Adam to save them but because not they themselves for they have no more ability so to do then a new born infant hath to dresse its naked body but their fathers put it not on by faith for themselves and theirs which if the dying infants might live to years as Christ said of Sodom they happily would do therefore millions of these poor innocents must perish so then belike it is thus and this is the covenant of the Gospel the fathers faith saves him and all his dying infants and the fathers sin of unbelief damnes for ever not himself onely but all his dying infants also All infants that are damned then are damned through the fault of two unhappy fathers a remote father for sinning and and immediate father for not believing between which two the love of the heavenly father cannot come at them a wise man may spend all he hath with looking but never find such as this in all the Scripture earthly inheritances are oft stated and removed to and from posterity for fathers faith and faults as all Abrahams posterity by Isaac and Iacob did enjoy Canaan and Esaus lost it but the eternal inheritance is neither won nor lost by the children through the faith or unbelief of the parents and besides if Adams sin though a remote parent doth so damnifie all infants that the righteousnesse of Christ cannot save them without the fathers faith me thinks he being their great grand father Adams faith should recover him and all his at least from that guilt his sin brought upon them by interessing them in Christs righteousnesse as well as his single unbelief at first destroyed them if any fathers faith shall entitle his infants to salvation or else God seems not to be so prone to mercy as severity yea indeed he that saies God is not more prone to severity then to mercy and shewes it no other way as to his dealing with innocent infants then by saying he saves no more dying of infants then those few i. e. some of the dying infants of believers and from the Mothers womb damns eternally all the rest may say over that his creed in my hearing 500 times and ten before I shall learn to believe it after him once Thirdly as to threatnings of damnation I find none at all to infants in their ininfancy from one end of the book of God to the other but all that ever is spoken as concerning eternal wrath the second death everlasting damnation the Lake of fire is declared as the portion of those onely that do and do not that which was never at all much lesse in order to salvation and on pain of eternal fire enjoined by infants either to be done or forborn yea this is the condemnation and nothing else that I know of that light more or lesse comes to persons and they love darknesse more then light because their deeds are evil those that Christ speaks nothing at all to as he does to heathens themselves Rom. 1. Rom. 2. but not to infants that yet know not the right hand from the left much lesse either good or evil they have not sin for sin is the transgression of that law that is lent us to live by whether a law within onely or without also Rom. 2. but when he hath spoken and they obey not when they know God and glorify him not as God then they are without excuse and have no cloak at all for their sin and the word he hath spoken to every one being rejected that same word shall judge him at the last day I find it said no whoremonger fornicatoâ— c. no actual impenitent sinner shall â—ver enter or hath any inheritance at all but not no unbelievers dying infants in the kingdome of God or of Christ and that the Lord shall come in flaming fire taking vengeance on all them that know not God and obey not the Gospel of Christ c. and yet on no dying infants though they neither know him nor obey him for if he should then believers infants should therefore to the pot as well as others as who in infancy obey no more then their fellows that the fearful and unbelieving and dogs and socerers and murderers and all liars c. but not hars dying infants shall have their portion in the lake of fire burning with brimstone which is the second death and that the unprofitable servant that traded not with his talent and not infants that in infancy have no talent to trade with shall be cast into utter darknesse that those on whom Christ called and they would not hear and to whom he stretched out his hands and they regarded him not and would none of Christs councel nor reproof shall call on him at that day and not be heard and not infants on whom he never called that the Lord added to the Church dayly such men and women Act. 2. not at all such infants as should be saved that he that believeth not the gospel shall be damned but not infants to whom he never preached that it shall be said to the wicked go ye cursed into into everlasting fire for I was hungry and you fed me not c. among which if there were any that died infants they might justly reply indeed as no wicked men at years can do Lord when saw we thee in distresse and neglected thee and did not come and minister unto thee In a word the whole body of the new Testament or covenant in the promissory praeceptory and minatory parts of it saving some two or three such gentle touches about infants as those above named whereby we may have hopes that none of them dying such are for ever lost was written and given to and concerning men and women and not infants to declare unto them the way of everlasting salvation and in what wayes God would and would not accept of them and he that with an unprejudiced spirit observes all this will trouble himself no more about his infants to in church and baptize them for remission of sins which is the prime use of baptism to sinners and utterly lost when diâ—penst to infants that have not sins nor indeed to do more then instruct them as they grow up and pray for them while they live infants and hope well of them if they dy in their minority but it pitties my heart for them to see what moyl and toil the Priests create to themselves and the people and what much ado they make about their poor infants even much more then about themselves As for Iacobs being Lovd before he was born he means in contradistinction to Esau wch is Mr. Bs. tenth ground of hope that believers infants are from the womb in a hopeful way I suppose he takes it to be so declared but is miserably mistaken if he think the ninth of the Romans saies so for t is true the elder shall serve the younger which relates to the posterity of those two and not their persons for Esau was mostly
then in anothers your very selves acknowledge you cannot if not why more I wonder ad negationem spiritus why more ad negationem baptismi why more ad negationem nugationis istius vestrae viz. your trivial new way or rather no way of baptism to which if it were baptism indeed you must admit if not all then not at all in time of infancy or else your absurdities are unsuffrable Sirs suffer me to come cross to you and hit you home with your own cross interrogatory p. 18. are those infants of infidels between whom and those of believers you objectors will admit no comparison inclinable to acts of holiness or not if the former it presupposes then that infidels infants have the habit also as much as the other and so the working in them and those born of believing parents may be one and so their holiness and faith and spiritualness and baptism be one too which all your Disputation doth deny if the latter I freely confess these are not inclinable nor yet the other neither These premised the Answer is in your own very words pag. 18. That unless it could be certainly presumed what children have the habit i. e. of faith holiness what have not the working of the spirit is not known to us he is neither bound nor barr'd there can be no conclusion made and therefore Quis nisi mentis inops c. how justly may they be concluded by themselves as well as by others to have hand plus cerebri quam cimax sanguinis and no more understanding then those whose right eye is utterly darkned who premising these sentences themselves do for all that make this conclusion viz. that these infants have faith Holiness the Spirit and thereby right to baptism above all others Or secondly Sirs do ye mean by it some Negative holiness consisting in their being without sin and having yet no wickedness and prophanness the thing which and more properly by farr you stile innocency in the next words though yet o curious criss-cross you will not hold them guiltless neither if so for my part I give you in my assent to it that infants are innocent but I cannot help it if it do you no good in your cause for first are infants of believers any more innocent in time of infancie then the rest how so not by birth for they are all alike born in sin secundum â—e not in life for it cannot appear that the one have more blurr'd themselves or barr'd themselves by any actual sin from baptism if innocency be that which intitles to it then the other But secondly to say the truth Sirs so far is baptism from being intailed to innocents and holy ones only as their only right that it belongs rather only unto sinners for though Christ for examples sake and for other ends submitted to it who yet had no sin of his own but he had ours by imputation yet the most proper use of it to all else that submit is to signifie the remission of their sins Mat. 3.6 Luk. 3.3 Act. 2.38 Act. 22.16 If believers infants therefore be so righteous holy i. e. innocent c. as you make them and I dare not deny but that they are nor dare I saie otherwise for the world of other infants in infancie having more charity than your selves even so much as to presume unumquemque bonum nisi constet de malo they are so little inrighted to baptism thereupon that till they sin they are much rather exempted from it for if baptism be a sign to signifie to him who submits to it the remission of his sinnes in plurali as Acts 2.38 and in all other places it seems to be then it s utterly usless to such and therefore to infants as being yet under no Commission of sinnes need yet no sign of Remission of them Secondly Matrimonial holiness I call that which arises from the conjugation of two viz one man and one woman only into one flesh according to Gods holy ordinance and institution the subject of which holiness is not onely marriage it self and the marriage bed which is said to be honourable among all men and undefiled or which is all one to be holy Heb. 13.4 but also the married persons of what rank quality religion soever when once come into that conjugall relation whether both or either or neither of them be believers and the seed or infants that are born of them in that condition which are called by God himself Mal. 2.15 a seed of his own seeking a godly seed or seed of God which he owns as truly lawfully honestly holily begotten according to his own holy appointment and not basely beastly trecherously adulterously nor corruptly as those are which are not begotten in the bed Opposite to this holiness these holy ones I mean the married couples and their holy seed are all the lusts of concupisence objected on strange flesh uncleanness 1 Thess. 4.7 adultery fornication and unclean agents i. e. adulterers and the unclean issues of the adulterous bed viz the adulterous brood or the seed of the adulterer and the whore Isa. 57.3 This kind of holiness I dare say you do not mean yea the most of you will hardly be perswaded that there 's any such kind of holiness at all or if you be it makes nothing for your purpose for what if infants of believing parents be as infants of unbelieving parents also are when begotten in lawfull wedlock holy in such a sense doth this tend at all to prove them to have the holy spirit which is the thing in hand yet this even this and no other is all the holiness meant by Paul 1 Cor. 7.14 where he saith else were your children unclean but now are they holy that very place which your selves so often send us to for proof thereof when we deny your Antecedent in this consequence viz. Infants of believers are holy therefore to be baptized This that I say as 't is not deni'd to my knowledge by some that are for infants baptism so is it most undeniable to any that will but plainly and impartially consider the direct drift of the Apostle in the verse which is not any such matter as to shew that there 's such a sanctity in the unbelieving husband or wife of believing yoke-fellows for these are there said to be holy as well as the children with the same holiness and in their children also as inrolles them all viz. the unbelieving parties and the children as well as the believing parties in the Covenant of grace or in any such outward Church covenant as inrights them to baptism membership and fellowship in the Congregation but to shew such a sanctity or holiness as clears both their conjunctions and conceptions to be pure and guiltless such as frees their bed from the account of baseness and their brood from the account of bastardy both which in the sight of God and men would else be unholy i. e. utterly unlawful and unclean his
con they are but as Auxilliarie hereunto Secondly because I am willing also sith you call so much for it to give out my own grounds for the truth by the way as I go along in disproving of your false ones that you may either yield to them if sound or answer and disprove them if unsound and rotten in the residue I shall be so much the briefer The next argument whereby you undertake to prove infants of believing parents to have the holy spirit is drawn from those Eulogies given them in Scripture not inferior to those of the best Saints from whence you thus argue Disputation Those who are invited to come to Christ Mark 10.14 Mat. 19.14 Luk. 18 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verse 15. babes such as are new come from the womb blessed by Christ declared to have right to the kingdome of heaven set forth for examples of innocency not to be offended guarded from heaven by Angels c. have the holy Ghost But such are little children Disproof You say they have Eulogies i. e. good language and commendations given to them not inferiour to those of the best Saints Nay Sirs they are superiour in some sense to the best of Saints for the best here have sin but these have yet none Christ taking away Adams sin and they adding none of their own and yet it will not follow that they are to be baptized for they have yet no need of it muchlesse that they have the holy spirit which is the thing you would prove by it As for these particular Eulogies which you instance in if the most special among them do clearly prove the subject thereby denominated to have that holy spirit that entitles to baptism then I le agree that mine are but if it do not then I hope you will agree to it that your wits are little better then sodden In order to the fuller finding out of the full weight of each Eulogy to such a purpose I le consider some of them asunder that being the best way and not as you Babilonicae brevitatis gratiâ have wrapt and swadled them all up together into one Syllogism and if you think it too tedious so to do I would have you to know my pains in writing will be Tantamount to your patience in reading The first Eulogy which you say Scripture gives to little children is their invitation to come to Christ from whence your Argument in form must runne thus Babist Those who are invited to come to Christ have the holy spirit and are thereupon to be baptized But little infants of believing parents are invited to come to Christ Ergo they have the holy spirit and are to be baptized Baptist. To which I retort stating onely another Minor in room of yours as the subject to answer to your middle term and then judge your selves how false your foundation i. e. your Major is and consequently your building or conclusion Thus Those that are invited to come to Christ have the holy spirit and are thereupon to be baptized But all men and women in the world are invited to come to Christ Mark 16.15 Mat. 22.9 2 Cor. 5.19.20.21 Isa. 55.1 Mar. 11.28 Rev. 22.17 Ergo all men and women in the world have the the holy spirit and are therevpon to be baptized I need say no more to wise men The 2 Eulogy given from Scripture to little children is this viz. they are blessed by Christ whence your argument must run thus Babist Those that are blessed by Christ have the holy spirit and so present right to baptism But little children of believing parents are blessed by Christ Ergo they have the holy spirit and present right to baptism Baptist. I answer first by denying your Major which is not universally true for persons may be blessed by Christ and yet not have the holy spirit for better understanding of which let it be considered that persons may be blest various wayes from which yet to their having the holy spirit there 's no consequence viz. outwardly and inwardly temporally and spiritually with blessings of the body and of the soul of this life and that to come first with outward temporal bodily blessings abstract from the other they may be and often are blessed when yet at present at least for so they must have as to your present purpose they have not the holy spirit who possibly also never have it in all their lives I mean in that sense from which Peter argues thus to their baptism Act. 10. for that some of you say when you can make advantage on 't another way was the spirit in the extraordinary gifts of it onely as tongues prophecy utterance c. by which sense how ever your infancy is clear cut off from all capacity of having it and so you are confuted by your own party in the very corner stone of this your babish building but I le give you the advantage of your own personal Tenet let it be what it will save only that forenamed common sense of the spirit wherein I have told you t is in all men who yet are not therefore to be baptized I say again both men and women and children may be blessed by Christ outwardly only as with health peace plenty fruitful seasons Mat. 5.45 God is good to all and sends sun and rain i. e. all temporal blessings on the good and evil just and unjust The blessings of bodily protections as to be guarded with Angells from heaven from dangers and mischiefs which is another of the Eulogies you here instance in which to save your selves and me some labor I le take in hear it being but a temporal blessing from which it follows not that such as are blessed with it must consequently have the holy spirit also bodily salvation from and sanation of disâ—ases distempers by Christ who is a Saviour of the body these blessings of the body the barn the basket and the store health and external happinesse persons may be and often are blessed with from God who fills their bellies with hid treasure so that they prosper and are not plagued when yet they are wicked in their lives and far from the holy spirit Secondly If you take Christs blessing as in this place you must for it s so expounded and plainly expressed in one of the three Evangelists you quote which write all the same thing in some difference of prase for his praying for the persons whom he blessed I say that even spiritually persons may be blessed by Christ in prayer for them yea blessed with the blessing of the spirit it self as de futuro and and yet not pro presenti have the spirit for Christ blessed his disciples Luke 24.50 i. e. prayed for them that they might be endued with the spirit and yet that he then prayed for or by lifting up his hands to the father then blessed them with did not come on them till some while after in this sense Isaac blessed Iacob Gen. 27.28.29 Iacob
upon denial of any sufficience in all your former proofs to make it appear is at last undertaken by you to be made sufficiently appear in this last Syllogism which if it do not make it as sufficiently appear concerning unbelievers infants considering your own matter used to prove the Minor as concerning the other then my candle is quite gone out but if it do then surely the very light that is in you is utter darkness In the next place you dispute upon us by way of Question and Interogation thus Disputation 1. How do those men and women that are baptized at years make it appear to those that baptize them that they have faith and the holy spirit If it be answered by their profession 3. Whether their profession since it is possible they may lie can make it appear infallibly If it be answered no. 3. What judgement then can they that baptize them passe upon them to be the subjects of baptism as they call them whether any other than that of charity If it be answered that of charity T is replyed then let them passe the same judgement upon those little infants of whom in general the Scripture hath given so good a report and against whom in particular no exception can be raised and the controversie between us is at an end Disproof First whereas you quere how those we baptize make it appear that they have the holy spirit before we baptize them I answer I know no necessity of making ir appear that persons have the holy spirit before their admission to baptism for though we find once that God Anticipated his promise and gave the holy spirit before baptism Act. 10. yet I know not nor yet do you any promise there is whereupon in an ordinary way we can expect it of receiving the holy spirit of promise till after faith repentance obedience turning to God baptism and asking of it Prov. 1.23 Iohn 7.38.39 Act. 2.38 chap. 5.32 chap. 8.16.19 Luke 11.13 Ephes. 1.13 Secondly as for the holy spirits appearing infallibly I answer first it may possibly appear infallibly to be in some in whom it is as Act. 10.44.45.46.47 by sundry fruits and manifestations of it which may warrant us to say God is in them of a truth Mat. 7.16.17.18.19.20 1 Cor. 12.7 1 Cor. 14.25 It may I say undoubtedly appear to be in men and women but cannot and way at all so appear to be in infants if we may believe your selves who tell us p 8. that infants have not the exercise and fruit of faith and p. 18. that instruction of the understanding in matter of faith in some sort must go before any act of faith can be discovered and that no judgement of science can be past upon infants till the acts themselves be seen and examined for a posteriore onely the discovery of habits is made and that unlesse it could be certainly presumd what children have it what have not there can be no conclusion made And howbeit I am not of the seekers mind that an appearance of the holy spirit in any person before baptism in water doth exempt him from it but am well assured that it strictly rather ingages him to it or else Peter could not have commanded them in name of the Lord to be baptiz'd in water upon whom the holy spirit fell Act. 10. but must rather have forbid it as frustraneous and altogether superfluous yet that the spirit should appear at all to be in men in order to their baptism much more that it should appear infallibly to be in them is a matter of no necessity that I know of sith in the word it s not required that persons be baptized with the holy spirit first in order to their baptism with water but that they be first baptized in water in order to their receiving the holy spirit Act. 2.38 for the baptism of the spirit as t is promised onely to believers so we believing obeying the Gospel and asking the holy spirit t is signified to us as one thing that shall be given among the rest in that very way of water baptism so that its enough for us as to the baptism of persons to take cognizance of it that they believe and repent which things though they cannot do without the spirit performing its common office of striving drawing moving inlightning convicting of good and evil sin and righteousness c. in all which it acts to the whole world Gen. 6. Rom. 1.20 Iohn 16.8 Act. 7.51 yet they not only may do them without but must do them before they can by promise expect the spirit in those special respects wherein he is promised to believers and calld that holy spirit of promise And now because you ask how we know they have faith whom we baptize I answer by their profession which gives though not infallibility yet by your leave for all your preferring the Eulogies given in general to all infants above any mans personal profession for himself in this case a far clearer and better grounded judgement of charity concerning them that they have faith then that you have concerning infants which at best is but charity mistaken for cruelty whilst it takes that to be in infants and that on pain of their damnation too they dying without it viz. believing see p. 8. which infants are utterly uncapable of and whilst it takes even that too without which it holds no infants are saved to be in but very few infants viz. believers infants onely and so damns all other dying infants which are far more innumerable and as capable of faith and as little barring themby actual sin from salvation and as little deserving damnation as the other so that whether we or you plead the cause of innocent infants let the world judge And whereas you suppose that because in charity onely we judge men and women to believe therefore we passe no other judgement then that of charity onely on them to be the subjects of baptism herein you grossely mistake our grounds of baptizing for thought that of charity onely is the judgement whereby we judge them to be believers yet that is not the onely judgement whereby we judge them to be the subjects of baptism but as to that we go upon a judgement of certainty and infallibility also for though it be not infallible to us that every one that professes to believe doth as truly believe as he professes yet this is infallible to us concerning him that professes viz. both that he professes and also that professing to believe with all his heart so that we in charity may judge him so to do whether he lie or no he is by the rule of the word quoad nos a warrantable undoubted and as no infant is infallible subject of baptism for the word requires us to baptize such as after our preaching the faith to them do truly professe to believe whether they believe as truly as they profest or no for that indeed is not so infallible to
that formed them will shew them no mercy and the lord Iesus shall come with flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God and obey not his Gospel and that because they received not the truth in the love thereof that they might be saved for this cause God shall send them strong delusions to believe lies that they all might be damned who had pleasure in unrighteousnesse c. who ere transgresseth and abideth not in the the doctrine of Christ hath not God every soul that heareth not the voice of that Prophet shall be destroyed with the mouth confession is made unto salvation and an hundred such like as speak of an necessity of good works as well as of faith viz. self-denyall taking up the cross and following Christ c. speak of and to infants in non age while they know not their right hand from their left But Sirs oh that you would once understand for then all your intricacies sottish and absurd assertions and disputes about infants would be ended and save you a world of perplexity that now you are in by the ignorance of it that the word was not written as the way and will of God concerning infants in infancy but concerning men and women in order to their salvation by Christ Iohn 6.39.40 And this Sirs is no other answer then you use to give us when we argue against infants believing thus viz. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word preached But infants cannot hear so as to know Christ by the word preached Ergo infants cannot believe You tell us true faith in Adultis can come no other way but by preaching but in Infantibus faith is begotten otherwise so you fancy but you have no Scripture for it as we have that faith comes no way but by hearing Babist But that Scripture Rom. 10. speaks only of the way of faiths comming to adult ones Baptist So say I of welnigh the whole body of Scripture it speaks of the way wherein men at years must expect to be justifyed and saved and not of infants for they may be saved without faith so when we plead with you against the baptizing of infants I mean such of you and such there be amongst you as are ashamed as well as some that are not to say that infants have faith we tell you the Scripture speaks only of baptism of persons confessing sin professing faith that faith and baptism use still to go together as he that believeth and is baptized the Corinthians hearing believed and were baptized if thou believest with all thy heart c. therefore those that believe not may not be baptized you tell us again of these places and of all that ever we bring out of Scripture where baptism is mentioned that they speak of adult persons of whom t is confessed by you that faith and confession and profession is required in order to baptism but not of infants that cannot perform them So Pareus in Vrsin Cate. p. 384. 385. and also many others and your answer is very true and grants all that we desire for indeed all the places where ever baptism is mentioned throughout the Scripture do speak of it as in relation to grown persons and not to infants therefore because the Scripture is wholly silent in such a thing we dare not meddle to baptize infants but as we grant your answer to be true so I hope you will grant it to be as true in our present case for if some of you when we call for faith to a persons baptism or else deny that person to be baptized say thus viz. true no baptism without faith of such of whom faith is required and who are capable to act it i. e. of men at years but infanâ—s being uncapable to act faith and it being not required of them therfore they may be baptized without it which conclusion you make without book to for the word warrants you not to make it why may not we when you call so universally for faith to every ones salvation or else saying assuredly they are damned return the like viz true no salvation without faith of persons capable to act it and of whom it s required but infants being uncapable to act it and it being not required of them therefore they may be saved without it Babist This conclusion is spoken without book and as unwarrantable by the Scripture as you say ours â—s sith the Scripture speaks as much of salvation by faith as of baptism upon faith and as little of salvation without faith as it doth of baptism without it therefore still we have at least as good ground to say infants may be baptized without faith as you have to assert they may be saved without it Baptist. No I shall leave you behind here for sith the Scripture speaks of the impossibility of infants believing and yet with all of their saluation as your selves confesse in your own interpretation of that clause viz. of such is the kingdome of heaven but no where at all of their baptism it shews that they may be saved without believing but shews not that they may be baptized without it besides to hold any of them to be damned before they have by actual sin debard themselves of salvation is abominable cruelty and breach of Christian charity with you who yet confesse that all of them have not faith p. 19. but to hold they need not to be baptized cannot bear the like construction sith t is acknowledged by them that deny their bapâ—ism and by them also who absurdly assert to the contradiction of themselves that the denyal of baptism to them denies all hope of their salvation that they may be saved nevertheless though they die unbaptized so that whether we who hold that to them all belongs the kindome of heaven though they neither believe nor are baptized before they die or you that hold no salvation to them without faith and yet hold that all of them have not nay that very few of them for how few are believers infants to others have faith whether we or you I say do justly deserve the censure of damning all or at least innumerable infants dying contrary to that evident testimony of Scripture and sentence of our Saviour that to them belongeth the kingdome of heaven and contrary also to the rule of Christian charity set us by your selves which is to presume well of every infant that he is in a good estate till he appear to be in a bad and by actual sin to bar himself and deserve exemption from the general state of little children declared in Scripture which is this that they have right to the kingdome let the most simple but honest Reader judge between us As for the two texts you say are brought in proof of justification of infants without faith viz. Rom. 5.18 Rom. 11.7 who urges the last of them I know not for my part I take it to be of no tendency at all either to your purpose or
believing things as beasts which are meerly sensitive have not flowing naturally from the rationall soul in man But if by faith you mean restrictively that faith in special whose adequate object is the word of God preached in the promise and precept of it which onely makes us subjects of salvation and baptism dare you say that t is of equal necessitie and certainty that faith in such a sense is in infants as the faculty of Reaâ—on and understanding is so that by the same Reason that we deny one of these to be in them it may be therefore denied that they have the other and that their non knowledge of good or evill will as much prove them to be habitually no reasonable creatures as it proves them to be habitually no true believers of the Gospel For shame Sirs blot out and abjure this absurdity for you cannot but know that the faculty of understanding in man is Habitus a naturâ innatus a habit ingendred in them in very nature yea in all mankind necessarily qua id ipsum but your selves say faith in the sense in which we speak of it is but Habitus infusus a habit infused and that into some only for all say you have it not and I say t is Habitus acquisitus rather an acquired habit which comes if not without the gift of God to persons therein yet also in that way of hearing the word which on our parts is first done in order to its being begotten in us whereby we come to know good and evil first i. e. to be convinced of sin and guilt in our selves and righteousness and mercy in God through Jesus Christ and then to have faith in him to justification in this therefore Reason remains unrefuted and rather routs you then is routed by you Review 2. Their dislike at baptism testifyed by their crying if they had faith they could endure it with much patience The same reason might be brought against circumcision children when they felt the pain it is likely cried as much Besides we must denie faith to be in the best of Gods children if their sense under the cross and their complaing of it be an argumâ—nt to conclude against it against the weaknesse of faith it may not against the being Re-Review Had circumcision bin administred on perswasion that the subjects to whom it was set were believers as baptism is to be Acts 8. this same reason might have been brough also against infants circumcision though I must confesse it to be the least among an 100 that in reason may be brought to disprove infants believing and therefore possibly you whom I observe sometimes to set up a man of straw of least strength to annoy you and then to shew your skill in fencing at him have singled out this easie opposite to encounter with and yet so far as I see you do not as the proverb is give him as he brings neither but circumcision as is weâ—l known well-nigh to every body but your selves was dispensed to persons upon a far different account from this viz. meerly on their being males of a Jewish houshold and sometimes one a more slender acquaintance with Abrahams family then so witness the whole City of the Shechemites whose males were all all circumcised on meer hopes of their princes mariage with Iacobs daughter but t was not dispensed as you senselessly suppose it was on supposition of its subjects having faith for as there was not present evidence to any body that any of those infants that were signed had faith so for all your childish conclusion p. 4. that the children of the Jewes had faith witness their circumcision therefore the children of believing parents have now by â—uture experience t was evident to every body that they had it not how else came they to be complained on in general when at years as a body of wicked ones and unbâ—lievers unlesse you will say they lost and fell from their faith as I am sure you dare not and for my part I cannot say they did except I could see more clearly then yet I do see or you can ever make me see that at first they had it As for your further following flim-flam wherein you tell us that we must deny faith to be in the best of Gods children as well as in little children if their sense under the cross and their complaining of it be an Argument to conclude against their faith I give you to understand Sirs that its an ignorant inconsequence and so you will your selves discern it to be by then you have weighed what a difference there is between that voluntary submission which by the power of faith in the Saints is acted and yielded to the cross and yoak of Christ in either circumcision or baptism or any other difficult duty or dispensation service or suffering they are called to for Christs sake and that forced and not more unpleasant then unwelcome imposition of it that is made when that cross or yoak viz. the affliction or pain of circumcision or baptism is put upon the necks of infants for the one freely choses it when they have the liberty to refuse and decline it if they please and therefore though they have some sense out to the flesh no affliction being joyous but grievous yet are so far from complaining of it that they rather comply with it of their own accord as counting it better then to be without it witnesse Moses who by faith chose rather affliction and reproach with Christ as deeming these better then the pleasures and treasures of Egypt which were at his choice as well as these but the other i. e. infants are so far from offering themselves to either dutie or difficulty for Christ as by faith esteeming it better so to do then to escape that they rather are solely sensible of the smart so as to gainsay refuse and avoid it what they can but onely that will they nill they men make them bear it and cross them whether they will or no neither can infants by faith choose well-come or delight in either the disease that is by dipping or the sore that seconds circumcision but suffer both full sore against their wills and whereas you say the sense of the cross may conclude against the weaknesse of faith not against the being that clause reasons Reasonlesly against Reason indeed for it hath neither good sense nor reason in it to your own purpose or ours either the best I can make on it for your turn is to suppose it a meer mistake and that 's the least a man so concerned to meddle with it as I am can well say of it for surely Sirs if I read it right you write it wrong and set down your mind in words the sense whereof is just contrary to your meaning for certainly you would or at least should have said Against the strength or greatness of faith and you say Against the weakness of it if this were but
Christ if you can tell where for the exemplifying of your baby Baptizing Rantizing And further had you chanced to be born and bred in such Hot Countryes where dipping is the Custome as you happened to come out in such a cold Climate where for fear of cold more then any thing else that is to warrant such a practise the custome is onely to sprinkle I appeal to your own consciences whether such a thing as rantizing would once have come into your minds upon the single search of those Scriptures Thirdly whereas you talk of dipping as the way of baptizing in those Hot Countreyes both Mr. Baxter and Mr. Cook also p. 15. assert that In those Hot Countrys waters for dipping were scarce and rare and could not be had in some places in a great distance and therefore if sprinkling or pouring only must be used in some Countreyes and dipping in other some in all reason and likelyhood if any places may be exempted from dipping sprinkling should be dispensed with rather in those Hot Countreyes to save people the paines of travelling so far as they must do for dipping where the waters were at such a distance from them and dipping rather appointed to be used in these Countreyes where the Service as it is not much more tedious then it was in Iudaea at least in coldest and sharpest seasons so may it be moderated as touching the tediousness therof by being done and dispatcht through the vicinity of waters here not very far off from our own doors Fourthly even those Hot Countryes of Iudaea Rome and the Regions therabout were not within the Torrid Zone nor so hot but that if cold water would have quenched love to Christ and pretence of danger discharg'd from duty they might have been as shy as your selves of being dipped in water for even there the waters saies Mr. Blakâ— was over cold for such a service and also this Colder Countrey as you count it of England is under the Tepid Zone and not so exceeding cold in summer Seasons but that dipping may be as well digested then as in Iudaea or as it is by such as then washed themselves in way of pleasure This Hot Countrey catch therefore is an Argument that flashes fairly in the pan and makes a report with a powder for almost every one le ts fly at us out of this Engine but verily it is an empty Engine a piece discharged to keep Cold Countrey Christians from killing themselves with Christs service but charged with no great store of truth nor sense nor reason wherefore Sirs if the coldnesse of this service of total dipping do cause you to stand so coldly affected toward it as not to submit to it here in England unlesse the Climate were a little hotter yet at least let us who by dipping as weak folks as your selves in winter have experienced how tollerable it is through Christ strengthening us for Christs sake to be with Paul in cold and perills of water so you suppose t is to be dipped as well as in other hardship Let us I say who are willing to venture on the way of dipping proceed without your offence and as for us we shall in order to your good be so far offended at your neglect of it as uncessantly to call upon you and yours to repent and be so baptized every one of you in the name of the Lord Iesus for the remission of sins till you can shew us as I am sure you never will his letters pattents for your Exemption Rantist But Mr. Cook forces this Argument further yet and tells you that their custome of being dipped enforces us to the same no more then the Gesture that Christ used at Supper binds us to the same you are willing to overlook that perhaps having little or nothing to say to it but I pray take all along with you as you go and be not so partial as to pick out what is easiest to be answered and let the rest alone Baptist. As for that poor piece of sustenance that Mr. Cook affords beyond all the rest toward the further improvement of this exception which from the heaâ— of those Countryes you make against the Example of dipping in the primitive times it hath no substance in it whereupon your cause can possibly live for though he saies their going into the water then and being dipped therein no more inforces us to observe the same in baptism then the Example of Christ and his Apostles gesture in the Supper which was leaning and partly lying ties us to the same but as the table Gesture of sitting now in use among us is fittest for the Supper so the usuall way of washing which is by powring as well as dipping is fittest to be observed in baptism Yet I desire Mr. Cook to consider these things First that if the priesthood had but any such clear example of their being sprinkled in the primitive times as we have of their going down into the water and being dipt there they would inforce us with more then Arguments to an observation of the very same yea how hardly have we escaped being inforced by them from dipping though they have not an inch of instance for their sprinkling Secondly there is a vast difference between an example in point of circumstance and meer gesture about a service and the very substance of the service it self variation from Christs example in the first is naught enough but in the other worse then nothing yet even such is your degeneration from dipping to sprinkling from baptism to rantism viz. not a variation from some certain circumstance in that one matter of baptism but a variation from the ordinanance it self a doing not what Christ did in another manner but a doing of another matter then Christ did dipping with the face upward and with the face downward is the same thing still though in a different gesture and to satisfie Mr. Simpson who in his letter scarce thinks it a burial in baptism if the face be not upward and the water powred on as the earth is on them we burie with their faces upward whether this way or that way is not so much material if there be a total covering and overwhelming with either earth or water it is a true burial still notwithstanding but dipping and sprinkling are two such diverse things that the first is both baptism and burial in baptism but the second neither the one nor yet the other Thirdly and yet the gesture is so faâ— to be heeded in every ordinance that if we know any one to be better then another and more assuredly to be that which Christ and his disciples used I suppose we are bound if not of necessity not to decline it to follow any other mens fashions whatsoever and I believe Mr. Cook did think it worth contending for to exchange the Bishops kneeling at supper for one more suitable to that Christ used Fourthly the gesture Christ used was the same as ours i. e. sitting
captivity still at least in the Suburbs and by the borders of Babilon where you yet linger and loiter for all your pretences and protestations to go quite home with them that are resolved for Sion what mean you to stand so neer in affinity as to make one spiritualty one spiritual fraternity with such flâ—shly minded men as the main body of the national ministry consists of in all Europe for t is evident you 'l enter into the lists and make head with the worst of them even with the Pope himself against any further discoveries of truth then will stand with your standing among them though the Lord makes out the truth more clear and you seem in your prayers to desire him so to do yea I am almost ashamed to utter what I see I see preciseness and prophaness go hand in hand to keep out the true Righteousness indeed So that if I speak to the whole body of the CCClergy throughout the earth as very often I do yet I bespeak you no otherwise then I find you viz. whether for this or for that in particular yet all banded in one general body against the truth for as Herod and Pilate though at enmity could yet agree as friends against Jesus so you though of never so different complexions and constitutions lives and conversations doctrines and disciplines forms and fashions and goverments and Gospels yet are all friends to Christs crucifying in his disciples yea how implacably are you at odds among your selves one sort of you being for the supremacy of the Pope another for the Super-intendeny of the Bishop a third for the superstitions of the Synods others for they scarce know which and they care not what but as the temper of the times doth dispose them some Rantizing infants from one ground viz. because its a tradition some denying that and disclaiming it as both a rotten and false one yet Romanizing still from some other some and those the most more loose a few more strict in their manners notwithstanding all which variety you are at unity still i. e. at emnity against the Gospel of Christ. But should you help the ungodly and love them that hate the Lord surely wrath will be upon you with them from the Lord If you Iehosophats i. e. the honest Presbyters in whom good things are found who have taken away the groves and much more of that Romish rubbish then your father Asa i. e. the good old Bishops did before you if you good Iehosaphats I say will after all this join with the wicked Ahabs that trouble Israel in imprisoning the Michaiahs at least by a silent assent and with the Ahaziahs that do wickedly so as to lay your heads together for ship-loads of Gold 2 Chron. 3.31.19.2.20.35.26.38 for more means and maintenance saying to them we are in this point as you are our people as your people our parishes as your parishes our Articles of faith herein as your Articles of faith our way of maintenance as yours and we will be with you in the warre to reduce the Giliadites the sectaries that should be subject to us to our obedience your ships and all your projects works and councels will be broken and disappointed as the others what ever may become of your persons true men in a false way are out of Gods protection as well as hypocrites in a true Therefore depart ye from the tents of those ungodly men yea arise and depart from that Papistical posture of parish Churches and Pastoral relation to such as are not sheep which not Christ Iesus but the Pope stated men in at first for this is not your rest because it is polluted it will destroy you with a sore destruction whereupon come out from them and be ye seperate yea come out of her come out of her ye that are Christs people for Christs Ministers you are not though never so good men by Antichrists orders and partake no longer with her in her sins least ye partake also of her plagues Fourthly the Godlinesse and honesty of mens persons doth not prove the goodnesse and truth of the outward form and way of Church-order they are in nor must hinder the overturning it if false who will say many of these under the Episcopacy were not good men if good men stand in a bad place soil or posture they have so much the more need to be removed as trees and transplanted into a better for many of you Presbyters that go for godly were as godly every jot while you stood in that false Episcopal form as now and some of you somewhat more for it s much to be feared that the settling of you in the same Hierarchy over the faith and chair of infallibility here in England out of which you justled the Bishops and they but an age above removed the Pope and the enjoyment of so much of their means hath been a means of abating much of your godlinesse and righteousnesse too if ever you had any or else the Priest surely would not so have so soon forgot that ere he was Clark as to have gone about so high Presbytery did but that God prevented him of his purpose so soon as ever he was gotten out of his own growning condition and kept from the clutches of those that crusht him to crush those that groan'd under him for the same liberty of conscience out of Smectimnus his own mouth There were therefore if not as many good men yet many as good men and to their then light sincere souls owning Prelacy and some its like owning the Papacy it self as may seem to be among you that now disown both yet did not this forbid you nor stop your mouths from using sharp invectives against their Authority as usurped their Government as ill their spiritual Courts consistories and several sessions as spiteful to the truth their wayes as violent against tender consciences that could not close with them their Liturgies Ordinations administrations of Ordinances Baptism and Supper Discipline directories for worship and Catechism c. as altogether superfluous superstitious unlawful and abominably corrupt their revenues too great though little enough for your selves if you could catch it their power too absolute till it came into your own hands their Synods too supercilious arrogant arbitrary and impositive upon the state both powers and people till you had a Synod of your own their pluralty of benefices too much of all conscience for one man till conscience in some of you was made wide enough to have and to hold as many cures as ever you can compasse and themselves an untoward and perverse generation the Whore of Babilon so Rutherford and the very best among them too bad and much more to blame then others for not seeing your model to be better and for once offering to set their shoulders to the upholding of so rotten a fabrick why therefore since your domination is the same and your government as Tyrannicall as the other the extent of your