hath part in the first Resurrection over him the second death shall have no power and he is willing that the doctrine of the Resurrection of the body of Christ as the first fruits of the Resurrection of the bodies of the Saints should be perpetuated though some say now of such as once was said of Paul Acts 17. that he was a setter forth of strange gods because he Preached unto them Jesus and the Resurrection and this query doth not altogether excuse the Author from that spirit but James here is three things for thee to prove by plain Scripture and not by thy consequences least thou be guilty of that which you of your way have charged upon the Priests 1. To prove Christ commanded water baptism since his Resurrection 2. To prove that his servants practiced it by vertue of that command after his Resurrection 3. That he commanded outward washing to be practiced after his Resurrection in memorial of his Resurrection and that the practitioners did it so accordingly all which thou seems to affirm in thy query and to take it for granted and then a more particular answer to them all thou mayest receive according to the Scripture of Truth Q. 4. Whether those that deny the Ordinance of breaking bread as it was instituted by Christ and practiced by his Primitive Saints are willing the memorial of Christs death and blood-shed should remain among his Saints until his next coming Answ Those who deny any Ordinance or institution of Christ to those of whom he required it and to that end for which he appointed it as the cause of his requiring it at their hands are transgressors and are not willing that the end or cause of his commanding it should be fulfilled or accomplished nor do not wait or look for his appearing the second time without sin unto salvation but believe they are saved though they commit sin and believe that freedom from all sin they can never attain while living in this visible world and such are not onely unwilling that the memorial of Christs death and blood-shed should remain among his Saints but are both ignorant and unbelieving that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses all that know it and believe in it from all unrighteousness and presents them perfect unto God without spot or wrinkle or any such thing and such onely as thus believe celebrate the memorial of Christs death and blood-shed as are dead with Christ and such are free from sin and such though they neither eat bread nor drink wine but feed upon locust and wild hony or are content with a dinner of green herbs such I say do truely shew forth the Lords death in their conformity to it and his blood shed in that their hearts are sprinkled from an evil conscience to serve the living God in truth and righteousness Q. 5. Whether those that say that Scripture 1 Cor. 11.26 is meant of Christs coming in Spirit do not in effect say that the Ordinance of breaking of bread was appointed for unbelievers to eat and drink damnation till Christ come to them in Spirit Answ Was it not in the same night in which he was betrayed that he took bread and is not Christ a spirit and his coming in spirit or doth he come out of the spirit or is there a coming of Christ and not in the spirit is Christ and the spirit divided or can he come and he not in the spirit and the spirit in him and where Christ is present is not the spirit there also and he in it and it in him and yet but one And doth it at all follow in sound judgement or good understanding that they who say the 1 Cor. 11.26 is meant of Christs coming in spirit must needs or in effect say that the Ordinance of breaking bread was appointed for unbelievers to eat and drink damnation till Christ come to them in spirit any more then it follows that the Disciples had no power at all because they were commanded to wait at Jerusalem for the promise of the Father and that they should receive power after the Holy Ghost was come upon them Acts 1.4.8 ver or any more then it may be said of Christ that his words implyed or that he in effect said that his Disciples had not his spirit at all in them and so were none of his when he said to them in these words how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy spirit to them that ask him Luke 11.13 and yet all that time God was their Father and they could not ask aright without the spirit and yet Christ saith how much more shall your heavenly Father give the holy spirit to them that ask him so do they who say that the coming of Christ in 1 Cor. 11.26 is his coming in spirit in effect say any more or otherwise that those had not the spirit at all or were unbelievers to whom Christ said take eat this is my body which is broken for you c. because they were to wait for a further and fuller manifestation of him in them and he went away in that fleshly appearance that he might come again unto them and abide with them for ever and this Christ prayed for and performed accordingly John 17.23 I in them and thou in me that they may be made perfect in one c. so that to say till he come is meant of Christs coming in spirit doth no more deny or in effect say that the breaking of bread was appointed for unbelievers to eat and drink damnation c. then Christ in saying the Father would give his holy Spirit to them that ask him in effect said that God would give his holy Spirit to them that asked or prayed without the Spirit or then Christ in effect said that they who waited in their wills and in the form without the power should receive power after the Holy Ghost was come upon them or then in effect Christ should say they had not the holy Spirit at all as yet because it was to come upon them and so till he come though meant of his coming in Spirit yet doth not follow but those to whom Christ spake had a measure of his Spirit already come to them and was in them and so commanded them not to eat and drink damnation but by eating of that bread and drinking of that cup they were to shew the Lords death till he come and then when he was come who was shewed by that eating and drinking the shew needed no longer the thing shewed being come and witnessed the bread indeed and drink indeed was known and Eternal life inherited Q. 6. Whether it is not granted by those that seem to deny it that the forecited place directs the Church at Corinth to the use of an Ordinance seeing some might eat this bread and drink this cup which is also called flesh and blood unworthily but those that eat truly that flesh that is meat indeed and drink that blood
one onely one is translated into English and the other is left in Greek untranflated And so whilst thou saist thou dost not know that any Scripture calls it Christs washing or baptism confesses and calls it inward washing thy self so that by thy own confession there is no more difference between the inward washing and cleansing by the Spirit and Christs baptism then there is between baptizing in Greek and washing in English which is all one and the word baptism might as well have been translated washing in all places of the Scripture as in one place had it not made for the upholding of the Trade of the Translators and for the continuing of much idolatry and ignorance in the world and whereas thou sayest it is not called Christs Baptism what Baptism was that the Apostles speak of 1 Cor. 12.13 For by one spirit are we all baptized into one body whether we be Jews or Gentiles and what Baptism was that which Paul speaks of Rom. 6.3 4. by which they were baptized into Christ and into his death and were buried with Christ by Baptism and by it planted into the likeness of his death whereby they knew that the old man was crucified with him that the body of sin might be destroyed that henceforth they might not serve sin for he that was thus dead and buried with Christ was free from sin which your water doth not do nay do not you who are washed with water plead against freedom from sin and say it is not attainable in this world and therefore it is strongly to be suspected that as your Baptism is wrong so is your faith also seeing the Scripture saith as many as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ and put off the old man with his deeds by being planted into the likeness of his death and by being buried with him by Baptism and in the 1 Cor. 6.11 where the Apostle saith they were washed and sanctified and justified by the spirit c. what difference is there by being washed or cleansed by the spirit and by being baptized by the spirit seeing washing and Baptizing is all one and if thou wert come to the full assurance of faith and knewest what it was to have thy heart sprinkled from an evil conscience then thou wouldst know what that pure water was with wch the Saints had their bodies washed Heb. 10.22 But thou concludest that Christs Baptism is not now in being because those tongues and miracles thou speaks of are not in being that thou know of and so justifies thy self that the one baptism is meant water baptism Christs baptism or the Baptism of the spirit was some extraordinary thing and was to confer upon them a larger measure of gifts fitting then to spread the Gospel c. and therefore one principal gift bestowed by that Baptism was the gift of tongues to this I spake before about fire Baptism as in Acts the second and saith other places both before in the sixth page and now but names none by which I conclude thou hast no place to prove the Holy Ghosts Baptism thou speaks of but that of Acts 2. and what ground thou hast to call that fire Christs Baptism or the Baptism promised that Christ should come withal I know not since there is not one word in that second of the Acts at the beginning that speaks of Baptism where it is said there came a sound from Heaven as of a rushing mighty wind and it filled all the house where they were sitting And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire and it sate upon each of them and they were all filled with the Ghost and began to speak with other tongues as the spirit gave them utterance Where is this called the Baptism of Christ or the Baptism of the Holy Ghost the word Baptism is no more named here neither in Greek nor English and yet this thou wouldst have by all means to be the only Baptism of the Holy Ghost promised and some other places where both the word Baptism in Greek and the word washing in English is spoken off must not be the Baptism of the spirit that was promised and was to continue when outward water was to cease but why should thou speak of miracles and tongues so much seeing tongues were for a sign not for them which believed but for them which believed not and thou accounts thy self a believer 1 Cor. 14.22 But James Pope why dost thou seem to grant inward washing and cleansing by the spirit to be a washing or Baptism of the spirit seeing thou hast spent so much time to prove inward washing and cleansing to be none of the spirits baptism and yet sums up the query thy self in these words whether the Baptism of water or the inward washing and cleansing by the spirit be the one Baptism which Paul writs of or why writs he but of one if both must be continued to which thou grants both must be continued and yet saith it is water Baptism he writs of So that thou seems to grant what thou wouldst deny and to deny what thou wouldst grant but thou art in a strait and truth is too hard for thee for if thou grant the spirits Baptism to continue then thy water Baptism must down because there is but one and therefore of the two thou hadst rather the spirits Baptism should cease then thine and yet if thou should deny inward baptizing or cleansing to be out of use then thou wert no Christian and therefore thou hast sowed as good a covering together as fig leaves will make to hide thy nakedness withal and to save thy water Baptism and thinks to do it by calling inward baptizing with the Holy Ghost inward cleansing and washing by the spirit and so sets up two words to contend each with other whilst thou thereby thinkest to amaze the Reader that thou may escape with thy water to be the one Baptism that is to continue and yet in thy first answer saith both must continue inward Baptism because no entrance into the Kingdom without it and water must continue because it is Christs Ordinance fitted to the New Testament as Circumcision was to the Old In thy next Book James prove it an Ordinance commanded by Christ to be practiced after his Ascention in plain words and not by an invented consequence least you are found guilty of that for which you condemned the Priests of England viz. for proving their Baptism by a consequence and will not this be much to your shame to have your Commision to prove by a consequence and not by plain and positive Scripture for a Commissioner by consequence onely is no Commissioner But James me thinks thou comes too near the Priests of England in bringing Circumcision and Baptism together dost thou not lay thy self open to some disadvantage in this was one Ordinance a type of another or one figure a type of another figure what confusion is here is not this Priests
take beed of being deceived Yea take heed you are not deceived in your Ordinanâ—es in your Church fellowship yea and in your Christ too seeing one Christ is your very light and life and another light that is unapproachable is he leading you in the way to And be not angry because Thomas White exhorts you to look to your building least it be pulled down to your loss neither call it judging of the hearts of Gods people any more seeing thou hast made thy heart and what is in it so manifest And for those Invectives which thou saist are so frequent in our papers thou shouldest have named some of them and who were their Authours otherwise now canst thou expect an answer but doth not fear surprize the hypocrite and are not the hypocrites in Sion afraid and cry out do not judge least you be judged not knowing to whom that was spoken Luke 6.37 to whom he spake a parable and said Can the blind lead the blind shall they not both fall into the ditch The blind are forbidden to judge but not the spiritual man who judgeth all things nor he whose eyes are opened to see good and evil and he that judgeth any thing in another that he hath not first judged in himself is a transgressor but he that judges that in another which hath been first judged in himself is no mans enemy though in the time of mans love to his lust he may count him his enemy because he tells him the truth but when he comes to be awakened he will count him his brother because he would not suffer sin to lye upon him nor the Sun to go down in his wrath And thou saist That which you call Church-fellowship you do not miscal it for it is true Church-fellowship according to the Order of our blessed Lord Jesus which he himself hath instituted and his holy Apostles and Primitive Saints practised in which fellowship though contemned by you do we walk sweetly together having his presence with us and his blessing upon us c. And many other words thou useth and applieth to thy self and brethren which are the words of others and the conditions of others and thou appliest them to thy self and thy brethren thou shouldest first have proved thy self and brethren born of the same spirit that they were and led into those things in which they walked by the same spirit that they were and not in the imitation without the same command that they had and leading which they were well acquainted withal as many as were the sons of God for they spake as they were moved by the Spirit and in it did they worship and by it were they guided to know when to go and when to stand still and by it they knew well their own spirits when self spake at any time and in it had they fellowship together and by the same Rule did they walk according to their several attainments but were not of many Sects neither did they cry up their own inventions for Christs Commands neither did thy differ about what were his appointments some crying one thing and some another like Babylons builders insomuch that their languages are confounded and they cannot understand one another what was the Primitive Order and what are now those appointments believers are to be found Practitioners of But one cryes this and another that but all in errour from the Spirit of the Lord who knows not the movings of his Spirit in them nor knows not that Christ the Leader and Christ the Way and Christ that dwells in the light unapproachable and is the light of the world all is but one Christ neither knows Election nor Reprobation but differs in their understandings about them all such are out of the Appointments and Commands of Christ and as yet knows not the Way of his worship as it was performed in the dayes of the Apostles therefore say not Christs Institutions are contemned because mens Traditions and carnal Imitations are not followed all which must tumble down when Babylon the great the Mother of Harlots falls and when that comes to pass it will be no wonder to those that behold her downfal that are come out of her to see many pleasant Pictures spoiled and lofty Cities laid low and Master builders that have rejected the light bewailing the fall of their Towers which they thought had been so high and built upon such a foundation as could not be shaken and of such materials as they thought had been living stones and formed in all things like the Primitive Churches but their attire will be found to be the attire of the Harlot and not of the true Spouse neither her comeliness that which Christ hath put upon her but a paint like Jezabel and a Harlot though welfavoured and though her garments be purple and scarlet-coloured yet not washed with the blood of the Lamb and therefore follows him not wheresoever he goeth And whereas thou saist you walk sweetly together How can that be seeing you differ in so many things and main things too as Election and Reprobation For how can two walk together except they be agreed and yet thou confesses you walk sweetly together and also confesses you are not agreed in Election c. Therefore may I not say there is no light in thee because thou walks not according to this Rule which saith Can two walk together except they be agreed Amos 3.3 Thousaist Thomas White is deceived in that he cautions you of being deceived your selves while you cry out others are deluded you who are joyned in that which you call fellowship by the outward form of washing c. Is not the mistake on thy own part Are you not so joyned If thou canst plead not guilty who else can seeing thou seems to justifie all that are called Baptists For Tho. Whites paper is directed in general to those people called Baptists and what is both spoken in general and to some in particular thou applies to thy self and brethren as either being guilty of all or else taking thy self to be united to all that are dipped in water and so by the tendency of thy discourse thou pleads for all the people called Baptists though they be such as differ from thee in the understanding of the great business of Election and Reprobation as if thou wert especially concerned in that name though there be many others who are not so called and yet do not differ in such weighty matters from thee and thy brethren as many of those people who are called Baptists do all which being put together spels little less then that you are joyned in your fellowship by your outward form of washing because thou pleads for and takes thy self to be especially concerned in all things charged against the washed or baptists which imports no less then that you are joyned in your fellowship by outward washing otherwise why dost thou not deny some of those people called Baptists seeing by your own confession
not sent to Baptize as an Apostle is to say Paul was not sent to preach as an Apostle except Paul had one Commission to preach and another to Baptize seeing that Commission hinted at in Matthew requires both besides is not this to devide Paul or rather Christ in Paul that he did some things ministerially as an Apostle and other things as a Disciple as if he were sometimes an Apostle and no Disciple and sometimes a Disciple and no Apostle or that Paul should dissemble with the Corinthians to write to them as an Apostle and to thank God that he had Baptized no more but those few he names and gives this reason for it because he was not sent to Baptize but to preach the Gospel when as by thy own confession he was sent as he was a Disciple to Baptize as well as others and knew it as well as James Pope if it had been so and had not Paul by removing one block out of the way viz. preventing a jealousie least he should be thought to Baptize in his own name laid a greater stumbling block in the way viz. to slight the Ordinance of Baptism and all those that should Baptize with water though as Disciples Paul not explaining his meaning to be as James Pope saith it was viz. that he meant as an Apostle he was not sent but as a Disciple he might did and might not Paul as well have left off preaching to prevent the jealousie of preaching in his own name as well as Baptizing seeing one was commanded in the Commission as well as the other was or might have been idolized as well as Baptizing but in truth Paul had no more Command to Baptize with water then to Circumcise yet he did both upon occasion to remove stumbling blocks and to strengthen the weak and all for the furtherance of the Gospel And Christs calling them Disciples in one place after he had once chosen them hinders them not from being Apostles no more then his calling them Apostles in another place hinders them from being Disciples for sometimes he called them by the name of Disciples and sometimes by the name of Apostles as Luke 22.14 And when the hour was come he sate down and the twelve Apostles with him and this was before he sent them forth in Mat. 28. but is not this a new invention saying that Paul as a Disciple was sent but not as an Apostle seeing the old cover is found out to be too narrow viz. that Paul was not sent so much to Baptize as to preach and therefore where it is said not sent is meant say some not so much as labour not for the bread that perisheth c. that is say some not so much for bread that perishes but you not being able to prove that Paul was sent at all to baptize with water but it may be easily proved that to labour at all is not onely lawful but commanded but that Paul was sent at all to Baptize with water yet remains to be proved and to say that he did Baptize with water and therefore was sent proves no more that he was sent to Baptize with water then because he did Circumcise proves he was sent to Circumcise but in thy saying it belonged not to Pauls Office and therefore he might leave it in this thou hast truly concluded that a man may be sent of God as Paul was and yet not Baptize with water as not belonging to his Office and for this ingenious confession of thine I may as truly confess to thee also that there are many that do Baptize with water who are not sent by God so to do and of this thy Brethren may take notice how thou thy self hast answered the Objection which is so often made by them and seems to lie so much in their way viz. if we that are called Quakers were led by the same spirit that the Primitive Saints were led by surely then we would do the same things that they did as to practise water Baptism c. Which Objection thou hast answered to the satisfaction of the Objectors in that thou hast found out a man sent of God and led by his Spirit and yet might lawfully let water Baptism alone to others as not belonging to his Office 2. The next Query propounded is whether the outward washing with water which is but the shadow and Johns Baptism or the inward washing or cleansing by the Spirit which is the Baptism of Christ Which of these I say is that one Baptism that Paul wrote of Or why writes he but of one there if both might be continued To this Query thou answerest like one altogether ignorant of the Spirits Baptism like those Baptists in Acts 19.2 onely with this difference thou hast read there is a Holy Ghost and a Baptism so called of which they had not heard but thou hast read and like them hast been it may be Baptized with Johns Baptism who indeed Baptized with water but he of whom John bore witness Baptized with a better Baptism who was to increase but John and his water Baptism was to decrease for John was sent to prepare his way In thy answer to the Query thou saist There are three Conclusions First that it is but a shadow Secondly that it is Johns Baptism Thirdly that the washing and cleansing by the Spirit is Christs Baptism To the first thou saist thou shalt let it pass to the second thou propounds a question and then follows with a second question whether John were a Minister of the Law or Gospel and then thou further Queries Whether there were any other difference between Johns and Christs then that one taught and prepared for Christ to come and the other taught to believe in him that was already come c. What shuffling is here to avoid a plain question viz. in short which is no more then for thee to answer what that one Baptism is which Paul speaks of whether it be water or the Spirits Baptism And if both were to continue why writes he but of one And to answer this plain Question thou asks Questions and propounds further Queries as if the way to resolve one Question were to propound two others or as if to answer one Query were further to Query but it is commonly the answer of him or them that have no further nor better answer to return But thou further answers in the third place and saist Whereas it is implied that the inward washing and cleansing by the Spirit is Christs Baptism I do not know that any Scripture calls it Christs Baptism or Baptism at all c. Thou mightest have left out this thirdly except it had been on purpose to manifest thy ignorance of the Scripture and Spirits Baptism thou needs not have said I do not know that the inward washing and cleansing by the Spirit is Christs Baptism For what difference is there between inward washing by the Spirit and inward Baptizing by the Spirit is it not all