as you use c. Nay 3ly you are hereby challenged to prove even by good consequence from Scripture that you have a regular call to preach and baptize I have not heard of any neither do I know that you ever undertook to clear it If your Call be extraordinary as Apostles Prophets Evangelists a proof from Scripture grounds is required of you and we shall own you for such If Ordinary as Pastors Teachers make it to appear according to Scripture-rule c) Acts 14.23 1 Tim. 3 to 8. Tit. 1.5 6 7 8 9. 1 Tim. 4.11 12 13 14 15 16. 1 Pet 5.1 2. and we shall rejoice therein If you cannot prove such a Call What boldness is it in you to cry down our Ministrie c. But they who will bring in a false Ministrie c. have held it their policie to crie out against the true SECT 2. H. H. p. 51. Mr. Hall saith p. 91. That the Scriptures are the chiefest strong holds of the Anabaptists and being pursued hither we run for refuge c. Answ It 's well they do so they are then sure and safe For Psal 119.89 Joh. 8.31 c. Reply 1. Let the Reader take notice that those Scriptures alleged by Mr. Hag. in the middle of this p. have been answered already I forbear therefore the transcribing and answering them least I be guilty of his usual crime Tautologie 2. It makes for the dignity and authority of the Scriptures that men of all perswasions who have owned the Scriptures for a rule have fled to them for shelter yet Hereticks and Schismaticks who have done so were neither sure nor safe but were found faulty even at the horns of the Altar as Joab was 1 King 2.28 3. Mr. Hall doth not blame you simply for running to the Scriptures for refuge d) See Mr. Hall's Font Guarded p. 91 92. but for mis-understanding and mis-applying them and so your running to them is in vain not onely as he saith but sheweth also by six Reasons which you take no notice of and the reason is because you could not frame a reasonable answer to them SECT 3. H. H. p. 52. Mr. Hall hath never a word to run to for Infant-baptism as he himself confesseth p. 30. in his fifth Argument in express terms Infant-baptism is not commanded c. Reply 1. Heaven and earth may be astonished at your impudent charge viz. Mr. Hall confesseth he hath never a word to run to for Infant-baptism 2. Lay your Argument right and it 's your absurd conclusion from his candid confession Thus He that confesseth Infant-baptism is not commanded expresly in Scripture hath never a word to run to for Infant-baptism But Mr. Hall confesseth so Therefore Sir your Major is false which may appear thus to the meanest capacity out of your own mouth The Christian Sabbath and Family-praier twice a day c. are not expresly commanded in the Scripture If I therefore should conclude Mr. Haggar hath never a word to run to for the Sabbath and such praier c. he would crie out that I wrong him For as Mr. Haggar brings Scriptures in his p. 12 13 14. to prove the same by Consequence so doth Mr. Hall prove Infant-baptism SECT 4. H. H. I shall now conclude with shewing ten undeniable Reasons why the Word of God must be understood and obeied as it is written without adding to or taking from I. Because God never without words made known his mind to men Heb. 1. ver 12. Reply 1. Your Reasons may be called undeniable as the Spanish Armado in 88. was called Invincible 2. If all these Reasons were granted yet none of them prove what you undertake viz. The Word of God must be understood and obeied as it is written 3. They conclude as strongly against you as against us who prove many points of Religion by Consequence from Scripture as well as we 4. They are impertinent to the main business and therefore not meet to be replied to but least you should crow I will give you a taste how easily they may be answered To your first If you mean of words written or else you say nothing it's false though it should be Heb. 1. ver 1 2. For God made known his mind to the Patriarchs long before his will was committed to writing e) Gen. 37 41. E. gr To Joseph read the Catechism with the Exposition you mention pag. 96. and you will find God made known his mind diverse waies without words To the third Were not those Scriptures the five Books of Moses wherein the doctrine of the Resurrection was written and might have been read by the Sadduces To the 9th it should be 2 Tim. 4.1.2 compare this with the beginning of your answer pag. 49. and here is another contradiction of yours To the tenth Shall the Heathen be judged by those words they never heard nor read I trow not Rom. 2.12 yet you say Christ will judg All Men by his words which terms All Men are not in Joh. 12.48 Do not you therefore passe that dreadful doom f) Rev. 22.18 19. on your self for adding to the Word SECT 5. H. H. p. 53. Lastly I shall propound these ten following Queries with a desire to have them answered by any who will or can Reply 1. You said pag. 52. I shall now conclude and here you come with your Lastly 2. These Ten following Queries are as impertinent as your ten precedent Reasons though according to the proverb a fool may ask more questions then a wise-man can answer yet I may warrantably g) Prov. 26.5 answer a fool according â—o his folly least he be wise in his own conceit and by the assistance of the Lord I shall answer briefly upon the former account Querie 1. Whether God doth require the sons of men to believe any thing in point of Justification that is not recorded in the holy Scriptures of truth Answ If by the sons of men you understand Infants you answer your self pag. 25. Christ hath no where required them to obey any command before they can understand c. Therefore not to believe But if you mean grown persons I answer If by recorded which yet is no Scripture word you mean contained in the Scripture as in your second and fourth Querie I say No. For the Scripture is the full adequate object oâ— Faith Therefore could the h) Rom. 10.9 word of Faith if you mean expresly written as in the eighth Querie I say Yes And I think you dare not deny that God requires of us to trust in the merits and satisfaction of Christ alone for Justification which is not expresly written in Scripture This instance may suffice among many Qu. 2. Whether God doth require or command us to obey any thing after believing which is not contain'd in the Word of truth Answ 1. If by contained you mean as in the seventh Querie in express terms you answer your self God doth command us after believing to give
p. You say Alas there are far better grounds which they are not aware of Answ That is it may be because you baptize them so soon if you would let them alone till they are men and women before you baptize them as you have example in Scripture they might receive Baptisme on better grounds Reply 1. Your interpretation with a may be is but a meer conjecture a fancy of your own head and worthy of no better a reply 2. Though we distinguish between men and women and children in our language yet the Scripture doth not always Cain a child is called a man Gen. 4.1 and an Infant upon the birth is also called in the New Testament a man John 16.21 where the same word is used which includes both man and woman as you confess p. 68. Howsoever your expression is as improper as your advice is impertinent viz. If you would let them alone till they are men and women I know not your meaning well unless you would have every Infant an Hermaphrodite viz. a man and woman 3. You have brought no example in Scripture to justifie your practice for those who are said to be baptized in Scripture were not baptized before that we read of as you acknowledge we were p. 24. SECT 18. H. H. p. 36 and 37. In your seventh Position you confess some Divines have reasoned very weakly for Infant-baptism and used unfit Phrases and mis-applyed Scriptures and to thâ—se some have wrote three or four Books and easily answered and seemed to Triumph and yet the truth is not shaken but it may be all the best Arguments and plain Scriptures have never been answered Answ I desire to answer the plain Scriptures no way but by Faith and obedience by believing and doing them Therefore if you know of any that speaks of Infant-baptâ—sm bring them forth and I will be silent The first I see but as for your best Arguments you talk off I look upon them but as so many cunning devised Fables wherewith you lye in wait to deceive simple souls by speaking things you ought not for filthy Lucres sake Titus 1 14. Reply 1. The first part of your answer I cannot put into my Creed for if you desire why do you not endeavour you knâ—w who saith p The soul of the sluggard desireth and hath nothâ—ng Prov. 13.4 2. M. B. aâ—d others have brought forth plain Scripture for Infant-baptism and you in silence have passed by the most of them because it seems you could not answer them though you confesse you see them 3. The close of your answer if it be a sufficient answer then its an easie matter to answer any Argument though never so strong by mis-applying Scripture and scornfuâ—l terms And I must needs tell you of your rash and harsh judgment contrary to Mat. 7.1 Judge not c. and to Rom. 14.10 c. why dost thou judge thy brother c. And indeed this last part of your answer is the reason why I cannot believe your first SECT 19. H. H. p. 37. You say Position 8. One sound Argument is enough to prove any thing true Answ Then either the great number of yours in your book of plain Scriptures are not sound or else you need not to have brought so many by your own grant Reply 1. What you say of M. Baxters Arguments may be said of yours more truly viz. your twelve Arguments q) Foundation fâ—om p 63. to 73. from p. 73. to 87. against Infants Church-membership and your nine Arguments against Infants-discipleship c. which wil be found as weak as water and as unsound as rotten ground when I shall come to them 2. M. Baxter tells you in this 8 Position It is not number but weight that must carry it Therefore he resolved not to heap up many 3. It seems you take notice of the great number of M. Baxters Arguments and yet you dare not grapple with that huge hoast but only cull out one or two and that by snatching at a limb and away r) Tanquam Caenis ad Nilum Eras Adâ—g as you have done with M. Cook c. SECT 20. H. H. But you say What if all the Texts were put by save one were not that enough Answ Yes it s enough if you can shew us but one but I pray where is that one I cannot find it in all the book But it seems you are afraid that all should be put by save one Therefore you make this Apologie but I suppâ—se all will do you little goâ—d Reply 1. If you wipe your eyes you may see if you be not blind in M. Baxters Book more then one 2. I doubt you speak against your conscience How dare you say you cannot find one text for Infant-baptism in all M. Baxters Book when you seem to be more Eagle-eyed then others in seeing and finding as you think the Font in Jer. 2.12 13. p. 8. 3. M. Baxters Apology is not made out of any such jealousie as you pretend as if he was afraid that all should be put by save one but out of a desire and endeavour to rectifie the ignorant in their fond conceits as he himself exprâ—sseth it which you have cunningly left out 4. I will accept of your grant and improve it in time convenient viz. If all should be put by but one it 's enough SECT 21. H. H. same p. You say Position 9. The former and present customes of the holy Saints and Churches should be of great weight with humble Christians Answ I grant it if they bee now according to the primitive pattern I am sure the custom of the Churches in the Apostles days was to baptize men and women when they believed c. Acts 2.41 8.12.36 37. 10.47 16.33.34 18.8 Therefore let this custom be of weight to your self and do not baptize little babes that cannot believe c. because Paul saith 1 Cor. 11.16 Reply 1. You condemn hereby all the Protestant Ministers of the French Churches who preach with their hats on their heads and yet they think they may do so without sin notwithstanding 1 Cor. 11.4.7 2. Are not you self-condemned who as I am informed have broken bread on the second day of the week when the primitive Disciples Å¿) Act. 20.7 did it on the Lord's day viz. the first day of the week as you grant p. 13. nay Expositors on that place collect they did break bread once a week viz. on the day aforesaid you once a month if so oft 3. Those Scriptures so often repeated by you have been answered already I tell you again That practise is not binding to us but in the same or like condition Beside the primitive Christians had their Love-feasts when the Lord's Supper was administred and received as is plain out of Scripture s) see Diodat 1 Cor. 11.20.21 Jude 8.12 and it was their custome to salute one another with an holy kiss Do you not think it a piec of your Christian
holds forth Leaving therefore secret things to the Lord I further will clear it that Infants while Infants even of Heathens so dying are not saved by Christ as being justified by him c. 1. Whatsoever is to be believed by us is contained in the Scriptures This you cannot deny but that Infants ever of Heathens are in state of justification and salvation is not contained in the Scriptures no not in Rom. 5.18 as is shewed before Therefore 2. Remission of sins and justification are peculiar to those m who are in Covenant But Infants of Heathenâ— while such are not in Covenant as all parties agree Therefore Or thus All justified persons are in Covenant Infants of Heathens are not in Covenant Therefore not justified 3. To contract my self Because Esau while an Infant was not justified though the child of godly parents as you said p. 57. much less the Infants of Heathens whil'st such 4. Then it would be a work of mercy to cut their throats and send them to heaven which is absurd at least you will judge Must Herod be a Saviour of Infants Did he them a good turn or no 5. They are without Regeneration as having neither word spirit sign promise or covenant of Regeneration hence said to be without 7. Baptism doth not belong to them as you and we agree which is the sign and seal of justification Therefore not justification by Christ's blood which is at least a part of the thing signified More might be added but I forbear onely I wish you to consider seriously how one absurdity draws on many more whil'st some are resolved to maintain their fancies What a monstruous thing is it that all the children of Heathens shall be partakers of the kingdom of heaven in glory and yet to deny to Infants of Christians the signe and seal of admission into the kingdom of heaven on earth or to them faith if the free gift come on them to justification of life I cannot find in Scripture specially in this Chapter Rom. 5.1.16 Such justification without faith SECT 4. H. H. same p. and 62. Secondly that God hath one way to save men and women and another to save Infants is evident Rev. 2.7 11 17 29. and chap. 3.6 13. because the Spirit often calls to such who have ears to hear but wee never find him calling to Infants to hear obey commandments c. Thirdly Life and salvation is promised to them that believe in Christ Joh. 3.15 16. with Heb. 5.9 but salvation is not promised to Infants on these terms Fourthly Death and damnation is threatned 2 Thes 1.7 8 9. to those that know not God and obey not the Gospel but they cannot know God for they know not the right hand from the left c. Fifthly The ordinary means of salvation is the preaching of the Gospel Rom. 1.16 1 Cor. 1.21 Thus is their great invincible objection or rather cavill answered clearly and plainly by the Scripture of truth Reply 1. It is in none of these Scriptures expresly said that God hath one way to save men and women and another way to save little children you are wise above what is written Must we trust you or seek wisedom at your mouth as you say in your p. 53. qu. 5. Secondly neither do you prove it clearly and evidently but by pitifull consequences May not I say to you as he in another case Therefore thou art inexcusable oh man whosoever thou art that judgest for wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thy self c. 3. They rather prove the damnation then the salvation of Infants for you say they cannot hear believe know obey confess to salvation 4. Is there not another contradiction for hare you say we never find little babes bidden to hear the Commandements And yet you say p. 52. the sons of men are commanded to hear Christ I hope some little babes are the sons of men 5. Sure you live by ill neighbours you do oft commend your self but you are strongly and strangely infatuated to believe that you have both proved what you undertooke and clearly plainly answered this invincible objection c. as you scornfully cal it when any rational man fearing God may see that you have done neither SECT 5. H. H. And the truth is they may as well debar little babes from food because it is said in Scripture He that will not work let him not eat as to debar them from salvation because they are not Church-members c. Reply 1. You debar them from Baptism because they cannot believe why not also from salvation hereafter on that Scripture Mark 16.16 as from food here on this 2 Thes 3.10 2. Infants Church-membership shall be spoken to in answer to your twelve Arguments But it 's your grosse mistake that they are no Church-members because they cannot perform the work of a Church-member The same may be said of the Jews Infants yet they were circumcised and were Church-members Nay we find them joyned in Church-Ordinances as prayer fasting c. 2 Chron. 20.16 Joel 2 16. 3. That God will give them salvation without observing Church-Ordinancer overthrows your 12 following Arguments with the last which a probable one you say p. 72. CHAP. XIII Whether Infants of Believing Parents are Church-members SECT 1. H. H. p. 63. 2ly Infants are not Church-members neither can Church membership do them any good but rather the contrary Argument 1. from Joh. 15.2 c. Reply 1. Instâ—ad of answering our Arguments for Infant Church membership which yet you undertook you tuâ—n opponent and dispute after your manner against their Church-membership But let any Logician read this your first Argument and he will easily see how monstrouâ— and mishapen it is without any true form To make the best of it it 's this If every branch that is in Christ must bring forth fruit or else be cut off then Infants cannot be branches in Christ for they cannot bring forth fruit neither shall they be cut off But the former is true therefore the latter and by consequent are no Church-members 1. You prove what you have undertaken by Consequences May they not be rejected by us as ours are by you saying p. 47. We weigh them not 2. If you must have that liberty which you deny to us you have here as many Consequences as M. Baxter had which in the aforesaid p. you find fault with As 1. If Infants be Church-members they must be branches in Christ 2. If branches they must be fruitful 3. If fruitful they must abide in Christ c. 4. If not they must be cast into the fire which is absurd Review I pray Rom. 2.1 Wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thy self for thou that judgest do'st the same things 3. Your Argument proves as strongly or more against all Infants interest in Christ and so salvation by him contrary to your own judgment p. 61. or more confidently and clearly for the damnation of Infants according to that He that believeth
do business in great waters same verse and to see the works and wonders of the Lord in the deep c. and are delivered and brought to their desired Haven 6. We say the whole man is baptized when not the whole of man but part is washed Whole Christ was crucified but not the whole of Christ your arguing is very weak to all that have understanding When a man is wounded in any one part we say truly the man is wounded though not all over Circumcision was a cutting off the foreskin of the flesh onely and yet the Jews child was Circumcised Sir when your tongue talks we say Mr. Haggar speaks will it follow that every part of Mr. Haggar speaks By this Argument hee is all tongue * Vox praeterea nihil but if his heels had spoken they might have made as wise an answer 7. Your next instance proves as little that Christ was dipt when hee was baptized for the words may be read comming up From q) Mar. 1 10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the water and that translation is more proper and suitable because all Rivers for the most part lye in the lower ground in comming to which wee are said to descend and coming from to ascend And indeed the Preposition is so rendered in the verse immediatly foregoing viz. Jesus came r) Mark 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From Nazareth yea it 's said The Dogs eat of the Crums which fall s) Mat. 15.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from their masters table yea where the same story is recorded Å¿) Mar. 3.7.13 it 's so translated twice as Who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come and then came Jesus from Galilee and often else where in the New Testament what more ordinary then to say Such a man came from Sea Thames c. Here appears the weakness of your inference and the instance doth not plainly shew that Christ went first down into the water or else how could he come out of it Your text in John comes now to be considered SECT 20. H. H. p. 67. 98. And the Scripture saith Jo. 3.23 John Baptised in Enon because there was much water there But M. Baxter answers that Travellers report that the river Enon is but a little brook that a man may almost step over 1. Surely it is want of the fear of God and love to the truth that he should turne aside his ear from the Scripture that saith There was much water to believe a Man a Traveller and Travellers may lie by authority why may not Sr John Mandevill be believed as well as this Travellers news The Lord be praised that hath delivered my soul from believing him and such as hee is Acts. 2.40.2 If it were granted yet Enon might have much water in another place Though but a little water where the Traveller was As it is with many Rivers in England Reply Travellers may lie but may not some speak truth If not I shall take heed of you and hardly believe you who have been a Traveller and that among the Jesuits the most exquisite Masters of that Art and compassers of Sea and I and to make Proselytes And had you named the book wherein Sr John Mandevill's tale may be found I would shape a sutable reply but let it passe in the mean time for one of your cunning devised fables 2. Your veine of railing at M. Baxter I turn a deaf care to when you prove us an untoward generation for you calling us so doth not prove us so your thanks for your selfe and caveat to others will be seasonable In the interim you do mock both God and man The Turk may as well praise God Luk. 18.11 he is no Christian and the Pharisee t) See 18.11 That he was not as this Publican 3. What this Enon was is disputable u) Calvin in Joh. 3.23 some think it a Town situate in the Tribe of Manasseh Diodate a Citty as Salim was to which the text saith â—t was near Others a Fountain or small brook v) As Grotius Jun. and M. Baxter-Sandys Travells l. 3. p. 141. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As Rev. 1.15 and 14.2 Bee it so yet wee are not a jot the nearer for dipping for the phrase is elsewhere usually translated * many waterâ— Now then it signifies many convenient places at the water where John and his disciples might be employed at once Not any deep water or great river which commonly is hemmed in with great bankes which deny an easy accesse for an Administration 2. Many waters are somtimes taken in Scripture and why not here for a confluence of waters on som plain x) Ezech. 13.10 for the watering of medows and some trees as we see in many places in England where the ground is low it 's plashy and seemes to be a little Sea and yet not knee deep 3. Jordane the Prince of Rivers in that Country which hath it's name from Jor and Dan two fountains from whence it riseth was not above eight fathoms deep nor Navigable y) Isa 33.21 what a small water then in comparison was Enon not far distant from Jordane Now though you will not believe travellers reports yet I hope you will notreject these plain reasons 4. You say Enon might have much water in another place although but little where the Traveller was Here you have only probablity for proof therefore as you argue z) p. 28. we read but of 4. or 5. whole households were baptized therefore not likely they i. e. the Apostles baptized whole Nations if they did we desire to see iâ— So I. It 's not likely Aenon was so deep for dipping if so prove it by Scripture if you can and we will believe it SECT 21. H. H. p. 21. Further M. Baxter saith The Jaylour in the night in his house was baptized but the Scripture saith Act. 16.33.34 Now if the Jaylour took Paul and Silas It implies they took them out and the next words prove it plainly viz. Hee brought them into his house Reply 1. Some enemies are sooner foyled then found I know not what to make of these Fiblets of an Answer If the Jaylour took Paul and Silas it implies THEY took them out who can make sence of this It may be you mean the Jaylour took them out as may perhaps be gathered from the Antecedent of your proposition and the proof you bring for the consequence but it seems you know not what to say or what you say you are IN and OUT 2. May not any unprejudiced Reader see this to be the sense of the words as they lye in the text viz. a) Act. 16.24 with 30 32 33. The Jaylour brought Paul and Silas out of the prison yea the inner-Prison into some outward room thereof where he heard the word and was Baptized and then brought them into his house which as it was usuall joyned to the prison 3. You do not tell
who saith p) Exod. 20.7 He will not hold him guiltless that takes his name in vain whereof you are in an high degree guilty who to vent your own rage and malice blindly and boldly misapply the Scripture to others and neglect to examine your self by it though not a little concerned therein I cannot but think that word sounds in your ears Is thine eye evil because I am good Here is your envie mentioned by the Apostle 4. For charging Mr. Cook with perverse Disputing c. Do you think that your railing mentioned also by the Apostle will prevail when your reasoning fails I beseech you not complementally but cordially in the fear of God confider it I did not think nor dream that I should have found Mr. Haggar in the Quakers Camp whither many of his Church are gone in Staffordshire SECT 7. H. H. Though we have affirmed a Negative yet you cannot justly apply to us that Scripture 1 Tim. 1.5 6 7. For we desire not to be teachers of the Law therefore Mr. Baxter saith We are Antinomians and deny the Law But I answer both you and he desires â—o be teachers of the Law Witness your running to Moses to prove Infant-baptism and Church-membership from Circumcision and the old Covenant c. Reply 1. It 's plain that the Law in the place mentioned is taken for the Moral Law Now I know no reason why any should be ashamed of being teachers of that Law or of being desirous to be such if their ends in desiring be sincere their call be regular and their gifts for that work be suitable q) 1 Tim. 1.3 The Apostle doth not blame any absolutely for teaching the Law for he saith We know the Law is good if a man use it lawfully but for undertaking a work beyond your call and abilities as those vain janglers did v. 5 6 7. Otherwise this desire is condemnable as 1 Tim. 3 1. A worthy work and the more desirous of and industrious in this work the more they are approved of God and good men And I pray you remember our Lord Jesus Christ r) Mat 15.17 to the end with c 7 12. was a diligent teacher of this Law So was Paul Å¿) Rom. 3.31 13.8 9 10. 1 Cor. 9.8 Eph. 6.2 c. so was James t) Jam. 2.8 9 10 11.14 Now you cannot vilifie us for teaching the Law absolutely but you must vilifie these and if we be desirous to be teachers of the Law we have a good copie to write after good examples to follow 2. If your words bear any common sense you plainly disclaim teaching the Law and assent to Mr. Baxters charge calling you Antinomians I accept of your acknowledgment Let that brand stick on you wipe it off if you can For Mr. Cook saith modestly that you who would be counted great Disputers and discussers of the Truth in so saying give just cause to judge that you are such men who are there described in Timothy and you here speak plainly that you desire not to be teachers of the Law 3. Here therefore was sufficient reason to apply that Scripture to you not onely in regard of your not understanding what you say and whereof you affirm which was the principal thing intended but also in regard of your professed desire to be a teacher of the Law though here you disclaim it Did you never teach against Drunkenness Whoredom Idolatrie Covetousness Profaneness c. and are not these things forbidden and condemned in the Law Did you not do you not teach the people that they must love God and their Neighbor worship God rightly sanctifie his Sabbath c. And are not these things commended and commanded in the Law 4. Though you say you desire not to teach the Law do you not urge the Law when you think it may serve your turn E. g. p. 13. you prove from Exod. 20.19 the seventh day was the Sabbath of the Lord. Without doubt the fourth Commandement is part of the Moral Law And pag. 52. you urge the fear of God and the keeping his Commandements u) Eccl. 12.13 which is the doctrine of the Law Now these and the like things you teach either with your will or not If not who forceth you to teach against your will If with your will how can you truly say you desire not to be teachers of the Law 5. Though you desire not to be teachers of the Law yet you desire to be Teachers for you take upon you to be Teachers witnesse your vocal and printed doctrine it must needs follow that you desire and practise the teaching of that which is against or besides the Law I mean God's Law for of that the Apostle speaks and consequently against or besides the Gospel For though the Law as it was mis-understood and misapplied by the blind and unbelieving Jews was contrary to the doctrine of the Gospel and Law too yet the true doctrine of the Law is agâ—â—eable to the doctrine of the Gospel as appears clearly by many Scriptures v) Matis 17 18 19 20 c. Luk 14.44 From 3.31 10.4 specially by the words of the Apostle immediately following that Scripture * 1 Tim. E. ver 7.8 9 10 11. which hath occasioned this discussion Whence observe 1. All these with the like sins and sinners are contrary to sound Doctrine 2. This sound Doctrine is the doctrine of the Law for it's-said ver 9. The Law is made or rather lies x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 heavily with its curses 3. This sound Doctrine of the Law is according to the Gospel Now seeing you will be a Teacher and yet disclaim teaching God's Law which so harmoniously agrees with the Gospel that whosoever teacheth the one rightly must teach the other also and whosoever rejecteth the one must reject the other I appeal to your consciences if not seared whether your Doctrine be nâ—t unsound illegal un-evangelical Doctrine And seeing the Law is just holy good spiritual whether your Doctrine be not unholy unjust evil and carnal And if Christ tell us y) Mat. 5.19 That whosoever breaketh one of these least Commandements and shall teach men so shall be least in the kingdom of heaven what think you will become of those who teach men to reject all the Commandements and wole Law and would be accounted Teachers but desire not to be Teachers of the Law 6. For your crimination of running to Moses we do as Christ z) Mark 12.26 with Luk. 10. ver 37. did who did run to Moses to prove the Resurrection against the Sadduces and * 1 Cor. 9.9 with 1 Tim. 5. ver 18. as Paul did to prove the main enâ—nce for Gospel-Ministers and as your self doth who run to Moses to prove a Sabbath pag. 13. fore-named SECT 8. H. H. pag. 31. And thus Mr. Cook I shall at present take leave of you c. Reply Indeed you do for the present take leave of Mr. Cook
and may for the future also for you leave the substance of his book unanswered CHAP. IX Of Mr BAXTER'S Ten Positions SECT 1. H. H. pag. 31. You say pag. 3. It hath pleased the Holy Ghost to speak of some things in the Scripture more fully and of others more sparingly and where God spake more sparingly the thing must needs be more difficult and yet truth still Answ But he never speaks of Infant baptism in all the Scripture neither fully nor sparingly Then none of his truth nor ever was Reply 1. If you could or would speak properly you would or should have said Either fully or sparingly but as you express your self you grant that Infant-Baptism is spoken of in Scripture one way or other For two Negatives in our language make an Affirmative but I will not insist on this 2. Whether the Scripture speaks of Infant-baptism I hope it appears already in part to the impartial Reader and afterwards will be further cleared 3. The Scripture speaks neither fully nor sparingly of baptismal boots baptismal breeches and other shifting garments used by your party therefore by your arguing your Mode of Baptizing is none of God's truth nor ever was SECT 2. H. H. You instance in 4 particulars but that which is pertinent to the matter in hand is your fourth viz. The New Testament speaks more sparingly of that which is more fully discovered in the Old What need the same thing be done twice except men should question the authority of the Old How silent is the New Testament concerning a Christian Magistracy which made the Anabaptists of old deny it where find you in the New Testament a Christian that exercised the place of a King or Parlament man or Justice of the Peace or the like And so of an oath before a Magistrate of War and of the Sabbath how sparing is the New Testament and why because enough is said of them in the Old To all which I answer you have spoken many words to no purpose c. Reply 1. How pittifully you contradict your self the meanest may see by comparing together the beginning and close of this Section For you said Mr. Bazters fourth Instance is pertinent to the matter in hand and here in the end you say he hath spoken to no purpose How can it be pertinent and yet to no PURPOSE 2. Why are not the other pertinent and to purpose because you could not answer pertinently and to purpose For in Mr. Baxters 1 Case he saith p) Plain Scripture proof for Infant-Baptism p. 3. the word is not spoken to Infants therefore it speaks more sparingly of them yet for the comfort of godly Parents God hath much more fully revealed his mind concerning their children then of wicked and open enemies In the first that Infant-baptism is not so great a point as many make it except by the dangerous consequences ensuing therefore more sparingly mentioned In the second Infant-baptism was not controverted then as some other points yet Scripture is sufficient to direct us for the determination of this too if we have wisedom to apply generall rules to particular cases and have senses exercised to discern the Scope of the Spirit Your silence to all which wee will take for consent SECT 3. H. H. Where as you say That which is spoken on in the Old Testament need not to be spoken of again I Ansâ—er Infant-baptism is no where spoken of neither in the Old nor New Testament therefore you ought not for shame to speak of it Reply 1. This Answer of yours might have been spared if you had read Mr. Baxter a little further q) Pag. 4. The main question is At what age members are to be admitted into the Church Now this is as fully determined in the Old Testament as most things in the Bible and therefore what need any more 2. It 's horrible audaciousnesse for you to say Infant-baptism is no where spoken of in the Old or New Testament If you mean in so many syllables it 's granted already If you mean not so much as by good consequence we say so it 's spoken of as womens receiving the Lord's Supper giving thanks at meals praier in and with our Family c. and therefore you ought not for shame speak against iâ— SECT 4. H. H. p. Ibid. As for your saying Where find we a Christian Magistrate in the New Testament I Answer Surely you have forgotten the Deputy Acts 13.12 and the Eunuch Acts 8.27 37 38. and what say you to Erastus the Chamberlain of the City Rom. 16.2 3. and likewise those Saints of Cesar's houshold Phil. 4.22 Reply 1. Answer hath been made to your two former instances r) see chap. 5. sect 9. which may satisfie any judicious Reader I wonder at this vain repetition of yours unlesse it should be to make up the number of your sheets I know not the caus 2. In your p. 13. You think you have found a Lord Deputy and a Lord Treasurer and you would fain find here a Lord Chamberlain too Would you set up these Officers again if you were to model and mould the State a new But to give you your due you do not dare not affirm Erastus to be a Lord Chamberlain or a Christian Magistrate onely you speak very gingerly What say you to Erastus c. Therefore I say 3. I find mention made of Erastus in Rom. 16 23. not 2.3 where in the Greek Å¿) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he is called a Steward Now that a Steward of any Town or City is or hath been called usually and properly a Magistrate is more then I know or perhaps you can tell Onely this I must tell you you might as well call Gaius a Christian Magistrate of whom in the same verse honorable mention is made viz. that he was Paul's Hoste and of the Church and then he that lately or heretofore in these parts have entertained Mr. Haggar and his Church must be a Christian Magistrate too 4. I dare not say that the Christians in Rome specially they that belong to the Emperors family call'd Saints of Cesars houshold Phil. 4.22 were Christian Magistrates If so speak out and prove it if you can 5. You wrong Mr. Baxter in charging him to say Where find we a Christian Magistrate in the Nâ—w Testament Indeed he saith How silent is the New Testament concerning a Christian Magistracy but presently after within three lines explains himself How sparing is the New Test c. And you that take upon you to find so many Christian Magistrates in the New Testament cannot find one Christian there that exercised the place of a King or Parlament man or Justice of the Peace c. and so his Quest for all your fair flourish is quite left unanswered by you SECT 5. H. H. p. 32. For an Oath did you never read in the New Testam Heb 6.16 And for War did you never read Luk. 3.15 Act. 10.1 For subjection to Magistrates 1 Pet.
liberty to swerve from these primitive practices c. 4. The custome of the Churches in baptizing Infantâ— is of that weight with the Paedobaptists that you must bâ—ing more convincing Arguments then you have yet done to take them off from that custom As for the manner of Baptizing Mr. Cradock to whom Mr. Baxter referrs you tells you * Gospel-liberty p. 2â— 4. I hat Christ hath not made Baptism such an Ordinance as that in all Climates and Countries-and Regions they must go over head and ears in a River c. SECT 22. H. H. You say that you can prove that Infant-baptism was used in the Church as high as to the Apostles as there be many sufficient Histories extant inform us and that the deferring of Baptism came in with the rest of Popery upon Popish or Heretical grounds Answ Oh Sir have I now sound you out Truly seeing I have I must not conceal your wickedness least I become guilty with you of the blood of souls And therefore I do by this declare to all men that you are both a Deceiver and a Blasphemer The which charge I now come to prove Reply 1. Nay stay a while and consider what you say or do you triumph before the victory If you have but now found out Mr. Baxter It teems you have missed of him all this while 2. Though I have found you out before yet I must not conceal your weakness wickedness and audaciousness least I communicate with you in â—our sin and here I do declare to all men hereby that Henry Haggar is both an Imposter and a Blasphemer the which charge I come now to prove but first let us see how you prove the charge SECT 23. H. H. p. 3.38 1. It 's evident you are a Deceiver in that you have intituled your Book Plain Scripture proof for Infant 's Church-membership and Baptism when indeed there is no such thing in all the Bible but you confess that your proof is from some histories extant which you judge sufficient c. Reply 1. You notoriously abuse Mr. Baxter he doth not say that proof for Infant-baptism from Histories are sufficient in his judgment u) see Mr. Baxt. Position 9. p. 7. but in opposition to Mr. T. pretences among the simple he saith he shall easily prove that Infant-baptism was used in the Church as high as to the Apostles daies as there is any sufficient history extant to inform us And if this proves Mr. Baxter to be a deceiver then blessed v) see the foregoing Chap. 5. sect 14. Inst 3.4 c. 16. s 8. Calvin is one and many other burning and shining lights in the Churches of Christ But your charge is indeed from an Eldern-gun and is no Musket-shot it makes a noise but God be thanked hurts not 2. Besides the humane testimonies for Infant-baptism in matter of fact M. Baxter brings abundance of plain Scriptures to prove it De jure And if you see them not it is because you are wilfully blind and obstinate It 's an easie matter for you with impudence to say there is no such thing but it's hard for you to disprove those Texts of Scripture alledged by him Therefore you have cunningly waved all saving two or three in comparison 3. Your Proposition implied is false viz. He that intitles his Book so and yet brings antient histories to prove the usage of Infant-baptism as high as the Apostles daies is a Deceiver you will never set this crooked legg straight while the world stands 4. To set the Saddle as they say on the right horse and to prove you a Deceiver I thus argue He that intiâ—uleth his Book Plain Scripture-proof for the baptizing of men and women when they believe in Rivers and Fountains as a Standing Ordinance in the Church of Christ is a Deceiver But H. H. so intituseth his Book therefore H H. is a Deceiver Theâ—e is no doubt of the Minor and the Major is as clear because those words viz. A Standing Ordinance are no where written in the Scripture of truth and with Mr. Haggar express and plain Scripture proof are all one SECT 24. H. H. 2. You are a Blasphemer for you say deferring of Baptism came in with the rest of Popery Answ But Sir do you not know that our glorious Lord Jesus Christ deferred his baptism till he was thirty years of age Luke 3.21 22 23. And yet he was the child of believing Parents I think you dare not deny Reply 1. If this example be binding none ought to be baptized till they are thirty years old which I perswade myself is against your judgment and practice 2. Luke saith not that Christ deferr'd his Baptism till he was thirty years of age This is your inference not his Assertion He doth not say Christ was thirty years of age before or when he was baptized much less tha the Deferr'd his Baptism till then but thus * Luke 2.23 Jesus himself began to be About thirty years of age c. 3. Christ was not till then baptized partly to answer the Types x) Numb 4.3 35 39 43 47. and chiefly to receive that Testimony from Heaven in the midst of such a great confluence of people that came to John to be baptized which is hinted by Mat. 3.5 6 13 Then and held forth by Luke c. 3.21 22. Therefore this was not properly a deferring * see Diodat on 2 Pet. 3 9. unless perhaps in the judgment of the Flesh as Hab. 2. vers 3.2 Pet. 3.9 SECT 25. H. H. p. ibid. Again doth not the Commission of Christ defer Baptism till believing Mark 16.15 16. and Philip also Acts 8 36 37. shewing by these words plainly that if he did not believe it was to be deferred c. Reply 1. In Mark and in the Acts cited there is not one word of deferring till believing you manifest your own folly and delude poor souls c. 2. You are now for Consequences when you think they will serve your turn Mr. Baxter hath brought more plain Scripture-proof for Infant Church-membership and Baptism then you have done for deferring Baptism 3. I am mistaken if you are not guilty of a plain contradictions For in your pag. 26. in your exhortation you do more then implie that Baptisme is not to be deferred saying Let us not delay the time with a woful misapplication of Scripture y) â—sal 119.60 but here in this page Baptism is to be deferred as you plead 4. The rest of this page contains nothing but an idle Repetition or abominable Censuring with horrible abuse of Scripture and therefore shall have no other answer but what is made already SECT 26. H. H. pag. 39. The summe of which is that Rev 19.20 and 13.16 17. are most properly applied to you the sign of the Cross being a mark of the Beast on the childs forehead when it was baptized or rather rantized Here is a looking-glass for you but the Gospel is our looking-glass Acts
2.41 8.12 14.3 wherein we see our selves conformable to the image of Christ and walk according to the Primitive pattern being far from compelling any to be baptized till they can understand what they do and amend their lives c. Reply 1. Those Scriptures cannot be properly applied to us but are wofully misapplied by you Why do you rave of the sign of the Cross which with other Ceremonies groaned under by the godly are removed Or of receiving the mark of the Beast i. e. z) Mode on Rev. 4. p. 76. a subjecting our selves to his Authority and acknowledging him to be our Lord when you cannot but know that yoke hath been happily cast off long since But it seems you had a mind to set the mark of the Beast on us in favour of the Church of Rome for whom you are a Factor But further to shew your error in that misapplication I pray what miracles are done by us As Rev. 13.14 and 18.20 I fear you shew too much the mark of the Beast by your kicking and wincing at and dabling those that are travelling towards heaven 2. You intimate that he who is Rantizâ—d as you scornfully speak is not baptized as if I should say H. Hag. is a man and therefore not a living creature but you acknowledge these 3000 were baptized and it 's most probable they were a) Acts 2.41 Videntur 3000 uno die à paucis Apostolicis non potuisse baptizari si singuli mersi fuissent Cham. 1.4 l. 5. c 2. s 6. rantized onely there 's no mention made of Fonts and Rivers 3. I wonder in what glass you lookt when you could see a Font in Jer 2.12 13. pag 8. and the sign of the Cross in this of the Revel and yet cannot see one plain Scripture for Infant-baptism 4. Were those mentioned in the Acts baptized before as you say we were pag. 24. or were they Church-members Receivers of the Lord's Supper c. as those were whom you re-baptize If not for shame do not say that you see your selvs in the glass of the Gospel more conformable to Christ and the Primitive pattern 5. Though you want the Argument of force which yet you would fain have yet you want not the force of Argument though feigned to compell some ignorant and carnal people whom I could name to be baptized by you 6. I may not forget to make good my charge also that you are a Blasphemer if to blaspheme be to speak evil as it is often rendred in the New Testament b) E g. Jude 10 c. 1 Pet. 4. ver 4. For you say Infant-baptism is of Sathan pag 35. when no Scripture speaks so That it is an invention of the Pope page 15. when it hath been practiced in the Church of Christ before the c) Universa Ecclisia baptismuÌ„ Insantumtenuit antequam intelligeretur quid sibi vellet Regnum Papae aut quicquam de eo auditum esset Cal Iust in Anab p. 478. Pope was born That Mr. B. Mr. C. and other godly Ministers that dissent from you are fools wicked Antichristian c. and that they make Proselytes seven fold more the children of Sathan then they were before p. 38. with a great deal of more filthy stuff disgorged from your rancorous stomach all along your book I say no more but that time is coming that you shall give an account to him that is ready to judge quick and dead 1 Pet. 4 ver 4 5. SECT 27. H. H. pag. 39 40. You say Pos 10. Evident Consequences or Arguments drawn by reason from Scripture are as true proof as the very express words of a Text and if we have the words without the meaning and reason we have no proof at all for the Divel used the words of the Scripture to Christ To all which I Answer Iâ— That Consequences or Arguments drawn from Scripture are as true proofs as Scripture This is but one of your untruths For most certain it is that what the Scripture saith we need not prove by Consequence As Gen. 1.1 3 7 8. And this I do believe without any Consequence And if you will deny it because it is plain Scripture without any Consequence you may if you please but your folly will be manifest as it is to me already Reply 1. You seem here to deny all Consequences when you granted some pag. 11. One of these must be one of your untruths for both members of a contradiction cannot be true observing the laws of a contradiction 2. Must that be an untruth in Mr. Baxter which is a truth in you For you have asserted plain Scripture-proof for giving thanks at Meals praying with our Families Womens receiving the Lord's Supper p. 12 13 14. which are but Consequences and Arguments drawn from Scripture and yeâ— as true proofs as Scripture it self so you judge and I deny not 3. If you mean what the Scripture saith Expresly it 's granted we need not prove by Consequence if otherwise it 's denied Christ himself Mr. Baxter tells you proves the Resurrection by Consequence out of Exod. 3.6 so that you might have spared the quotations out of Gen. 1.1 c. who denies all or any of these But you have a notable faculty to prove that which none of your Adversaries deny 4. If Mr. Baxter c. do believe those Scriptures cited by you and not deny the same then is your folly made manifest in making such an inference as you do SECT 28. H. H. p. 40. Secondly when you say If we have the words without the meaning and reason we have no proof at all This is a most subtill Sophistry much like to that of Satan when he beguiled Eve saving Gen. 3.4 5. which was both a truth and a lie The truth is if we have not God's meaning and the reason why he speaks to us how can we understand as we ought But both are plainly declared to the sons of men by the Word of Truth and so plainly that if you or an Angel from heaven shall add to it or take from it you shall be accursed and he will add c. all which if you do not know read Prov. 30.6 Gal. 1.8 9. Rev. 22.18 Reply 1. Mr. Baxter's expressiâ—n and Satan's are very unlike you acknowledge a truth and a lie in Satan's but you have shewed no lie in M. Baxter's nor indeed can you unless you will also condemne your self 2. If we cannot understand unless we have God's meaning and reason then Mr. Baxter is in the truth viz If we have the Word without the meaning and reason we have no proof at all Shuffle no longer 3. Mr. Baxter knows and hath read those Scriptures menâ—ioned by you but do you read them more seriously and then you may know more clearly whether you be not obnoxious to those plagues and curses for you are guilty of adding to the Word e. g. p 4. you add That forth wilderness in Mark 1.3 4 5.
not so believe 3. You distinguish foolishly between Faith and Obedidience for Faith it self is an obediential act It 's called the obedience of Faith a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e Ut homines fide obediant Deo Beza in loc Rom. 1.5 16.26 and to believe is to obey as appear◠by the opposition Joh 3.36 b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that believeth not the Son i. e. He that obeieth not the Son as Beza translates it and children of unbelief are called Eph. 22 children of disobedience 4. It seems by your confession that your words whereby you express your self do not pertain to the rule of Faith and Obedience 5. I wonder you daresay that you put not men on believing or doing any thing as a duty that is not written in Scripture For do you not put men to believe that Infants are neither Disciples nor Church-members nor in Covenant c. That they dying in their Infancie are saved by Christ's death without actuall faith pag. 61. And have you not rightly proved praying in a man's family giving thanks at meals Women's receiving the Lord's Supper c. to be duties yet none of the foresaid particulars are expresly written in Scripture and would you have them done but not in faith SECT 53. H. H. Herein lies the depth of all deceits viz. Because Christ expounded the Scriptures of the Prophets therefore men will take in hand to expound his Expositions q. We could make them plainer then he hath left them or make any thing true that is not written in them And because Philip opened the Scripture to the Eunuch Act. 8. therefore men will take in hand to open Philip's words so as to make them to appear otherwise then they are written Reply 1. You are fallen deep into the pit of Deceit if no Minister may preach e. g. on Mat. 5. where Christ expounds the true meaning of the Law and clears it from the Pharisees false glosses or on Mark 4.34 where Christ Expounded all to his Disciples or on Luk. 24.27 where beginning at Moses and all the Prophets he Expounded to them c. or on Acts 8. instanced in by your self For what is it to preach but to expound and apply the Word of the Lord. 2. You bewray your weakness and wickedness things usual to persons wedded to their opinions in contradicting your self for you take upon you all along to expound the Expositions of Christ and his Apostles Do not you make their sayings plainer then they have left them But I crie you mercy you make them appear otherwise then they are written SECT 54. H. H. For the plainer manifestation of the truth I desire all impartial men to consider these following things 1. If I would prove by Scripture that God created heaven and earth I must bring a Scripture that speaks so as Gen. 1.1 2ly Or that God created man upright Eccles 7.29 Or 3ly that all men since Adam's fall were sinners Rom. 3.23 Or 4ly That God sent his Son to redeem those sinners 1 Tim. 1.15 Chap. 2.6 Or 5ly That the dead shall rise Mar. 12. ver 25 26 c. Reply 1. What need this vain repetition your first instance hath been answered before in your p. 40. and your last in p. 48. 2. The other Scriptures do not say in express terms what yet you truly affirm you swerve from your own pattern Let the Reader view your quotations and compare them with your expressions 3. What blindness and blockishness is here If you would prove that men must give thanks at meals pray in and with their families that women are to receive the Lord's Supper bring some Scriptures that speak so but you cannot in express terms though you do it by consequence p. 12 13 14. so do we for Infant-baptism SECT 55. H. H. p. 50. To conclude If I would prove that men and women should be baptized when they believe I must bring a Scripture that saies so as Acts 8.12 37. And now if any man will prove that little babes should be baptized let them bring one Scripture to prove it and then they will do honestly otherwise c. Reply 1. This Scripture and the challenge have been answered before I will not trouble the Reader with Tautologies as you do CHAP. X. Concerning Consequences drawn from Scripture c. SECT 1. H. H. But now a word to Mr. Cook who saith that we never read in the Scriptures Go H. H. and J. B. teach all nations and baptize c. nor do we read that Christ gave a command to you two to preach the Gospel c. Answ This is but a cunning devised Fable a subtil sophistry of Mr. Cooks to deceive the hearts of the simple but easily discovered by them to whom the Lord hath given understanding We do not desire Mr. B. and Mr. C. to bring a Scripture that saith Go R. B. or go W. C. and baptize Children that cannot speak nor understand what you preach c. Reply 1. Bravely done Mr. Haggar when you cannot shape an handsom answer to Mr. C. then according to your custome you crie A cunning devised fable subtil sophistry c. which charge how unjustly as well as absurdly after a long digression it comes in here I leave to the judgment of the intelligent must passe as words of course to please or fright the simple 2. He hath lost his understanding I think that cannot see you here quite and clean yielding the cause to Mr. C. by a tacite granting that H. Hag. and J. Brown are by consequence from Matth. 28.19 commanded to teach and baptize c. For you say We do not desire c. 3. Infant-baptism hath been largely proved by many Scriptures and Arguments grounded on Scriptures specially in that very book of Mr. Cooks which you pretend to answer but scarce meddle with unlesse a lapp and snatch and away 4. As to that instance in that book requiring you to make out your practice by express Scripture it is not so easily answered as you imagine For 1. whereas you say you desire not Mr. B. or Mr. C. to bring a Scripture that saith Go R. B. go W. C. c. that 's nothing We have no more reason to be satisfied in your practice without express and immediate Scripture then you have in ours without such Scripture though many Consequences from Scripture are clearly brought Or rather if you were impartial you should have justified your own practice by express Scripture without Consequences before you had urged us thereto For 2ly where is it expressed in Scripture that you are appointed to go up and down in several parts of England and to draw people being Christians by profession and brought up from their childhood in that Religion wherein to they were baptized in Infancy to renounce their Infant-baptism and to be dipped in such a pit or Pool c. before such a company whether naked or covered with such a form of English words
according to the mind of Christ was and is onely by Ministeriall teaching Secondly That none but such so discipled were or are to be baptized But on the contrary are not examples obvious in Scripture As the thief on the Crosse who was a Disciple yet not Discipled by Ministeriall preaching the Gospel whom yet you acknowledge to be in a saving condition p. 25 26. and baptized in will though not in deed and to omit many instances Paul was a Disciple o) Acts 9.22 yet not by the preaching of the Gospell and was baptized too and I trow both according to the mind of Christ to say nothing of p) Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 6. c. 2. Origens and Austins q) Confess l. 8. 〈◊〉 12. Discipleship the one by his parents education the other by a Voice from Heaven 5. For your confession c. It had been more ingenuity to have confessed your own errours with which your book is stuffed as may appear by this reply or your impudence with a witness in denying that which you cannot but know to be the custom of the Churches of God for more then a 1000 years See your p. 3. or your uncharitableness in disowning them for the Churches of God who have owned Infant-baptism What your custom is I matter not you shall be none of my presidents though God may make you an example and then I shall remember you as I do Å¿) Luk 17.32 Lot's wife SECT 8. H. H. p. 91. But to retort M. Baxter's Argument this Doctrine of M. Baxters and the rest of the Priests of England viz. That all Children should be Baptized in their None-age according to their practice doth turn the Baptisme of Christ which is to baptize men and women when they believe quite out of the Churches of the saints therefore c. This his Sword is turned with the edg against himself Reply 1. In generall you should have given no more then his own you have made so little use of the Argumenâ— that you deserve to pay no interest but how have you put the sheep in Wolves clothing and besmeered M. Baxter's modest and meek expression with the excrements of your own passion 2. In particular 1. You call us Priests in derision you shew your selfe to be the Son of Hagar by your scoffing that Nick-name neither gaines you not loses us any thing Secondly we do not say all children but the children of believeing parents are to be baptized And those I trow are not All children s) Isa 28.15 Thus you make lies your refuge and under falsehood have you hid your self Thirdly you say that our Doctrine turns Christ's Baptism out of the Church because the baptizing of men and women when they believe is the baptisme of Christ This is bâ—t a pittifull begging of the Question and yet without Question both the Baptism of Infants of the other are consistent It 's well known that many Jewes Heathens converted to the Faith have been Baptized by us as well as the Infants of believeing Parents Thus indeed the edge of M. Baxter's Sword is so turned that for very bluntnesse it hath not so much as pierced the skin SECT 9. H. H. Same p. His Sixth Argument is against the mannes of Baptizing by Dipping as being a branch of the Sixth Commandement because it doth ordinarily tend to the overthrow of man's health and lives therefore no Ordinance of God but an hainous sinne c. Answer In order First Observe M. Baxter useth not one Scripture the ground of faith to prove it murder c. he hath used many vain words which prove nothing c. Reply 1. Here is a fair promise of aningenuous proceeding t) Quind dignum tanto seret hic promissor hiatu partuturiunt montes nasceturridicuâ—is mus Horat but not a suitable performing seeing folly marches in the Van rather let it be observed that you suffer the ground and foundation of your practice to be undermined and razed and yet you make no stir but what a great bussle do you make when M. Baxter comes to the Manner This is Lapwing if not Jesuite-like to cry loudest when furthest from the Nest 2. You will not be kept from your old custom of Fly-blowing mens writings with your corrupt breath M. Baxter doth not exhort the Magistrates p. 134. and 136. to destroy the Anabaptists as well as High-way murderers M. Baxter and I have so much charity u) Sic Diligendisunt homines ut non diliguntur eorum errores Prosp for you and yet Zeal for the truth that we would have noâ— your persons but your erroneous practises destroyed if so be the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus 1 Cor. 5.5 3. It was needless for M.B. to bring senseless for you to demand Scripture for the proving of usual dipping to be murder Hath not God made us men as well as Christians and given us reason as well as Religion Is there not a morall as well as a divine Faith And is there an incompossibility of both these Cannot we act the one but we must decline the other If therefore M. Baxter had proved dipping to be murder by a morall-convincing Argument I might have believed him and yet made the word of God the ground of my Faith as it is granted to be yet 4. Who did ever produce Scripture-testimonies for the proof of a bond Or Gospel-evidence for title to Land Hath the Grand Jury Scripture for to prove matter of fact e. g. Murder yet the bill is found and the murder justly condemned I have heard it considently affirmed that Mr. Haggar hath been married to two wives which are both yet living Now unless he can bring Scripture to prove the contrary by his own Logick none is bound to believe him Let him therefore take heed of such arguing 5. But Mr. B. proves it by Scripture If the sixth commandement be the word of God which forbids the ordinary use of any thing which tendeth directly to overthrow health and life how else can you prove the tortures inflicted on the primitive Christians to be murder but by such a Medium as this is unless it be your opinion That their tormenters were no murderers Though the tormented were indeed Martyrs Nay you your self allow the lighting of one candle by another v) Gospell worship no wrok for Infants p. 38. So the first be lightted by the fire of of the Altar i. e. The pure word of God You see Mr. B. doth so it is then a Scripture-argument by your own grant So that you might well have forborn that peremptory charge that Mr. Baxters proof is by affirming from out of his own mouth only c. 5. The Reader may do well to observe your First without a Second only when you cannot answer then you fall to your old haunt to cavill c. SECT 10. H. H. p. 92. But he proceeds I dare not say that in Cities like London and
book I heartily return SECT 33. H. H. p. 104. Your eighth Argument followeth viz. Because the Anabaptists way and practice is such as hath been still branded and pursued with God's eminent judgments but never evidently with his blessings Therefore not likely to bee of God Answ By this Argument the Amorites were the children of God for they enjoied Canaan four hundred years and the Israelites were not the children of God for they were in bondage and misery Christ and his Disciples were branded for Hereticks c. Joh. 7.34 as you brand us but do you say they were not God's people Reply 1. You are all the Country wide Mr. Baxter spoke of God's branding and you of man's branding The Reader may see your answer is not to the purpose 2. The Israelites were oppressed in Egypt Christ and his Apostles persecuted yet God evidently followed them with his blessings They had Sun-shines as well as showers beams of mercy as well as clouds of misery The Israelites the more they were afflicted f) Exod 1.12 the more they multiplied and the more Christ his Apostles and Church were persecuted the more the Gospel flourished g) Phil. 1.12 3. a strong argument h) Graecam Philosophiam si quis Magistratus pâ—ohibuerit eaâ—tatim perit at Doctrinam Christianam oppugnant reges terrae tamen crescit Dâ—vn in Col â— 6 ex Clemente of the truth of the Gospel But the Anabaptists were never attended with any evident blessing of God but rather eminent judgments of God How hath this opinion been visibly blasted Had it been a plant of God's own setting he would have made it flourish in spite of opposition The Lilly hath grown in the midst of Thorns Thus you see your parallel is not right and therefore your answer is wrong SECT 34. H. H. The Prophet had like to stumbled at the prosperity of the wicked and to have said that they were God's people Psal 73.3 4 5. But you so stumble and fall as to speak evil of God's people because of their sufferings Reply That the prosperity of the wicked and adversity of the godly is a strong temptation to Atheism i) Cum rapianâ— mala fata bonos Solicitor aullos esse putare does Ovid I confess But you say and not prove that you are the people of God Thus did your forefathers the Donatists thus doth every Sect as Socinians Antinomians Arminians Quakers Ranters c. style themselvs the people of God till you prove the Anabaptists God's people I shall look on those judgments wherewith they are branded as on the fire and brimstone which fell on Sodom SECT 35. H. H. p. 104 105. You say further the Anabaptists hindred the Gospel in Germany there be few Divines of note who do not bear witness of it did live idly forsake their wives and children abounded with abominable lusts c. Nor can any man shew you one of the Anabaptists who is not blemished with some of the fore-named wickednesses c. Answ Now by this time I hope you have vented your deadly poison against the Anabaptists but if all this were true which is not yet it seems M. Baxter's Religion is so tottering that it must be underpropped with the Anabaptists failings or wickedness of those who have apostatized from us as if none of us were free Reply 1. Your reviling of M. Baxter will not serve your turn you are now at the Bar and now or never must plead the Anabaptists cause in the present charge drawn up But it may be this was the Preface to the Plea and you onely spit that you may speak out and what you speak is not an answer but a rambling discourse made up of fraud and folly 2. Your Etes or Spectacles or both are naught when Infant-baptism seemed to you to be Mr. Baxter's Religion Part it is but not all he looks upon it as an Ordinance yet comparatively k) See Insâ—it Bâ—p 10 11 of inferior consequence It 's truer that Anabaptists place their Religion chiefly in Re-baptizing and are gone so far in Popery that they make it necessary to salvation and Dipping essential to that Ordinance 3. Were this his Religion and ready to fall yet it needs not to be propped by the rotten posts of the Anabaptists weakness or wickedness such are rather fit to build a Babel then a Temple This hath stood many hundred years before Anabaptism was dream'd of and I should be ashamed to own the cause were Paedo-baptism onely good because Anabaptism was bad your principles and practices being so vain and vile that they are able almost to justifie any Heresie and to canonize an Atheist Infant-baptism is not onely comparatively but simply just and lawful on Scripture grounds as hath been shewed and therefore we need not the wickedness of your Apostates to support our Religion This Diamond hath a native lustre and needs no such foyl 4. You fillily shift off your charge by saying The worst of men apostatized from you c. Adam's excuse was as good when he laid the fault on Eve for they still mainteined their principle and practice of Anabaptism even when they wrote their blasphemous lines and led their beastly lives So that Mr. Baxter's light received no advantage as is pretended from their darkness That Sun will shine notwithstanding a spitting candle SECT 36. H. H. p. 106. 2. That the Anabaptists hindered the preaching of the Gospel in Germany his proof is nothing but telling us most writers of those times testifie it Answ He might as well have asked his fellow Priests if it had been lawful to take Tithes and he had been sure of their testimony for it as he hath now against the Anabaptists who had rich and potent enemies that wrote those Histories against them Zuinglius disputed with them and could not stop their mouths the Senate banished them c. Such arguments that neither Paul nor Peter nor John could answer Act. 24.5 Reply 1. What other witnesses should be brought but the writers of those times Is not that enough if there be truth in the History or Moral faith in us Would you have Scripture to prove that John of Leiden had three Wives 2. Your scornful term Priests I pass by being on my journey every bark and snarle must not stay me and for the lawfulness of Tythes that shall bee spoken to anon God willing your exception against the witnesses is insufficient for they were the most famous Orthodox Divines in those times and parts viz. Luther Melancthon Zuinglius Bullinger c. Now let the world judge which is the more creditable your Nay or their Yea and it 's a wonder to me that if those Histories were false neither you nor your brethren have discovered the falsness of them to the world since they are still on every occasion produced against you It 's not your poor evasion Ask your fellow Priests c. will bring you off 3. These potent enemies you say wrote
Mark 5.3 5. but how came they dead the Magistrate you say prisoned banished and hanged them I easily believe that they who were hanged were dead but that the prisoned or banished were so unlesse civilly dead in Law or spiritually dead in sin is beyond my faith And me thinks though the imprisoned could not write yet the banished might have the liberty of pen and ink Thus whilst you would scape the Bears skin you get into the Foxes by misciting Mr. B. 2. As you have manifested your folly so you discover a piece of daring pride in challenging those three worthies to answer you Goliah-like done But Sir you must not take it unkindly if I tell you and so I do your book is not worth the answering by such worthy Champions Nor had it been by me had not some of your brood with a braving importunity forced this from me Of all which and more I have given an account in the Epistle to the Reader 3. It had been more meet in my judgment â—hat you should first have answered Calvin now he is dead laid in grave and past answering for himself so you might have cryed quittance with him SECT 39. H. H. p. 107. You say Calvin in his letter shews two sorts of Anabaptists one boasted of Scripture and pleaded it with great confidence Answ 1. If they so boasted they boasted of that which is good 2 Cor. 11.10 Psal 44.8 and if you would boast of them more then you do it would be better for you 2. Doth it displease you to hear men plead Scripture for what they hold are you such enemies to hold holy Scripture Take heed least white you boast your selvs to be wise without or above them you become foools 1 Cor. 3.19.20 21. If those two things be the worst that Calvin and you can say of those Anabaptists I shall not be ashamed to own them for Christians before all men Reply 1. If boasting be taken in the right sence I agree with you the more you and I boast of Scripture the better it is for you and me Though those Scriptures you brought to prove this be impertinent 2. It doth not displease Calvin or Mr. Baxter that men boast of and plead Scripture but that they shamefully abuse it to the maintenance of their cursed errours as if God had provided armes for Sathan gathering that which the Holy Ghost never scattered and wracking it to speak that he never intended And if you have a love to the truth as it is in Jesus I think you will be displeased to see spiders gather poyson from such flowers and brats draw blood in stead of milk from those sacred breasts which is Calvins c. meaning when he says they boast of Scripture Christ liked the Law but not the Pharisees Leaven We commend the Text but not the Anabaptists Comment And therefore while you wonder at them take heed you be not of those Act. 13.41 3. Your civill caveat which is as a flower in a dunghil I thank you for it I like not truth the worse from whomsoever it coms f) Si caecus mòstravet iter tamen aspice Horat. I will embrace good counsell ever from an enemy for those 1000 you talk of I have replyed to 4. In the conclusion though you have thrust us out at the window yet you have unawares let us into the Church at the door for if we plead Scripture more truly then the Anabaptist for what we hold you need not to be ashamed to own us for Christians before all men But 5. Will Mr. H. indeed own all for Christians that plead Scripture his words can bear no other construction then not only Hereticks but Satan himself may come in for a room among Christians Did not Satan plead s) Mat. 4 6. Et sient caput tunc capiti nunc quoque memhrâ— membris c. com c. 51. Scripture to Christ Mat. 4.6 And as impertinently as you have done as hath been shewed and have not his first born children I mean Hereticks both pleaded and boasted of Scriptures Now let any Heretick have but his book and by your doctrine he wil never be condemned Is this boasting and pleading Scripture good Certainly you are too lavish now when you cut the Devill and his Imps a piece of the childrens bread Thus you stand upon such a guard your self as defends and patronizes the worst of men and the vilest opinions of those worst of men Why may not any who plead Scripture with confidence be as good Christians as Anabaptists are or boast themselvs to bee SECT 40. H. H. As for your other sort you talk of that are above Scripture that confound all things c. I and all that own the Scriptures do deny and defie them and their ways and you do wickedly to call them Anabaptists whom Calv. calls Libertines as you confesse p. 141. Reply 1. I believe all that own the Scripure as they should do deny and defie them and their ways But I doubt whether you do as you say for then you deny and defie Anabaptism for that is their way still though they fly higher then yet you have done But as many in word defie the Devill and spit at the mention of his name yet own him in life So I fear you do with those Anabaptists 2. To pass by the overflowings of your gall against M. B. the meanest may see you would fain creep out at any hole Calvin calls them Libertines Therefore M. B. doth wickedly in calling them Anabaptists like this Protestants are of two sorts either Lutherans or Calvinists Therefore he that calls the Calvinists Protestants doth wickedly therein Or if I should say there are two sorts of Christians viz. Protestants and Anabaptists is it maliciously done to say Anabaptists are Christians upon the supposall SECT 41. H. H. p. 108. You say pag. 142. No man can shew you one man of the Anabaptists that is not tainted with some of these foresaid wickednesses Answ If any of us should say wee were never lyars wee should be still lyars Rom. 3.10 to 16. This is the condition of all men before faith and repentance Luk. 13.2 3 4. again 1 Cor. 6.9.10 11. And I dare not say but such as have been gross sinners may on their conversion be brought into the Anabaptists Churches c. Reply 1. I will not quarrell with you about the first part of this your rambling Answer It s to be acknowledge with shame and sorrow we are vile by nature 2. Surely you have the Art of breathing on your Converts with Knipperdoling u) Sleid com 〈◊〉 â—0 bidding them to receive the holy Ghost If those of the Anabaptists Church though grosse sinners when of our Church are now Saints which is nothing else but a blasphemous crack or vain brag a Paradox to me and shall be believed when you prove your Dipping an Ordinance of Christ and your Baptizing exepere operato the Laver of regeneration for the
God hath opened the mouth of the Ass to reprehend the madness of these Prophets 2. When we accuse the Anabaptists our Bill is against ALL we say and that truly there is not a man of them that is not guilty of some of those fore-mentioned crimes Now though you have face enough yet you dare not say all the Ministers or all the people of the Church of England were guilty of some of those wickednesses the voyces of a few are not the qualifications of all m) Tantum in propriis essentialibus à particulari ad universale valet consequentia 3. You say you have playd the fools part I think so too it had been pity such a Comedy should have been Acted without you and so unawares you have given us thirteen to the dozen 4. Did the tongues and pens of M. Baxter and M. Hall flye at more uncertainties then yours Are not the writings of Calvin Bullinger c. as true as the first Century of Scandalous Ministers c. and is not M. B. as faithfull a reporter as M. Haggar SECT 48. H. H. p. 117. to 120. Now let the impartiall Reader consider whether this generation of men are not those spoken of 2 Tim. 3.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9. Jer. 23.14 15 16 17. Ezek. 22.26 27 28. Mich. 3.12 Phil. 3.18 19. 2 Pet. 2.9 to 19. So that I may say with Jeremiah 5. ver 30 31. Reply 1. To all this I will say only thus much The Lord will cut out the proud tongue and the monthes of Lyars shall be stopped I shall spread all before the Lord as Hezekiah did Rashake's letter and the Lord be Judge between us Withall know Sir that you must one day answer for this * Jude 15. and for abusing Scripture to the venting of your own wrath bitterness and malice for which end the Scriptures were never written That such Scriptures may be used out of a holy zeal against the known enemies of God his Church against false teachers I deny not but it 's not fit you should vomit up your gall in them this is but to put Satans brats in God's childrens cloaths and to raise up the Devill in Samuel's mantle Yet 2. You say p. 117. we are false accusers for we accuse you and are in fault our selves A wise reason If reduced into form They that accuse the Anabaptists and are in fault themselvs are false accusers But we accuse you c. 1. Your Major is notoriously false Those Scribes and Pharisees accused the woman taken in Adultery in the very act yet they were not false accusers of her though they were in fault in themselves Joh. 8.3 to 12. The penitent thief accused the other thief for railing on Christ and yet he was no false accuser of him though as deep in robbery as the other 3. You say also the Lord hath promised they shal proceed no further c. 2 Tim. 3.9 It 's to be considered whether it be not a threatning rather then a promise we have only your bare word for this last which I cannot credit for it 's said their folly shall bee made manifest as theirs also was i. e. Jannes and Jambres now that was a judgment executed and is not this then a judgment threatned 4. Other Fopperies mentioned in the close of this answer are but repititions to a loathing I 'le say no more SECT 49. H. H. p. 120. Thus having made an end with M. Baxter I shall conclude with M. Cook 's last end of his Font uncovered p. 46. where he seems to answer this Objection Reply And have you done with M. Baxter Truly then you have done your work but by halves What do you say to his tryall q) c. 15. p. 152. to 160. of the strength of your cause by antiquity what not a word to all this what 's become of your old way of disputing never an Odium to cast upon him no clawing Apostrophe to the Reader or people never a mist to cast before mens eyes that they may not see the truth Cannot you tell M. Baxter hee lyes and all that he writes are but lyes why are you thus cowardly without any noise to quit the field Is not this to acknowledge you are conquered But you are about to encounter with M. Cook again Let 's see how you charge here if any whit better then before CHAP. XVI SECT 1. H. H. p. 121. He saith The truth oft lyes deep and will not easily be sound out As it is more pretious then Gold and Silver so it requires more diligent search Gold mines are not obvious to every eye much skill and labour are requisite to find them out and bring the Gold to light Answ Sir I am afraid that this is your Gold that you have deceived so many poor souls withall which you have taken great pains to dig out of the mountains of antient Fathers the mines of mens inventions you may well compare your work to Digging for Isa 29.15 c. Reply 1. That you might be thought it seems to have fully answered that little Book Though you never spake to the substance of it as you have nibbled at some few words in the beginning so now you take notice of some few words in the close of that Book But whereas you say you are afraid I tell you the wicked fear where none pursues and Hypocrites pretend to fear the sins of others when they intend most to hide and dissemble their own 2. It appears indeed you were afraid of somthing when you keep at such distance from the body of that little book which you pretend to encounter only making a few slieghty velitations first at the van and then at the rear and presently run away not daring to come near the main body which stands still in it's full strength and sees you running away only giving some bragging and rayling words as you look behind you which any coward may do 3. If you did discern any counterfeit Gold there why did you not discover it by the touch-stone of the Word to bee so 4. What occasion you have to complain of Ancient Fathers c. I know not for they were not urged in that book But what was there asserted was confirmed by Scripture Though we blesse God for any help we have from ancient or modern writers and their inventions For the finding out of the truth and understanding the Scriptures you that stand not in need of the help of others may scorn them if you please being sufficient of your self 5. You may perceive now your perversenesse in abusing Scripture r) Diodat on Isa 26.15 for they carried on their design secretly with in themselvs never informing themselvs of the wil of God nor commending their said designs to him in prayer for a blessing Malice it self cannot charge M. C. thus Nay rather he is like those who have digged deep to find hid treasures and to expose them to open view which all
Humane Learning is an excellent gift of God and needs not my patronage being able to plead for it self against all the friends of ignorance and the works and workers of darkness yet I shall speak something of it in this place according to my promise and others expectance As I desire to bless God for the gifts which he hath richly bestowed on many of his servants and to bewail my own defect therein So I know God the Author of it hath and will execute severe vengeance as on the abusers so on the contemners of it But tell me 1. Doth not wise Solomon though he acknowledged wisedom i. e. humane learning in natural moral and political things in comparison of the fear of God to be but vanity and vexation of spirit Eccl. 1.17 18. 12.13 yet tells us That wisdom excells folly as far as light excells darkness Eccl. 2.12 13.14 Was not Moses learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians Acts 7 22. which sure was humane learning * Just Mart. Râ—sp ad Qu. 25. viz. in Geometrie Astronomy Astrologie c. which out of your profound ignorance or profane scornfulness you are pleased to term Whimsies pag. 35. Was not Daniel and his Companions skilful in all the Wisdom which was famous in the Court of Babylon Dan. 1.4 5 6. Was not Paul brought up at the feet of Gamaliel Acts 22.3 and endowed with all the improvements of humane learning which those times could afford What should I say of Isaiah e) Isa 50.4 The Lord hath given me the tongue of the learned Luke Apollos c. who had eminent acquired endowments which all were made serviceable to God in the work to which they were called And whatsoever some others of the Prophets and Apostles wanted in acquired endowments was supplied by infused in that they were enabled to speak with tongue without study Acts 2. 2 Cor. c. 14. What would you have separated from Moses's Church or Daniel's or the rest because they stood so much in humane learning If you say that though they used humane learning they did not ground their religion on it no more can you say and prove truly of us We ground our Religion on the Scripture but make use of humane learning to know the meaning of the Scripture knowing it is a means sanctified of God for that purpose as of humane eies to read it humane reason to understand it desiring the Lord to sanctifie this humane ability but not casting away eies ears reason or learning If you say we abuse humane learning so did not the Apostles and Prophets Be it so But will you reject good things for the abuse then must you cast away eies ears reason meat drink apparel If you will separate from societies where good things are abused you must separate from all societies and your selves too 2ly Hath not God's providence made special use of the Exactness of the Hebrew Scribes Scholars and Rabbins for the preservation of the Scriptures of the Old Testament even in the least points and tittles Yea how could the Scripture of the Old and New Testament have been conveighed to us without Humane Learning unless wee must have had continual miracles Was not humane learning both amongst the Heathen and the Jews the means of the first Translation of the Old Testament to the spreading abroad of Divine Truth amongst the Nations and to make way for their call to the Gospel And hath not this been the blessed means which God hath used for communicating the knowledge of the whole Scripture to you and many thousands more who must for ever have been ignorant of them if they had continued sealed and locked up which they must for ever have been had not the Key of Humane Learning opened this Treasure to us Oh monstrous ingratitude to spurn at so happy an instrument of conveighing the knowledge of God and of the Scriptures to us 3ly Do you not know that the times of greatest ignorance and decaies or neglects of Humane Learning in the Church were the times of greatest Superstition Idolatry and Deformation when the Prince of Darkness uncontroulably ruled by his substitute Antichrist who was in those times especially as great an enemy to humane learning as you your selvs loth to be at the pains to get it himself and disdaining that any under him should bee more knowing then himself Under whom that illiterate herd of Monks and Friers bore the greatest sway and the blind led the blind into the pit Mat. 15.14 And if here and there a learned man was found in those times their humane learning was counted a sufficient ground to charge them with Heresie or some other hainous offence And can you be ignorant that the grand design of Antichrist is to keep the people in ignorance and illiterateness concerning the Scriptures that they may neither be able to understand them in their original languages which indeed were a work of greater learning then ordinary capacities and the generality of the people can attain to nor yet so much as have them translated into known languages which cannot be without much humane learning at least of some choice men least the light of the Scripture shining forth to the people by means of humane learning the abominableness of their Darkeness should be discovered 4ly Know you not that the breaking forth of Humane Learning about 200 years ago was a preparative and introduction to the breaking forth of the Gospel from under the Cloud and restauration of Religion Doubtless the Spirit of God stirred up those generous spirits impatient of the torpid ignorance which by the cunning of Antichrist and his instruments had over-spread the world with indefatigable industrie to recover learning out of the rubbish in which it had laien buried a long time So that in a while the knowledge of the Greek Hebrew and Chaldee tongues in which the Scriptures were first written and of the Syriack and Arabick into which there were most famous and antient Translations and other Arts and Sciences by which the Writings of the Learned might be better understood were speedily brought to a wonderful splendor and perfection And then presently after these dawnings of Humane Learning Christ the Sun of Righteousness arose in the sincere preaching of the Gospel and expelled the darkness of ignorance and superstition out of many Nations in great measure 5. How is it possible that the Scriptures confessedly the rule of true Religion should be understood by us English-men or any other Christians without the help of humane Learning unless by immediate inspiration and the miraculous gift of speaking with and interpreting of strange tongues and other sudden Revelations which were peculiar to the Prophets and Apostles and those primitive times which none of you as I know pretend to and which to expect now were high presumption if not tempting of God The Original Languages of the Scripture cannot ordinarily be understood without Grammar Learning there is much Oratory in