no efficient but a Recipient cause of it As even they confess that call it a Receiving Instrument And yet we have it not till we believe or consent Who would have thought that such a mâ—n as you had taken your own faith to be an efficient cause of your own Justification and so that you justifie your self And what if one give land to you and your heirs It is none of theirs till they are in being And yet their birth is no efficient cause but only the cause of the subjects receptive capacity I am ashamed that you put me thus to catechize you Mr. T. 5. If visible Church-membership be antecedent to the interest a person hath in the Covenant then the Covenant is not the cause of it But c. Ergo Answ The word Interest may signifie the Interest that fallen mankind hath in the Covenant as conditional antecedent to mans consent And thus I suppose neither you nor I here speak of it But if by my Interest you mean that I am the person to whom the Covenant giveth a present Right to its benefits I answer Some benefits follow long after but when I consent then I am the person to whom the Covenant giveth a present Right to union with Christ in the first instant and consequently with his Church or body in the second so that here is no such thing as your feigned membership before Covenant interest that is before a Right to that Relation by Gods donation And as 〈…〉 former dream that this is not a Right anâ— moral effect but a physical it was your self and not I that subjected you to the shame of such an assertion which I will no more confute Mr. T. 6. If the Covenant c. be the only 〈…〉 bought Orphans of Turks wholly at our dispose are no visible members c. Answ No friend of truth will run into the dark with a controversie and argue à minus notis Many judicious Divines think that Gods Covenant with Abrahams Infants born in his house proveth that two things go to make up the capacity of an Infant for baptism 1. That he be his own and at his dispose who offereth him to God 2. That he be offered or dedicated by a Consenting Owner Now their reason is because if they be our own we have the dispose of them for their good and our wills are theirs But the case is most clear about those that by Generation are our own and darker about those that are by Adoption or purchase our own Now here you do nothing but deny the darker which you cannot disprove and thence the plainer which we have fully proved Mr. T. 7. If the Covenant oâ— Law with the Parents actual faith without profession make not the Parent a visible Church-member neither doth it the child But Ergo. Answ I grant both major and minor He that is not known to have faith is not a visible adult member And he that is not known to be the justly reputed child of a professed believer is 〈◊〉 an Infant Church-member And what 's this 〈◊〉 our controversie Heart consent maketh a mystical or invisible Christian and member and Professed belief that is Believing Consent maketh a visible member of the parent and is necessary to the visible membership of the child If I may call that Making them which is but the Disposition of the material Receptive constitutive cause It 's pitty we should have need to talk at this rate Mr. T. 8. If persons are visible Church-members and not by the Covenant of Grace then it is not true that Christ by his Law or Covenant is the sole efficient of visible Church-membership The minor is proved in Judas and hypocrites Answ 1. They are not the sole efficient Gods Love and mercy also is efficient 2. You profess your self that the name Christian and Church-member are equivocal as to the sincere and the hypocrites If they be not the same things no wonder if they have not the same causes That Donation or Covenant may be the sole nearest Instrumental efficient of True membership and yet not of Equivocal 3. God who is our Paternal Beneficient Ruler doth give some of his benefits by his Law or Covenant absolutely and antecedently to mans conditions and some consequently as Rewards And Gods Laws having first a Preceptive part as well as a Donative or Premiant a Right may accrue in foro ecclesiae to an hypocrite from that precept As e. g. God antecedently doth by his Covenant give the world an Impunity as to the punishment of Drowning it And so by his common Law of Grace he giveth the world many common mercies by a Redeemer and perhaps many by that you call a physical act immediately And by his Law he having given a conditional pardon and life to all commandeth his Ministers to offer it and All men to Accept it and his Ministers to judge by mens profession and to use professed Accepters as real because we cannot see the heart This being so when the hypocrite professeth his consent the Law obligeth the Minister and Church to receive it by which in foro ecclesiae he hath a right to his Church station And Christ himself called Judas and sent him out to Preach and his mandates were as Laws So that the Right that an hypocrite hath he hath by the Law which obligeth the Church to use him as a true believer upon his professing to be such None of this can be denyed But Judas was called immediately by Christ himself and his follow me was a precept which gave him a Right to his Relation Mr. T. 9. If Infants are visible members by the Covenant on Condition that the Parents c. then either the next Parents or in any generation precedent c. Answ The next Parents that are Owners of the child and have the trust and power of disposing of him or covenanting for him And the Reason is because they have 1. That Propriety and 2. That trust and power Mr. T. 10. If an Infants visible Church-membership be by the Covenant on the Parents actual believing and not a bare profession then it is a thing that cannot be known c. Answ I pitty Readers that must be troubled with such kind of talk 1. The Right of the child is upon the Believing Parents dedication of that child to God by consenting that he be in the mutual Covenant 2. Heart consent known only to God giveth no Right coram ecclesia known to men but only to such mercy as God who only knoweth it giveth without the Churches judgement 3. Believing and profession qualifie for Right in the Judgement both of God and of the Church 4. Profession without consenting faith qualifieth for Right in the Churches judgement according to Gods Command who biddeth them so judge and do Wrangle not against plain truth Mr. T. 11. If other Christian priviledges be not conveyed by a Covenant upon the Parents faith without the persons own act and consent then neither
16. It is a foolish pretence of peaceableness and quietness to stand by in silence for fear of our own or others trouble and see well-meaning people seduced Christ and his truth and name abused and God dishonoured and his Churches shaken and made a scorn and scandal to the world and all for fear of being accounted contentious If it be lukewarm as they say themselves to hear dayly swearers cursers scorners and such other prophane sinners and not give them a close reproof or admonition so much more is it to see or hear hurtful falshoods published as the precious truths of God and not to contradict it nor endeavour to save mens souls from the infection If Satans work must be done without resistance as oft as a mistaken well-meaning man will do it there will be little safety for the flocks § 17. When Paul fore-told the Ephesians of two sorts that would assault them viz. Grievous devouring wolves and men arising among themselves that would speak perverse things to draw away disciples after them his conclusion is Therefore watch And what that watching is he tells Timothy The mouths of such deceivers must be stopped not by force for that Timothy had no power to do but by evident truth And Truth hath a power in its evidence if it be but rightly opened and managed And were it not that God in all ages had enabled some of his servants faithfully and clearly to vindicate truth and defend sound doctrine and hold fast the form of wholesome words and stop the mouth of ignorant pride that wrangleth against them what had become of us long agoe And though ill disputes have done much mischief and too often disputing succedeth more according to the Parts interests or advantages of the Disputers than according to the evidence of truth Yet for all such abuses Truth must be defended and it findeth something even in nature as bad as man is to befriend it few love a plain falshood unless where interest greatly bribeth them And upon tryal Truth will at last prevail where sin doth not provoke God in judgement to leave men to the delusions which they chuse § 18. If then the way be to Teach and Learn and quietly open the evidence of truth and in meekness to instruct those that oppose themselves and to avoid contentions as we avoid wars till other mens assâ—ults do make them unavoidably necessary and yet not to be cowardly betrayers of the Truth and Church of God nor suffer Satan to deceive men unresisted but earnestly to contend for the faith once delivered to the Saints It must be considered I. To whom this earnest contending may be used II. And by whom § 19. I. We must not be over sharp or earnest 1. With those that are yet strangers to Religion of whose conversion there is hope and who are liker to be won by a gentler way which more demonstrateth love and tenderness 2 Tim. 2.25 26. § 20. 2. Nor with Godly Christians who fall into such sins of infirmity as we are lyable to and whose tenderness maketh compassionate tender dealing fittest to their recovery Gal. 6.1 2 3. § 21. 3. Nor with humbled dejected Christians who are apter than we to aggravate their own faults and have need of comfort to restrain their sorrows and keep them from despair 2 Cor. 2.7 § 22. 4. Nor with sinners that under conversion and repentance are humbling themselves by confession to God and man Luk. 15. Philem. 10 16 17. § 23. 5. Nor with Christians that differ from us in tolerable matters and manage their differences but with tolerable infirmities not hazarding the safety of the Church or mens souls § 24. But in these cases we must use plainness sharpness and earnestness 1. When in secret where mens honour with others is not concerned it is necessary to mens convictâ—on and repentance 1. Because of the Greatness of the sin or error which will not be known if it be not truly opened and aggravated 2. Or by reason of the hard-heartedness or obstinacy of the sinner that will not be convinced or humbled by easier means § 25. 2. And when we are called so to admonish a publick sinner for his crimes or heresies which must be opened as they are before he will be convinced and humbled openly before the Church § 26. 3. And when the people or Church is in danger of being infected by the sin or error if the evil of it be not fully and plainly opened and the sinner rebuked before all that others may beware § 27. 4. When the offender or heretick sheweth us by his obstinacy that we have no cause to expect his cure and conviction but are only to defend Gods truth and mens souls against him then he must be used as Christ did the Pharisees and as Rulers execute malefactors not for their own good but for the warning of others and preservation of the innocent § 28. 5. And when our gentle speeches tend to scandalize those without and make them think that we prevaricate and favour Christians in their sins § 29. All these cases you may see proved 1. In Nathans dealing with David and Christs with Peter Matth. 16. and Pauls Gal. 2. c. 2. In Pauls dealing with the incestuous man 1 Cor. 5. and Peters with Ananias and his wife 1 Tim. 5.20 Them that sin rebuke before all c. 2 Tim. 4.2 Tit. 1.13 Rebuke them sharply that they may be sound in the faith cuttingly Tit. 2.15 Rebuke with all authority especially when we deal with Inferiors who must be humbled Tit. 3.10 11. Mat. 23. throughout And Eli's gentleness or remisness is our warning § 30. II. And as to the persons who must use this sharpness and earnestness against errors and sinners in contending for the faith 1. It is not those who overvalue their own conceptions and grow fond of all that is peculiarly their own and insolently take all men to be enemies to truth and faith and godliness who are adversaries to their odd opinions 2. Nor must inferiors rise up with insolency against superiors or the young against their elders and the ignorant against the wife on pretence of a zealous standing for the truth Though they may humbly and modestly defend that which is truth indeed 3. Nor should unstudyed Christians presently think hardly of any party and backbite them and inveigh against them because their Leaders call them hereticks or reproach them as erroneous dangerous men as almost all parties do against each other 4. Nor should those Ministers who have not a through insight into a Controversie meddle much with it nor be too forward to reprove and reproach where they do not understand nor to undertake disputes which they cannot manage 5. But as God doth indow men with various gifts if each man were imployed according to his talent all would have their honour and comfort and the Church the benefit of them all § 31. We have notoriously all these sorts of Ministers in the
meerly because he elected them some will say why may he not do so also by the Parents at least renewing them all in transitu § 15. If you say that He giveth them freely his sanctifying grace and giveth them right to Salvation as sanctified though he tell us not who are sanctified I answer 1. Take heed lest you teach the presumptuous to say the same of Infidels Heathens and almost all that God may in the passages when they are dying sanctifie and save them all 2. Still this giveth no positive hope of any particulars nor more to Christians for their Children than they may have of the Children of Infidels nor any promise of the spirit and sanctification as Believers have § 16. I take it therefore for the soundest Doctrine that Gods taking the Children of the Faithful into Covenant with him and becoming their God and taking them for his own doth signifie no less than a state of Grace and pardon and right to life eternal and that they are in this state upon their Parents Consent and Heart-devoting them to God in Christ before baptism but baptism is the solemnizing and investiture which openly coram Ecclesia delivereth them possession of their visible Church-state with a sealed pardon and gift of life For it is not another but the same promise and Covenant which is made to the faithful and their feed And all Gods promises to the many Generations of them in the second Commandment and many other Texts cannot mean any such little blessings as consist with a state of damnation and the possession of the Devil And all the ancient Churches in baptizing of Infants were of this mind whom I will not despise And Abrahams case perswadeth me that the Children of Natural and Civil Parents truly their Owners have this right before they are baptized But the former natural Parents have plainer evidence than the later which is a darker case But as for them that think either that all Infants are saved or all baptized Infants â—ure vel injuria though no Parent or Owner consent or dedicate them heartily or openly to God or though they are hypocrites and truly consent not for themselves or theirs let them prove it if they can but I must say it is past my power § 17. I know the grand difficulty is that then this Infant-Grace is lost in many that live to riper age I have said so much of this in my Christian Directory that I will refer the considering Reader thither only adding 1. That far greater absurdities will follow the contrary opinion and the greater are not to be chosen I am loth again to name them 2. That the universal Church as far as by any notice we can know did for many hundred years grant the conclusion and take it for no absurdity but a certain truth yea much more Austin and his followers themselves thought more at age were truly justified and sanctified than were elected and did persevere And some hold that not all that have the sanctifying spirit but only certain confirmed Christians have a certainty to persevere And others hold that as the spirit of Christ is promised to Believers though men believe not without the spirit so that measure of Grace which causeth men only to believe as antecedent to that promised spirit of Power Love and a sound mind is but such as may be lost as Adams was and that it is the spirit following it as the rooted habit which cannot be lost And others come yet lower and say that the Grace which giveth faith it self cannot be lost because such have the promise of the spirit but yet the grace which only enableth men to Repent and Believe called sufficient may be lost before it produce the Act Accordingly some think of Infant-Grace The last sort think that they have real pardon of original sin and right to life and have real Grace but being Infants that grace is but such as will enable them to believe if they come to age and not infallibly cause it and that this may be lost And so I might run over the opinions of the rest And among all these the judgement of Davenant Ward c. of the loss of an Infant-state of Grace as by them opened is not so hard as I think the contrary way will infer And it seems by Art 1. c. 17. that the Synod of Dort was of their mind § 18. Our darkness about the future state of Infants Souls hath occasioned some diversity of thoughts about their present state Indeed they will neither in Heaven or Hell have any work for Conscience in the review of any former actions good or evil And it seemeth by Nazianzene before cited Orat. 40. that some Ancients thought as most Papists do that unbaptized Infants have neither the joys of Heaven nor any punishment but the loss of these But what state then to place them in they know not To think that they shall remain in a meer potentiality of understanding and shall know no more than they did here is to equal them with bruits and to encourage the Socinians who say the like of the separated souls of the adult And if they can allow understanding to those that died baptized why not to the rest And if they understand they must have grief or pleasure But who can know more than God revealeth § 19. In sum 1. That God would have Parents devote their Children to him and enter them according to their capacity in his Covenant as I have elsewhere proved is a great truth not to be forsaken 2. And also that he accepteth into his Covenant all that are faithfully thus devoted to him and is peculiarly their God and such Children are holy 3. That they are certainly members according to an Infant capacity of the visible Church as they are of all Kingdoms under Heaven These are all clear and great truths 4. And that there is far more hope of their salvation than of those without 5. And I think the Covenant maketh their Salvation certain if they so die 6. And it seemeth to me that the investiture and solemnization of their Covenant with Christ should be made in Infancie from Matth. 28.19 20. and the exposition of the universal Church 7. But if any should think with Tertullian and Nazianzene that the time of investiture and solemnization is partly left to prudence and may be delayed in case of health yea or should think that Infants are not to be solemnly invested by baptism but only the adult so they confess Infants relation to God his Covenant and Church I would differ from such men with love and peace and mutual toleration and communion CHAP. I. The Occasion of this Writing § 1. AS I was by great and long importunity unwillingly engaged at first to meddle publickly in the Controversie of Infant Baptism with Mr. Tombes so I then resolved to meddle no more with it unless I found that necessity made it an apparent duty § 2. Accordingly when Mr.
not receive them though we approve not of their way § 30. And were it in my power as a Pastor of the Church I would give satisfaction by such an answerable profession as this Though it be our judgement that Infants have ever been members of Gods visible Church since he had a Church and there were Infants in the world and do believe that Christ hath signified in the Gospel that it is his gracious will that they should still be so And that he that commanded Mat. 28.19 Go ye and Disciple all Nations Baptizing them would have his Ministers endeavour accordingly to do it and hath hereby made Baptism the regular orderly way of solemn entrance into a visible Church state and therefore we devote this child to God in the Baptismal Covenant Yet we do also hold that when he cometh to age it will be his duty as seriously and devoutly to make this Covenant with God understandingly himself and to dedicate himself to God the Father Son and Holy Ghost as those must do that never were Baptized in Infancie And we promise to endeavour faithfully as we have opportunity to instruct and perswade him so to do hoping that this his early Baptismal dedication and obligation to God will rather much prepare him for it than hinder it § 31. Me thinks these Professions should put off the chief matter of offence and exception against each other as to the ill consequents of our opinions And if sober good men would by such a mutual approach be the more disposed to live together in love and holy peace how easily should I bear the scorns of those Formalists that will reproach me for so much as motioning a Peace with the Anabaptists even in the same Communion Who by making it a reproach will but perswade me that such as they are less worthy of Christian Communion than sober pious and peaceable Anabaptists § 32. And if with the partial sort of themselves such motions of Peace be turned into matter of contempt and they proceed in their clamours and reviling of me as an enemy of the truth for being against their way I shall account it no wonder nor matter of much provocation finding in all Sects as well as theirs that the injudicious sort are apt to be abusively censorious and the more mens Pride Ignorance and uncharitableness remain the more they will swell into self-conceit and trouble the Church with a mistaking wrangling hurtful sort of zeal § 33. And as I must needs believe as ill of some sort of Zeal as St. James hath spoken of it Jam. 3. and experience hath too long told the world of it yet I take it for truly amiable in men that they have a love and Zeal for Truth in general and a hatred to that which they think to be against it and that their bitterness against the truth and me is upon a supposition that both are against the truth and God for this beareth them witness that they have a zeal of God though it be not according to Knowledge and if they knew truth indeed they would be zealous for it § 34. I conclude with this notice to the contrary minded that the evidence for Infants Church-membership seemeth to me so clear both in nature and in Scripture that I bid them despair of ever perswading me against it But if they will have any hope of changing my judgement it must be by confessing the visible Church-membership of Infants and proving that yet they are not to be baptized and that Baptism was appointed for initiating none but adult converts and not to be the common entrance into the Church which yet I think they can never do while the plain Law of Christ Mat. 29.19 and the exposition of the universal Church doth stand on record to confute such an opinion But here they have more room for a dispute § 35. But though I expect to be censured for it I will say once because truth is truth that though Rebaptizing and Reordaining are justly both condemned by the ancient Churches and pronounced alike ridiculous by Gregory Mag. Lib. 2. Ep. Indict 11. c. 46. and many others yet were men Rebaptized but for Certainty to themselves or to the Church and to quiet their consciences and on such terms as in my Christian Directory I have shewed that a seeming Reordination might in some cases be tolerated and would not wrong Infants nor make it an occasion of division or alienation I know not by any Scripture or reason that such Rebaptizing is so heinous a sin as should warrant us to contemn our brethren No though it were as faulty as the oft commemorative baptizing used by the Abassines CHAP. III. A General View of Mr. Danvers book § 1. MR. Danvers book is entitled a Treatise of Baptism in which he giveth us the History of Infant and Adult Baptism out of Antiquity as making it appear that Infant Baptism was not practised for 300 years in his second edit it is near 300. And in his Append ed. 2. I cannot find that it was practised upon any till the fourth Century And he giveth us a Catalogue of witnesses against it By which those that hold their Religion on the belief of such mens words will conclude that all this is true and that Infant Baptism is a Novelty and those that are against it do go the old and Catholick way § 2. Having perused his testimonies on both sides I am humbled and ashamed for the dulness of my heart that doth not with floods of compassionate tears lament the pittiful condition of the seduced that must be thus deceived in the dark and of the Churches of Christ that must be thus assaulted and shaken and distracted by such inhumane horrid means The book being composed in that part of history which the stress of the cause lyeth on of such UNTRUTHS in fact and history as I profess it one of my greatest difficulties to know how to call them Should I say that they are so notorious and shameless as that I say not only a Papist but any sober Turk or Pagan should blush to have been guilty but of some page or line◠of them and much more a man of any tenderness of conscience the Readers would think that the language were harsh were it never so true and some would say Let us have soft words and hard arguments And should I not tell the Reader the truth of the case I might help to betray him into too much fearlesness of his bait and snare and I doubt I may be guilty of untruth by concealing the quality of his untruths And it is not matter of Argument but fact that I am speaking of § 3. But it pleaseth that God whose counsels are unsearchable as to permit five parts of the Earth to remain yet strangers unto Christ so to permit his Church to be so tryed and distracted between Church Tyranny and dividing separations Sects and parties as that in many ages it hath not been easie to
other miracles and a victory he returned with a prosperous navigation saith Beda c. 20. by his own Merits and St. Albanes intercession Afterwards he returned again in a second necessity with Severus and delivered the Britains from Pelagianism who yet lived in such wickedness as Beda after Gildas describeth Here let the Reader note against Mr. Danvers dream 1. That this was done in 429. And if Mr. D. could prove indeed that all the Bishops of France then were Waldenses or of the judgement so called so long after he would do us Knights service against the Papists in the question of the perpetual visibility of the Church But if I cite Mr. Danvers for it I doubt they will laugh at me and make no more of his authority than I do of the Dutch Anabaptists Martyrology 2. Note that Prosper saith it was the Pope that sent Germanus 3. Note that he was sent by the Bishops of France who then did little differ from Rome but submitted to his Primacy and Patriarchate in the Empire though reserving their liberties Read the Epistles of Leo 1. against Hillary Arelat and all that story and you will see how much the Pope usurped there betimes 4. Pope Celestine was the great maintainer of Augustine against Pelagius and so the apter to do this 5. The Pope had before this sent Palladius to the Britains who received him And therefore they were then on some fair terms with him 6. Germanus and Lupus were Bishops and they that sent him and so Antichristian to some Anabaptists 7. Germanus sure was not of Mr. D's Church that used Reliques so strangely for working miracles Was this an Anabaptist 8. This was all done after Augustine had written that no Christian thought Infant-Baptism vain or about that time And yet were all the Britains then of another mind 9. The Bishops of France with Pope Celestine took part with Augustine against Pelagius and sent Lupus with Germanus to do that work And yet were all these Bishops against Augustine about Infant-Baptism which he saith all the Church Vniversal agreed in 10. Lastly the Britains were infected with Pelagianism Pelagius called Morgan being a Britain and Vsher saith some say born the same day with Augustine and Celestius a Scot or Irish man And the Pelagians themselves were for Infant-Baptism And if any Christians in the world had been against it they would have been the likeliest who denyed Original sin Yet even they durst not deny this And is it a credible thing that all these Britains who were some of Pelagius's mind and some of Augustines were yet against both in point of Infant-Baptism Yea and not a word said of this by any writer when their Pelagianism made so great a stir Yet this man gathereth that the Churches of France were Anabaptists contrary to all history because the Waldenses 600 years after were Anabaptists which is also false And the Britains were Anabaptists because the Churches of France sent two Learned men to dispute against Pelagianism in England when the unlearned Britains could not do it Reader will not this kind o◠arguing make thee an Anabaptist or else make thee pitty the seduced party O what a temptation to Popery do such men lay before the people When men see that every such a one that hath ignorance and pride enough to make him wise in his own eyes shall thus pour out falshoods to cheat mankind and the ignorant know not but it may all be true it tempteth men to think that there must be some Authorized men whom the Ignorant must believe before such seducers or else confusion and falshood will take place of truth and the people will be as children tossed up and down and carryed to and fro with every wind of doctrine And indeed a concordant Ministry is so to be preferred though it infer not a Roman infallibility § 42. 6. His last proof that the Britains were against Infant Baptism is because Augustine the Monk was himself so raw and ignorant in the rite as to ask How long the Baptizing of a child might be deferred there being no danger of death Answ I grow ashamed that I have medled with such a Collector A baculo ad angulum Doth it not rather imply that there was no controversie between him and the Britains about Infant-Baptism seeing he never mentioned any such thing § 43. His next witnesses against Infant-Baptism are in the fourth Century called by him Dadoes Sabas Adulphus and Simonis who saith he in his catalogue oppose it And p. 229. he saith to prove it but that they were charged to have an ill opinion of the Sacrament of the Altar and of Infants Baptism And he citeth Histor Tripartita li. 7. c. 11. and some fellow an hundred years ago Answ And have we here any honester dealing than before Read and judge That which the Tripartite History cited by him saith is this that There was then a Sect called Messalians or Euchetes known in the Catalogues of Hereticks and called The Praying Hereticks who expected the operation of some Devil thinking him to be the Spirit of God refusing to work and giving themselves to lie and sleep to expect Revelations Indeed their opinion was that Prayer was all and Baptism and the Lords Supper were nothing dicentes Divinum cibum nihil nec prodesse nec laedere that the Sacred or Sacramental food did neither profit nor hurt These men were led by one Dadoes Sabbos Adelphius Hermas and Simeon And Adelphus when old for they hid their opinion bewrayed his error in a speech to Flavian of Antioch that Baptism doth the Baptized person no good but prayer only expelleth the Devil And 1. These men were no more against Infant-Baptism than against the adults Baptism For they were above all Ordinances save Prayer 2. They were against neither as unlawful but against both and other ordinances as unprofitable 3. They carryed this much in secret which they could not have concealed had they not Baptized Infants 4. Some hereticks and all Infidels and Pagans were against all Baptism as well as they And doth any of this prove that any one Christian was against Infant Baptism more than adult § 44. Next he tells you that Faustus Regiensis saith that Personal and actual desire was requisite in every one that was to be Baptized Vincent and Cresconius I spoke to before And he citeth not a word of his writings for it nor any other but one Jacob Merning I suppose a Dutch Anabaptist Answ Reader thou seest still how thou art used Faustus Rhegiensis is a known Author his works are common He is commonly taken for a Semipelagian and he hath a book to prove that souls are bodies which Claudianus Mammertus hath answered But I never read one syllable in him nor in any other that ever wrote of him or against him that should make one doubt whether he was for Infant-baptism Could he be in such a station as he was and have so many writings and so many
censorious of them as to think that they need any more to his frustration If they will not must I write another book to tell them what I have written in the former How shall I know that they will any more read the last than the first If Satan have so much power over them that he can make them err and lie and slander and backbite as oft as a man professing zeal for the truth will be his instrument and messenger it is not my writing more books that can save them The end must tell them whether I or they shall be the greater losers by it § 24. I have therefore but these two wayes now to take 1. Whereas this man saith that my doctrine seemeth heynous to every one of my Non-conforming brethren and most Protestants and that I have lost my self among my friends I do demand as their duty and my right the Means of my conviction and reductâ—on from those brethren if any whom he doth not belie I profess my self ready privately or publickly to give them an account of the reasons of all my doctrine and thankfully to retract whatever they shall manifest to be an error And I challenge any of them to prove that ever I refused to be accountable to them or denyed a sober answer to their reasons or refused to learn of any that would teach me or to study as hard to know as they or that ever partiality faction or worldly interest bribed me to deal falsly with my conscience and betray the truth And if after this claim they will be silent I will take them for consenters or if by backbiting only any will still notifie their dissent I will take them for such as I take this writer and in some respect worse though not in all § 25. II. My second remedy is I will go willingly to School to Mr. D. and having said so much for the Learning against the Disputing way I will become his hearer and reader if he have any thing to teach me that savoureth of Truth and Modesty more than this noysome fardel doth which he hath published And to that end I will here give him a Catalogue of the contrary opinions to mine which I desire him solidly to prove If he hold not the contrary doctrines why doth he exclaim against mine as heynous If he do hold the contrary to what I have with due and clear distinction and explication opened and his Readers after the perusing of all my own words together be of his mind I then take these following to be their own opinions and part of their Religion which I desire them to make good and teach them me by sufficient proof CHAP. VIII A Catalogue of some Doctrines of Mr. Danvers and the rest that with him accuse my Christian Directory if indeed they hold the contrary to mine which they accuse as must be supposed by their accusation which as a Learner I intreat any of them solidly to prove OF the Question 49. p. 826. as cited by him The falshood of his inserting in a Popish Countrey in their way of Baptizing in that cited place which spake only of the Lutherans I pass by as weary of answering such But I. That it is a sin for any man supposing Infant Baptism a duty to offer his child to be Baptized where it will be done with the sign of the Cross or such ceremonies as the Lutherans use though he profess his own dissent and dissallowance of those ceremonies and though he cannot lawfully have it done better but must have that or no Baptism at all II. That in the ancient Churches of the second third and fourth ages it had been better to be unbaptized than to use a white Garment in Baptism as they did or to be anointed as then or to taste Milk and Honey though the Person offering his child to such Baptism had professed his dissent as aforesaid III. That all the Churches of Christ in those second third and fourth and following ages who were Baptized thus Infant or adult had no Baptism but what was worse than none Though Church history certifie us that this use was so universal that it 's hard to find any one Christian in all those or many after ages that ever was against the lawfulness of it or refused it By the way it was but one of your tricks which you know not how to forbear to foist in Peril of Law when I had not such a word or sense as Peril As if you knew of no Obligation there but from Peril IV. Your pag. 373. ed. 2. That anointing using the white Garment Milk and Honey were Blasphemous rites and Popish before Popery was existent or if otherwise that All Christs Church was Popish then V. Your Pref. ed. 1. That Christs Ministers rightly ordained and dedicated to God in that sacred office are not so much as Relatively holy as separated to God therein VI. That Temples and Church Vtensils devoted and lawfully separated by man to holy uses either are not justly Related to God as so separated or though so separated and Related are in no degree to be called Holy VII Your Pref. 16. That no Reverence is due to Ministers and Church utensils VIII Ibid. To be uncovered in the Church and use reverent carriage and gestures there doth not at all tend to preserve due reverence to God and his worship IX Ibid. That the unjust alienation of Temples Vtensils lands dayes which were separated by God himself is no sacriledge no not to have turned the Temple of old and the sacred things to a common use unjustly nor the Lords day now But thou that abhorrest Idols dost thou more than commit Sacriledge Even teach men so to do and say It is no Sacriledge no not when God himself is the separater and man the unjust alienater And yet is Infant-Baptism a sin X. Ibid. That it 's no sacriledge unjustly to alienate things justly consecrated and separated to God by man as Ministers Lands Vtensils c. Remember Ananias and Saphira XI Ibid. That it is a sin to call a Minister a Priest though it be done in no ill design nor with any scandal or temptation to error and though he that useth the word profess that he doth it but as a translation of the Greek word Presbyter and as God himself doth Rev. 1.6 and 5.10 and 20.6 and 1 Pet. 2. 5.9 Question Whether it is sinfully used in Scripture XII Ib. Accordingly it is sin to use the word Altar for Table or the word Sacrifice for worship as thanksgiving c. though with all the foresaid cautions and though God so use them in the Scripture 1 Pet. 2.5 Heb. 13.15 16. Phil. 4.18 Eph. 5.2 Rom. 12.1 Heb. 13.10 Rev. 6.9 and 8.3 5. and 16.7 And that all the ancient writers and Churches sinned that so spake XIII That no sober Christians should allow each other the Liberty of such phrases without censoriousness or breach of Charity and peace Ibid. pref XIV Ibid.