into communion when the Parents have lost their Right and the child is born after 2. What if by the Law of the Land a Traitors Estate be forfeit if his Heir therefore receive not that which he could not give him because he had lost it will you say that this is contrary to Gods Ordination that the Son shall not suffer for the Parents sin The Son may yet have some priviledge from a Father which he could not have were that Father an Infidel or excommunicate person and therefore all the world have not the same Priviledges as the Church So much of that Argument Arg. 16. Those whom we may justly Baptize supposing them of age and natural capacity we may justly admit to the Lords Supper while they are no worse than they were at Baptism But we may not admit a notorious ungodly person to the Lords Supper Therefore we may not justly Baptize such And consequently not their children upon their account The Major is plain No Church-member ought to be kept from Church-communion in the Lords Supper but upon some just Accusation of a crime which he is since guilty of more than he was at his Admittance But the Baptized are Church members Ergo c. It is by one objected that this is the Anabaptists Argument or one to this purpose to keep out Infants because they are not to be admitted to the Lords Supper Answ. That is for want of natural capacity to use the Ordinance and not for want of a Right if they had such capacity But for men at age I suppose it past doubt that you may admit them to the Supper on the same qualifications as to state worthiness on which you may admit them to Baptism Object The Baptized are Incipientes the Communicants Proficientes Therefore there must be more in all Communicants then is requisite in the Baptized Answ. There ought to be more because they ought to grow in grace But 1. it is not requisite that they be in any other state then the Baptized Nor 2. Is it absolutely necessary that they have any further degree of grace For 1. the Lords Supper is the means of increasing grace and doth not ever suppose it encreased 2. The Apostles admitted the new baptized into their communion to breaking of bread and prayer presently Act. 3. and 4. Indeed there is requisite in the Receiving and before thoughts suitable to that Ordinance according to its difference from other Ordinances and so there is in each Ordinance according to its nature And in that sense as to some acts it s as true that there is somewhat more required also in Baptism then in receiving the Lord Supper But that 's nothing to the case The Minor is granted me by almost all on supposition that we can have a Classis to exclude the offender And many grant that every Minister may suspend one from the Lords Supper in this case by forbearing his own act I wonder how so palpable a mistake did come to be so common with wise men as that a single Pastor at least when he is the sole Governor of that Church may not exclude on just occasions Doubtless they may without a Classis take in men into the Universal Church for a Classis was not called for every mans Baptism Therefore if one man may be the sole Ruler of a particular Church of which there 's little reason to doubt why may he not do the Office of a Ruler But there 's much to be said for this on a fitter occasion See Gilesp Aarons Rod. l. 3. c. 15. pag. 541. The last Consequence I take for granted on what is said before and the meer nothing that is said against it viz. that if the Parents be in such a state in which they may not be admitted to baptism were it then to do then may not the children be admitted on their right or Interest because they are to come in as Theirs Argu. 17. Those that are Notoriously the children of the Devil may not be baptized nor their Infants on their account But the Notoriously ungodly are Notoriously the children of the Devil Ergo. I prove the Major 1. Baptism is ordained to admit all the baptized to be visible children of God those that are Notoriously the children of the Devil cannot be admitted to be at that time the visible children of God Therefore they may not be Baptized For the proof of the Major see Gal 3.26 27 28 29. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus For as many of you as have been bâ—ptized into Christ have put on Christ And if ye be Christ's then are ye Abrahams seed and heirs according to promist The Minor is plain For the Minor of the main Argument see 1 John 3.7 8 9 10. Let no man deceive you he that doth righteousness is Righteous He that committeth sin is of the Devil In this the children of God are manifest and the children of the Devil Whosoever doth not Righteousness is not of God This Text proves also the inconsistencie of these two Estates Argu. 18. He that will not be Christs servant may not be baptized nor others on his account But notorious ungodly ones while such will not be Christs servants Ergo. c. The Major is proved in that it is part of Christianity in the Essence of it He is to be believed in and accepted as Lord and King All his Subjects are his servants The Minor is proved from Rom. 6.16 Know ye not that to whom ye yield your selves servants to obey his servants ye are to whom ye obey whether of sin unto death or of obedience unto righteousness Argu. 19. He that will not hear Christ as the Prophet of the Church may not be baptized But notorious ungodly Ones will not hear Christ as the Prophet of the Church Therefore
their seed which Coram Deo will warrant them to require and receive them Prop. 2. God hath not commanded or allowed any that have not saving faith to seek or receive the Sacraments in that condition but hath made it the order of their Duty first to Repent and Believe and then to seek and receive the Sacraments These two Propositions I shall now briefly but sufficiently prove The first hath in it three parts 1. That God hath not made any Deed of Gift of Sacraments or right to Sacraments to any that are short of saving Faith save the seed of the faithful 2. That therefore such have no title to Sacraments Coram Deo that can properly be so called 3. That therefore they cannot lawfully Claim and Receive them though if they claim them we may lawfully Administer them To avoid confusion I shall take these distinctly 1. That God hath made no Promise or Deed of Gift of Sacraments or Right to them to any that are short of saving faith or on any lower Condition than saving Faith I prove Arg. 1. There is none such to be found in Scripture Therefore God hath made none such We have long expected the production of any such Gift or Promise and yet none is produced Which is likely would have been if it could have been found And if it be not in Scripture it is nowhere Arg. 2. If the Promise or grant of Right to Sacraments be made on any Condition besides saving faith then 1. either on the Condition of the Profession of that Faith 2. or on the Condition of a real inferiour faith or 3. on Condition of the Profession of that inferiour faith But none of these three Ergo The Enumeration will be acknowledged sufficient by them that we have now to deal with And 1. That the bare profession of saving Faith is never made the condition of any Promise or Deed of Gift by which a Title to Baptism is conveyed appeareth 1. In that none such are found in all the Scripture God nowhere saith If thou wilt but profess or say thâ—t thou believest thou shalt be baptized or have Right to Sacraments though the Church must administer them on that Profession 2. Else God should command a man to lye or justifie him in it and make a lye the condition of his mercies Though every duty be not the condition of Justification yet every such condition is a duty and every duty is commanded and God doth not Command any man to lye or to profess to be what he is not or do what he doth not or have what he hath not Much less will he make this the condition of his promises Object God commandeth both Believing and Profession therefore Profession is part of their duty and their sin is not that they Profess but that they do not Believe Answ. But God so connexeth these duties together that the later is a sin and no duty if it keep not its place and be performed without the former If a man tell a lye by speaking any good which he never thought its true that God would have had him both think it and speak it and then it would have been no lye but he would not have him speak it before he think it for then its a lye And you cannot say that his sin is only in not thinking it and not in speaking it which was part of his duty For it was both his sin Not to think it and to speak it when he did not think it and speâ—king it was not his duty save upon presupposal that he think it or it was not in any other order to be performed The same is here the case between Believing and professing to Believe 3. God maketh nothing the matter of Duty or the Condition of his Gifts but what hath some moral worth in it which may shew it fit to be well pleasing to him But the bare verbal Profession of that which is not in the heart hath no such Moral worth in it as may make it pleasing in his eyes Ergo 2. And then for an Inferiour Faith that this is not the condition of Gods Promise I have fully proved in another Disputation Moreover 1. No such promise can be produced out of the Word of God If it could its lâ—ke we should have had it ere now 2. The promises are expresly made on the condition of saving faith therefore not of any other Of this more in the following Arguments Only here I add that as to the Administration of Seals no man can know the sincerity or reality of an inferior kind of Faith any more than of a saving Faith 3. And then for the third viz. The Profession of a Dogmatical or other inferior Faith it can be no condition 1. Because the faith it self professed is none therefore the profession of it iâ— none 2. The profession of a saving faith is none Much less of a lower faith Observe in all this that when I mention a Dogmatical Faith I take it in Mr. Blake's sense and the sense that its commonly taken in viz. for an assent that comes short of that which justifieth and not as some of the Ancients did who called justifying Faith by the name of Dogmatical Faith as dist not from Miraculous Faith because they ordinarily placed Justifying Faith in Assent So Cyril and John Hierosol Cateches 5. pag. mihi 43. distinguisheth Faith into Dâ—gmatical which is saving and into that which is of Grace by which Miracles are wrought He means by Grace the extraordinary Gift of the Spirit And so some Protestants too Legâ— D. Alard Vaek Comment in Symbol Apost Proleg Cap. 5. pag. 20.21 Argum. 3. It is one and the same Covenant Testament or Deed of Gift by which God bestoweth Christ and Right to Sacraments and that on the same conditions But the Covenant or Testament bestoweth himself only on the condition of saving Faith Therefore it bestoweth right to Sacraments only on condition of saving Faith That there is any Covenant distinct from that one Covenant of Grace Mr. Blake disowneth as a fancy that never entred into his thoughts pag. 125. That this one Covenant or Testament giveth Right to Christ and to Sacraments upon the condition of one and the same faith is evident 1. Because the word distinguisheth not therefore in this case we may not distinguish It offereth Christ and Sacraments to men on these terms if they will believe but it doth not give us the least hint that by believing is meant two several sorts of faith whereof one is of necessity to right in Christ the other to right to Sacraments Mr. Blake that so abhorreth the imputing of equivocal terms to the Scripture I hope will not feign them to speak so equivocally If the Word had ever said It is such a kind of faith that is the condition of Right to Christ and such a different kind of Faith that is the condition of Right to Sacraments then we might have warrantably so distinguished our selves
but there is no such thing Yea the Scripture maketh it plain that it is saving faith which it meaneth that is pre-requisite to Baptism as is already manifest from Acts 16.30 31 32 33. 16 14 15. 15 7 8 9. 8.37.2.38 39 40 41 42 44 Mark 16.16 c. To which add Mat. 28.19 20. Go ye therefore and Disciple me all Nations Baptizing them in the name c. Those and only those that are Discipled must be baptized But none are Discipled Internally but true Believers nor visibly but the professors of a true saving belief and their seed Therefore no others should be baptized The Minor which only requireth proof is thus proved None are Disciples but those that take or profess to take Christ for their chief Teacher and Saviour But all that do so heartily or profess to do so have or profess to have saving faith Therefore none but those that have or profess to have saving faith are Disciples The Major is undeniable The Minor is clear If he that heartily takes Christ for his chief Teacher and Saviour have not saving Faith there is no such thing It is he that will not hear the Prophet that shall be cut off and he that will hear him that shall live And he that heartily takes him for his chief Teacher is willing to hear him and learn of him And he will give rest to the souls of all that will come to him and that learn of him as Matth. 11.28 29. Argum. 4. God giveth Right to Sacraments to none but those to whom he giveth Right to Remission of sin But he giveth Right to Remission of sin to none but true Believers Therefore he giveth pâ—oper Right to Sacraments to none other The Major Mr. Blake wonders at that all men should have right to the End or Fruit of the Ordinance who have right to the Ordinance when it is the right use and Improvement of Ordinances that must give right to the End But 1. the form of a Sacrament is Relative and the nearest end essential to it and therefore all ends are not separable and at a distance 2. God giveth no man Right to use Sacraments contrary to his Institution But the ends to which the Sacraments are instituted is to seal up Remission of sin already given him by the promise therefore he giveth Right to Sacraments to none but those to whom he giveth Right to Remission of sin The Major is proved in the former Disputation Object But our Divines say that Baptism is not only for the Remission of sins past but of future sins Answ. 1. True but still including sins past 2. It is the review or consideration of Baptism which they say is for the strengthening of our faith concerning the Remission of sin daily as we commit it 3. If any of them do make Baptism to be effectual to the Remission of sin hereafter when present sin is not remitted they suppose this to be by accident when contrary to the intent and Institution of God it is misused at the present but rightly considered of in believing reviews He that hath not Right to be baptized for the obsignation of Remission of sin hath no Right given him by God to Baptism For God hath appointed no other Baptism There are indeed certain distant benefits of the Sacraments which are suspended upon a distant improvement of them But a saving participation in Christ and pardon of sin is a present benefit which the person must be qualified for the obsignation of before he have Title by Gods gift to that Sacrament Ar. 5. Ad homineÌ„ It is but few Protestants that I know of that seem adversaries to our present Assertion and those few also do grant it Mr. Blake saith pa. 124 of Sacraments so that I conceit no promise of these ordinances made to such a faith but an actual investiture of every such believer in them And when I supposed that he had thought there was a distinct promise of Church Priviledges upon condition of a faith not justifying or saving he tels us of some body I know not who that said I rather feigned this of him then found it in him and himself addeth And I profess I know no man whose brain ever hatched or vented such a crotchet we are therefore here secure or should be one would think from Mr. Blakes opposition If this much secure us not see him p. 122. where having thrown by my distinctions as confusion pag. 120. and my positions as not looking toward the business i. e. for ought he could see and having confuted me by my own words pag. 121. before he understood them he brings me in thus stating the Question Whether these men be in Covenant with God as to Gods actual engagement to them so far as that Gods Promise is in force for conveying actual Right to them as to the promised Blessings And so whether it be a mutual Covenant and both parties be actually obliged And thus I say that wicked men are not in Covenant with God that is God is not in Covenant with them neither have they any Right to the main Blessings given by the Covenant viz. Christ Pardon Justification Adoption Glory To this I annexed which he leaves out Nor to the common Blessings of this Covenant for they are given by the same Covenant and on the same conditions as the special Blessings so that though they may have Right to them at present on the Ground of Gods present collation or trusting them with them as a servant hath in his Masters stock yet have they no Right by Covenant Mr. Blake replyeth 1. That he knoweth no man that hath spoke so much to prove the affirmative as I. But where He will tell us Logically thus So long as they break not the Covenant Engagement in which he confesseth they have obliged themselves God stands engaged to them for the greatest spiritual blessings But according to him they break not Covenant till they arrive at final impenitency and unbelief Rep. 1. I said in another book that as the new Law of faith is called Gods Covenant so no man but final unbelievers doth so break that Covenant as to be the subject of its proper actual commination i.e. penal censure or that its penalty should thereby become his due the penalty being a peremptory remediless exclusion from all hope And what doth Mr. Bl. but make me say in an unexplained general that they break not Covenant till they arrive at final unbelief c 2. I said over and over that they broke their own covenant engagements though they did not so far violate Gods Covenant as to incur the foresaid curse And what doth Mr. Blake but intimate that I teach that they break not the Covenant engagement in which they oblige themselves Yet he stops when he should have repeated these words in his Minor perceiving it a cleanlier way to let the Reader infer them Ah sorry Tempter that could procure such a volume of so
all that I could to have confuted the Arguments for it and was very willing to have found the truth on Mr. Blakes side but it was too hard for me and overcame me after some such reluctancy For besides many other Reasons which I have mentioned I find that there is no footing for a man in his way He that will not take up with the bare name of a Dogmatical Faith knows not for ought I can find what to take up with I despair of ever prevailing with Mr. Blake let him write never so much more on the subject to give us a true Definition or Description of that Faith short of Justifying which entitleth to Baptism and to prove it from Gods word or to agree with himself Commonly he calls it a Dogmatical Faith one would think now you might know the truth by this plain Name but when I tell him that if it be meerly Dogmatical then it is only in the understandings Assent and importeth no consent of the Will and that this is in the Devils and may be in those that say We will not have this man reign over us nor be our Saviour because he will not let us have our lusts And would he Baptize those that should say so Hereupon Mr. Blake will take some consent of the Will or else it cannot become a covenanting but sometime he only describes it negatively that it is not such as comes up to Justifying Faith but who knows by this what it is though he tell us what it is not sometime he makes the expression of it to contain those two parts 1. Confession of the necessity of justifying Faith 2. An engagement or promise to Believe with a Justifying Faith But when I interpret this promise to be that he will so believe de futuro he asketh me how comes de futuro in as if every promise were not de futuro Is it de praesenti Doth he promise that he doth at the present so believe why this is not to promise but to profess and is the thing that I plead for as necessary which Mr. Blake resisteth sure then it is de futuro or it is not intelligible by common capacities Well if it must be de futuro either it s at the next moment or some time at longer distance To say I consent not now but I will the next moment or tomorrow is ridiculous partly because as I have proved to him such a person is not capable of making such a promise so as should be rationally accepted in a covenant and partly because we may end the controversie by forbearing his Baptizing one moment longer or one day till he do indeed Believe and consent as he promiseth But what time soever it be as I told him upon these terms a man may say I believe the Creed and Scripture to be true but because I know that I cannot serve God and Mammon nor have Christ to justifie me and live in my sins I will not yet have God for my God or Christ for my Lord and Saviour nor the Holy Ghost for my Sanctifier because I will not yet leave my sins but hereafter I will would Mr. Blake Baptize such a man as this In answer to such a question he saith pag. 133. I think it will be nothing hard for any honest Christian to say that a man not justified may believe every fundamental Article as to Assent and that he may be convinced of the necessity of such Repentance and accordingly to make profession of it as Johns Converts were Baptized into c. And pag. 147. he saith Seeing Mr. Baxter calls upon me further to declare my self further in this thing I do believe and profess to hold that he that upon hearing the Gospel preach't and the truth of it published and opened shall professedly abjure all other opposite waies whatsoever and choose the Christian way for Salvation promising to follow the Rules of it is to be Baptized and his seed c. And are these Descrptions of his Dogmatical faith the same with the former Is not Repentance ever concomitant with Faith John's Baptism was the Baptism of Repentance for Remission of sins and if our Divines mistake not when they maintain to be the same with Christs sure Faith was to go with that Repentance and that Repentance which is for Remission of sins is not common but saving and special If therefore saving Repentance must not only be promised de futuro but professed de praesenti then doubtless so must that Faith which is inseparable 2. And would Mr. Blake have us so Censorious as to say that those men that Abjure all other waies whatsoever and choose the Christian way for Salvation promising to follow the Rules of it if they do this sincerely are not yet justified or have not justifying faith and that if they do it not sincerely that is not yet justifying faith which they profess For my part I am past doubt of it If this be Mr. Blakes Dogmatical Faith he and I are not much at distance about the Qualification of the Baptized but about the nature of justifying Faith For that 's justifying in my judgement which is but Dogmatical in his Christ is the way to Salvation the Sanctifying work of the Spirit and the holy Love and Obedience of the Saints in this way in subserviency to Christ all these are the Gospel way to Salvation the false belief of Erroneous men and the many by-paths of the unregenerate are the contrary which Satan perswades them to and makes them believe may serve the turn That man that Abjureth all other waies than that are opposite to the Christian way and doth choose the Christian way for Salvation is certainly a true Penitent and believeth to justification or else I can have no hopes of being saved Election is that term by which Amesius will needs express the proper formal act of justifying Faith Not one of all these acts that Mr. Blake mentions either 1. To Abjure all other opposite waies whatsoever 2. To choose the Christian way of Salvation 3. To promise to follow the Rules thereof I say not one of these can be uprightly and unfeignedly done by the unregenerate by any that hath not true Repentance and justifying saith Much less altogether Judge then whether the profession of this be not the profession of saving faith and whether Mr. Blake know where to fix himself and how to describe his Dogmatical faith and whether he do not yield the cause that I am maintaining And whereas he takes it for an egregious piece of affected nonsence to say that Justifying faith is a promise and still saith that Justifying faith with him is the thing promised or the thing whereto we do restipulate pag. 171. I say that he can never prove that the Church of Christ did know such a Baptismal covenant wherein the first justifying faith was the thing promised though the continuance may And should I so Baptize any person at age or an Infant in
respect of the Parents Faith which is his condition of Title I should think I made a new covenant and a new Baptism I mean If I Baptized any without the present profession of justifying faith and Repentance upon a promise that they will begin to Repent and Believe savingly for the time to come Indeed the first faith and Repentance unto life are so much above corrupted nature and so much the special gifts of God which he hath given no man assurance of in particular that hath them not already that we must stay till men have them before they are meet to be admitted upon promise that they will perform them It hath pleased some of the great Calumniators agents to censure me as an Arminian or half one because I run not so far on the other hand as they But it s a hard case that I am in who must needs be an Arminian and yet must be forced to dissent from so dear a friend as Mr. Blake for fear of becoming one I am confident that Mr. Blake in those points is Orthodox but so could not I be if I should entertain his opinion For if I did believe that upon the acts of common Grace men have covenant or promise-right given them by God to be Baptized I must needs believe that they had Right to Remission of sin in Christs blood seeing God appointed no Baptism but what is for the Remission of sin upon which account I have mightily displeased some Reverend friends that before over-valued me who are favourers of the Arminian way meerly because I oppose Mr. Blake in this point For my part I still take faith to be the very internal covenanting with God in Christ and not a condition of our own covenant though it be the condition of Gods covenant or promise and so that condition of Gods covenant and our own actual covenanting are one and the same thing our very first covenanting with him or consent to his terms is that faith on which he promiseth us Justification though there be a further performance required to our Salvation It is all one in my account to believe in Christ and to become a Christian and Baptism commonly called our Christening is not to engage us to begin to be Christians hereafter but it is the solemnization of the Christian contract or marriage between Christ and the Soul which is supposed to be made in heart before so that they are then actually Christians inaugurated or publickly manifested And for all that Mr. Blake hath said to the contrary he that professeth any faith only that is short of justifying faith is not a Christian in the covenant-sence but is only Equivocally or Analogically so called And whereas Mr. Blake makes it more tolerable if I had used the word Analogically then to use the word Equivocally if he had pleased to observe it I frequently put them together as here Equivocally or Analogically so that if that will satisfie him he might have been satisfied sooner Yet I take the Scotists controversie to be yet undecided whether some terms be not both Analogical and Univocal and some both Analogical and Equivocal which they handle on the Question Vtrum Ens dicatur Vnivocè de Deo Creaturâ or rather that the later clause is past doubt and therefore in our ease it is both Nor am I yet perswaded that his old Testament covenanters which are the great moving instance did profess only such a faith as was short of Justifying and they that lived in such scandal as was inconsistent Notoriously with their profession were by the law to be put to death and then they were past begetting Children to plead a right in Circumcision And whereas he is so confident that according to my opinion the Baptism of the unjustifyed is a Nullity and that they must be Baptized again and saith that its much to be feared if not certainly to be concluded that the Major part by far of the Worcestershire combination consists of unbaptized persons c. pag. 142 143. I answer 1. it is a meer naked unproved assertion that any such consequent doth follow on these grounds Nor can he ever prove it If the outward ordinance were rightly administred and the inward covenanting of the heart were not performed it is not that which was well done that must be done again but that must be done which was at first omitted even sincere internal covenanting or believing 2. But it is much more disputable according to his principles whether all that he should so Baptize must not be rebaptized For as the ancient Councils which were against Cyprians and the rest of the Carthaginians Rebaptizing did yet decree that all should be rebaptized that were Baptized by the Paulionists not that they allowed really of twice Baptizing but that the first was but Baptism Equivocally so called because they Baptized not into the Name of the Trinity so if we should upon the new Doctrine take up a new Baptism upon a meer Dogmatical faith which is not a believing in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost but only a Believing that there is a Father Son and Holy Ghost and add if you will a Promise to believe in them hereafter I should be hardly put to it to prove these persons truly Baptized and that it being a Nullity all were not to be done again and yet some Brethren of Mr. Blakes minde think that my Judgement opens the way to Rebaptizing when I doubt it will be hard to avoid it as to every person in the way that he disputeth for Not that I think that any one should be rebaptized that is Baptized by Mr. Blake or any of them For I am confident that neither he nor they did ever practice their own doctrine nor ever Baptized one person but upon the profession of justifying faith it self 3. But why do they not see that on their own grounds many of their own Baptizings would be Nullities and the persons be Rebaptized If a Dogmatical faith it self be of necessity to the Being of Baptism then what shall be done with those many hundred Children among us whose Parents discover to us that they have not that Dogmatical faith How many have we oft occasion to speak with that marvail when we tell them what Christ is and hath done and suffered for us as if they had never hard it before when yet they sit under our teaching day by day like Dr. John White 's Catechumene that being asked what Jesus Christ was answered that she did not know she was never taught so far but sure enough it is some good thing or it should never have been put into the Creed Would Mr. Blake have the Children of all these rebaptized or not If yea then he is more than I for rebaptizing if not then how will it follow any more from my judgement that the Children of the unjustifyed must be Rebaptized I cannot conceive what he can say without going to the right of remote ancestors or the