ingrafted and bears them up and makes fruitful Whereas you say That by ingraffing in is meant admission into visible communion I say it is not only that but first faith and then admission into visible communion And one word by the way what visible communion are Infants capable of if they may some of them be capable of invisible union and communion with Jesus Christ yet where is their capacity of visible communion with the Church which consists in communicating of experiences in Ordinances fellowship in breaking bread and prayers where is your visible communion of Infants Sir You seem to answer an objection p. 63. Paul speaks of an invisible Church For my part I own no such objection for I know no invisible Church here upon earth for a Church of Christ is a company of believers walking in the visible profession of truth and there should be none in that profession but such as are believers indeed and if any come into the outward without the inward grace they must be plucked up Therefore I own not that distinction of visible and invisible The invisible Church are those out of sight that are departed the visible are those living in the visible profession of truth and these are they which are graffed in Rom. 11. Those that are graffed in truly shall stand and thrive the root Christ bears them They that are but in shew shall fall the root will not bear them because not graffed in by the heavenly Father In all this here is no room for the natural seed I leave it to the Reader to judge The fifteenth Argument From 1 Cor. 7. 14. Else were your children unclean but now are they holy From hence you argue They that are holy with a Covenant-holiness may be baptized But Infants born of one believing Parent are holy with a Covenant-holiness Ergo Such Infants may be baptized Your Major hath been often denied for it s but the substance of what you have often said before and therefore in substance I must answer what I have answered before there is no such thing mentioned in all the New-Testament as a federal holiness viz. an external Covenant-holiness without an internal this being the substance of what you say pag. 65. you confess children only by nature that there is no difference between the childe of a Christian and the childe of an Infidel Yet consider him as believing so he and his are holy he is holy spiritually but are his Infants so too no you confess pag. 62. This caution must be remembred that the holiness you speak of is not personal inherent holiness for this cannot be transmitted to posterity but t is a federal external Covenant-holiness Pray Sir the next time let me know where in the New Testament this same external holiness without the internal is so much spoken of or commended The Lord loveth truth in the inward parts and condemns hypocrisie and hypocrites he condemns the form without the power he owns no Jew but the spiritual no seed but the spiritual the axe is now laid to the root of the Tree every Tree that bringeth not forth good fruit must be cut down Mat. 3. and yet you are all for an outward holiness without the inward which is indeed and truth an abomination unto the Lord. But to come to the Scripture you pretend to ground your Argument from You say The Anabaptists have invented an evasion to avoid the force of the Text that say they it s a matrimonial holiness that they are legitimate and no bastards c. Which I affirm is the truth of the Scripture and shall 1. give some brief answers to what you assert And Secondly set down my reasons for what I affirm 1. You pretend the many absurdities that will follow if it be meant of a civil holiness 1. Then the children of Turks and Pagans born in Matrimony should be holy Answ and why not upon a Matrimonial account more holy that is more lawfull then those born of fornication And whereas you say they are dogs that are without c. It is true that is comparatively to the true Church and Spiritual Seed so are not only Turks and Pagans but most of your Church-members who do the same if not worse works then they only you have perswaded them into an outward Covenant as you and they imagine but that helps not the business 2. It s sin to wicked men what ever they do yet their civil actions are better to them as eating drinking plowing Marriage lawfull procreation of children then the contrary evil actions the Apostle saith that marriage is honourable among all Heb. 13. 4. If among all then among Turks and their children are civilly holy lawfully begotten according to a civil institution though nothing be truly and spiritually holy but to those in Christ it s a Law God hath written in the hearts both of Turks and Indians that they are more conscientious in defiling of the Marriage estate then many of those you call Christians 2. You say The Apostles reason would have no weight with it for their children were legitimate before conversion so he should allow them no more priviledge then meer Infidels have c. The Query is not what they were before conversion but one being converted and the other not the doubt ariseth whether or no the Believer must put away the unbeliever if he or she must do so then the children must be gone too both before and after conversion and this was a Priviledge to the Believer not to be compelled to part with his children though unbelievers had the same in being yet it was not to them such a priviledge for mercy is mercy to a Believer indeed he sees every thing sanctified to him which the unbeliever doth not 3. You say Then all bastards are unholy and must be damned Here is a simple one indeed coming forth from so wise and deep a head as Thomas Hall's 1. Must all be damned of necessity without the holiness you are pleading for 2. Do we or the Scriptures say that Bastards must be damned do you know from whence you have drawn that conclusion your self that Bastards must be damned if that be not a federall holiness but a marriage holiness that their children are legitimate then bastards must be damned Is this your Logick I leave it with you 4. You say The word holy is never used in all the Scripture for legitimation but generally for a thing separated from common use to Gods service c. 1. Thomas Hall shall confute Thomas Hall by and by see pag. 67. he saith That the sanctification of the unbelieving husband to the believing wife is not in respect of his personal condition but in respect of his conjugalrelation though he continue unclean towards God yet to his believing wife in a way of marriage he is sanctified that is he is holy for so the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth and in essence it s the
men who seek themselves yet God hath hitherto so kept and carried me that I may say truly I have endeavoured to keep a Conscience void of offence both before God and men And as to those Principles of Truth by me owned although judged by men yet my judgement is with the Lord and he knows the way of his People but the way of the wicked shall perish Though I pass under the censure of Tho. Hall whom nothing but Fire and Fagot can satisfie and under the ignominious reproaches of Feriby Sanders and a thousand more yet none of these things trouble me and let none think that I am besides my self because I thus profess and write for if I am it is to the Lord and for your sakes for whom my desire is that you may be made partaker of the truth and that as it is in Jesus not after the will of men but of God I have presented to thy consideration these two things First the insufficiency of all those grounds produced for Infant-Baptism wherein its weakness and inconsistency with the Gospel will appear and the continued practice of the baptizing of Believers cleared and vindicated 2. A brief Reply to John Feriby and Richard Sanders wherein you may finde a farther confirmation of the truth asserted in the Pulpit-Guard Routed viz. the lawfulness of the Preaching of Gifted Brethren I have likewise three things to desire of the Reader 1. To read and judge Read and consider what thou readest for I have endeavoured to compose much in few words and that because I judged it to be for thy profit large Discourses being sometimes not so usefull therefore I say be content to spare a little time to consider and contemplate upon what thou readest and happily thou mayest come to see all those strong Guards broken and disperst as the morning dew before the Sun 2. Read with patience and be not troubled at that which may seem to thee to be harsh language or contrary to thy understanding and this I assure thee considering the Spirits of those men with whom I have had to deal I have passed through with as much moderation as possibly I could without betraying the Cause and giving but a word of reproof to an insulting adversary 3. Read and judge impartially lean not to the right hand or to the left for affection sake but desire the Lord from an impartial unbyast heart to lead thee into the truth resolve not to follow the traditions of men or Churches but the written word of Truth which is able to give thee direction as a rule of life through the blessing of the Spirit of Jesus and to make the man of God perfect throughly furnishing him to every good work Tho. Collier THE Font-Guard Routed SIR IT S faln to my lot once more to encounter with you and why to me more then to others because not only the Truth of Jesus his Honour and his servants in the profession of it lieth at stake but my self likewise in a special manner being not only concerned in the case in hand but likewise being deeply aspersed by your Libellous Tongue and Pen in your succeeding word to one Collier to which I shall reply in its time and place But Sir by the way it seems you are become an absolute Souldier a grand Captain Leader But what 's the work To guard Pulpits and Fonts forsooth I suppose you 'l be cautious of suffering much in defence of your Cause if you had intended it you would not have set your guards about that which none intends to take from you that I know of But is it truth in good earnest that your Font is affronted 1. I wonder you had not had more wisdom and forecast in you at first and have set your Guard round about your Kirk so one might have served for the whole and have saved you much labour and expence of time but I suppose your wisdom lay in this You guarded the Pulpit first that so being routed there you might have a fair retreat to the holy Font and when routed there you might sound another retreat but whither I know not unless to the high Altar viz. the Communion Table so called or into the Belfrey to secure the holy baptized Bels In Pope Johns time the 14. began the vile superstition of baptizing Bels Simpsons History of the Church Cent. 10. Or to take the Church doors c. But whither am I wandring I say no more of this but leave my name sake Tom to his own choice 2. I wonder that a wise man as Tho. Hall should have so little wit or so much idle time to set up such a strong guard in defence of that which none intends to take from him we baptize in Rivers not in Fonts we do not intend to take them from you no we know not what to do with them unless c. But 3. Did you ever read in Scripture of the Font or of baptizing in the Font I know you have not I remember I have read in the Popish Histories of the holy Font in the first institution of Infants baptism from thence you had both as in its time and place I shall let you see Now to your Arguments for that is it I intend to fall upon letting pass all other things for if I rout you there as I doubt not in the strength of Jehovah whom I serve in my spirit but that I shall rout you in all your twenty Arguments so the Commands of Christ and practise of the Apostles may stand clear before the sons of men and the Churches practise in baptizing Believers vindicated in opposition to all gainsayers Now to your first Argument Page 8. From the Covenant of grace which God made with the Faithfull and their Seed they are confederates say you joyned together in the Covenant of God c. Your first Argument is this Page 9. To whomsoever the Covenant it self belongs to them also belongs the seal of the Covenant But the Covenant belongs to Believers and their Children Ergo The seal of the Covenant belongs to them also I answer First your Minor is denyed That Children of Believers are in the Covenant of grace and here lies the ground of your miscarriage ignorance and error in this particular We will therefore come first to consider the Covenant it self which is the foundation on which you stand Gen. 17 7 10 11. This Covenant it self is wholly outward and it consists of two parts the one on Gods part to be performed the other on Abrahams and his childrens part That on Gods is in ver 7 8. I will be a God to thee and to thy seed after thee and I will give unto thee and to thy seed after thee the Land of thy sojourning all the Land of Canaan for an everlasting possession and will be their God This Covenant is outward and consists of an outward promise The Land of Canaan c. and is not in it self the everlasting Covenant of grace
was converted 4. You say They are Church members and so by consequence Disciples Hence you argue All Church members are Disciples Infants of believing Parents are Church-members Ergo. The Minor is denyed You seem to refer to Mr. Baxter This being Mr. Baxters grand Argument I shall say something to it in this place though I have in brief answered it already If I grant they were Church-members yet they are not so now we being under another ministration more spiritual more immediate and he owns none to be members of the Church but those who are truly spiritual when but one comes in without a wedding garment he takes notice of him Friend how camest thou in hither without a wedding garment Mat. 22. 11 12. And you bring in none else but those without a wedding garment what account you will give your Lord I know not but I shal let you see the repeal of that Church-membership you so much boast of the Promises made to Abraham run all into Christ and are dissolved into him Gal 3. 16. So that if you trace the Promises you shall see where they all center The promise was made to Abraham and to his seed he saith not to seeds as of many but to his seed which is Christ 2. See to whom the Promises come forth whether to the natural or to the spiritual seed ver 29. If you are Christs then are ye Abrahams seed and heirs according to the promise So that you must now be Christs before you can be Abrahams seed and then being Christs we are heirs according to the promise So here is the promise and the heirship you need not go so far back into the old Testament if the Lord enlighten your darkness And how come we to be Christs by believing ver 26. Rom. 2. 28 29. He is not a Jew that is one outward but he is a Jew that is one inward c. So that the outward Jew the natural seed is cut off from the spiritual Covenant for when the outward Covenant was ended and the spiritual one was come then the natural Church-membership was lost and the spiritual one come in if what you would have were truth that it were the same Covenant and the same members then the Jews had not been broken off to this day for they are the seed of those that were members in the first Covenant but they are broken off for want of faith which alone gives an interest in the Covenant and we by faith stand So to wind up all Infants of believers are not Disciples no Church members therefore not to be baptized The tenth Argument All that have faith may be baptized But some Infants have faith Ergo. The Major you say none will deny Yet give me leave to question it and highly too for first those are to be baptized that manifest faith if Infants have faith which I shall question in the second place yet they have not that faith which is required of those that are to be baptized viz. In the manifestation of it so then if Infants have faith yet none knows that they have it none knows who of them have it It s apparant that none but the elect have it further its apparent that but few of the elect have it neither in infancy all that live and come to experience they had it not in infancy they can experience it they know how they came by it then it can be but those elect Infants that die that are believers then God can save without faith by vertue of his electing love in Christ and if he doth work faith in them that is able to save them without Baptism it not being required of them and it s our duty to walk by Rule then we walk safe and to administer the Ordinances of Christ according to his minde not our own the minde of Christ is that he that believeth shall be baptized Mark 16. 16. that is upon the hearing of the Gospel and confession of his Faith not Infants those that we know not whether they believe or no he hath not left us so to walk in the dark this I think is sufficient to answer both your Major and Minor although for all you say to prove your Minor there is no weight in it neither do I clearly assent that Infants have faith That Scripture you mention Mat. 18. 6. is not so express as you pretend or imagine but it relates to those who are humble and meek qualified as little children see ver 3 4 5. so that it is such a little childe so qualified one of those that did believe 1. Query What children are they that usually are persecuted for the name of Christ Infants in nature or children on in Grace 2. Query Whether Christ is now teaching his disciples and encouraging them against suffering or little Infants By this you may with ease come to perceive what Believers are intended in this Text. 1. You say They receive the Kingdom of God Mark 10. 15. It is not said that Infants receive the Kingdom of God but whosoever doth not receive the Kingdom of God as a little childe c. that is to be humble and meek and teachable c. and you had wisdom enough to give this interpretation your selves formerly but that now the case is altered you need to apply it another way And 2. Though some Infants do receive the Kingdom c. Yet it is not many as you have heard already not all 3. You say they please God because he blessed them Doth God use to bless Infants or others because they please him or doth he bless them with Grace because he pleaseth himself in so doing when they are enemies to him 4. Faith you say must be allowed them else not salvation And when the Scripture speaks of faith it intends it to such as are adult and those who are adult not believing shall be damned the Scripture determines nothing about Infants but leaves it as a secret to God for they cannot have that faith the Scripture speaks of which comes by hearing and the Scripture speaks of no other faith that I know of and therefore they cannot have that damnation the Scripture threatens to unbelievers though the elect Infants dying may obtain through the Grace of Election the same Salvation without Faith as believers do through faith Rom. 11. 7. 5. You say Though Infants cannot make an actual profession of faith as adults can yet being born in the bosom of the Church they have somewhat to bring c. Yet are children of wrath as well as the children of the Gentiles are as you confess before 1. Reckoned in the number of Gods people with the Parents No truth in that as hath been often proved none are accounted for the seed but Believers 2. Some of them elect c. 1. That some you know not 2. For that some you will take in all Finde out the Elect and then we shall be silent you say Hence we read that some
have no original sin c. Ans If they have will your outward outside pretended Covenant and Seal wash it away how then doth it leave them children of wrath still as the heathens Oh sad unheard of contradictions They are not excluded from the preaching of the Gospel the ordinary means 8. You say This robs Infants of their right Parents of their comfort the Church of her members Christ of his merits and God of his glory Ans I tell you there is a great cry and but little wooll when looked after 1. Children of their rights When Christ in the Gospel hath nowhere given them that right Secondly when they have it given them it is such a right as deludes them there is nothing in it but words and wind 2. Parents of their comfort What comfort is it to parents who understand and are not as ignorant as their babes to have their children cheated sealed with a blank or a counterfeit that can do them no good 3. The Church of its members Alas of what use are such members in the Church of Christ Did you ever find such members there There are or should be none but useful members 4. Christ of his merits Did Christ merit baptism for Infants if so you should have proved it Or purchase his Church Act. 20. 28. Eph. 5. 25. 5. And God of his glory What glory would Infants bring to God in the Church of Christ Can they worship spiritually Such he seeks to worship him Joh. 4. 24. can they offer up spiritual sacrifice acceptable c This is the work of the Church of Christ 1 Pet. 2 5. and they that cannot do this dishonour God in his Church and have nothing to do to be there These things thus considered I leave the Reader to judge who dishonor God most those who contrary to his revealed will thrust upon him of their own heads a company of ignorant dead members that do not know him and cannot worship or those who according to his revealed will endeavour to keep the Church pure and admit none but those they judge living members knowing that none else can offer to him living sacrifice acceptable c. The seventeenth Argument From the benefit that redounds both to parents and their children 1. Much comfort comes hereby to Parents when they consider Gods free grace to them and theirs c. Ans 1. There is no such thing in the Gospel covenant as hath been already proved neither have you nor can you produce any such word in the Gospel-covenant but that he is a God a Father to the true seed viz. the seed of Christ and none else are accounted for the seed they and they onely who believe have received this priviledge this right to be called the children of God Joh. 1. 12. And then 2. What comfort can it be to Parents to have their Children called and accounted that which indeed at present they are not nor have no right so to be called or accounted For the Covenant of grace is this I will write my Law in their heart c. so will I be a God unto you c. And ye shall no more teach one another saying Know the Lord for ye shall all know me from the greatest to the least They that are accounted to be in this Covenant are such as know the Lord by vertue of their being taught of him And this is set in opposition to the Covenant of the Law which was made with the natural seed which were a people for the most part not knowing God But it is not so in the Gospel-Covenant there are none but those who know the Lord c. Jer. 3 31. Heb 8. 10 11. Therefore I say again that it is but little comfort to those Parents who are not more ignorant then their Infants to have their Children called and accounted that which they are not to have their Children as you say admitted into Christs school members of his Church sheep of his fold distinguished from heathens c. What true comfort can it be to Parents or benefit to Infants to have all these outward things you pretend they gain by it and yet may be without the truth of all and are as you confess Children of wrath as well as the children of heathens Is not this the way to lead them on in a fools paradise make them have good conceits of themselves that they are in the Covenant and so delude and undo them for ever And the truth is and Christ hath said it Joh. 10. 9. that He is the door into the sheepfold viz. the Church and none can enter in but by him and those who enter by him shall be saved and shall go in and out and find pasture They shal not be mocked cheated with an outside Covenant-holines Church membership c. as you serve the Children of the Nation but they shall be saved c. The eighteenth Argument All will-worship must be avoided But the refusing to baptize Infants of Christian parents till they come to years of discretion is will-worship Ergo It must be avoided Your Minor is denied You pretend to prove it with another Argument wherein your weakness appears the Argument is That which hath neither precept nor president for it in the word of God is will-worship But the deferring the baptizing the Infants of Christian parents hath neither precept nor president for it in the word of God Ergo It is will-worship Ans 1. That the weight of your Argument may the better appear unto the Reader I shall give another Argument as well grounded as yours That which hath neither precept nor president for it in the word of God is will-worship But the deferring the baptizing of the Infants of Heathen parents hath neither precept nor president for it in the word of God Ergo It is will-worship Secondly I answer That which hath neither precept nor president for it in the word of God is will-worship But the baptizing of Infants of believing parents hath neither precept nor president in the word of God Ergo it is will-worship You confess 't is true Men of years professing faith are fit subjects of Baptism So then upon your own confession we take the fit subjects But not the onely subjects excluding Infants c. Although the Scripture excludes all except men of years professing faith I prove it thus If there but one water-baptism mentioned in the Gospel as an Ordinance of Christ by way of precept and president and that is to persons of years professing faith then all others are excluded But there is but one water-baptism mentioned in the Gospel as an Ordinance of Christ by way of precept and president and that is to persons of years professing faith Ergo All others are excluded Mat. 28. 19. Mar. 16. 16. Act. 2. 38 39 41. Act. 8. 12. You require a president for it Let any man shew but one example of any Child of God that ever kept his Child unbaptized till he could
make profession of his faith c. Ans 1. VVhen you have produced any Scripture that requires Infants of Believers to be baptized then shall I shew you a Scripture where they kept them back till they professed faith 2. There being no command for the practise of baptizing Infants there needs no record for the keeping them from it it s enough that there is neither precept nor president for the doing of it that was enough to them and should be to us 3. The not doing of a thing is no part of worship all worship consists in doing or suffering the will of God and suffering is a doing the will of God too in both of which the renewed mind is active as well as the body is in the one active in the other passive Heb. 10. 36. But the refusing to baptize Infants is no part of worship therefore cannot possibly be will-worship If baptism of Infants were a command of Christ as you say though never proved yet to neglect it is no more will-worship then to neglect prayer praising or the like is will-worship it s no worship not will-worship Thus have I briefly minded you of the simplicity and nonsense of your Argument in every particular and proceed to your Nineteenth Argument From the blessing of God upon the Churches that have practised Infant-Baptism Ans 1. If you mind by the blessing outward prosperity I suppose the Church of Rome whom you condemn for heretical in your separating from her hath had as great a share and the longest standing of any Church or State in the world And that is no trial of the truth of a Church outward prosperity and long continuance for the Churches of Christ in the Primitive times were and yet are under persecution reproach and contempt but little prosperity in the world Joh. 16. ult 2. If you mind as you seem to intimate Because so many bless God for their Infant-Baptism Answ 1. So did many bless God for Episcopal Government yet at last the very same blessed God for the fall of it 2. I suppose as many upright souls now are blessing God for his discovery of the vanity of it 3. It s not mens blessing God for things that proves the truth of these things but the approbation of him who is Truth it self 4. If you mind because those you falsly call Anabaptists have been condemned persecuted and afflicted as you intimate and the others justified upheld c. Answ 1. It s the likelier to be truth for that hath alwayes passed under reproach and contempt as for affliction Job suffered much the loss of all will you judge Job for his afflictions and justifie his wicked enemies yea and the Devil too that afflicted him for shame learn more civility then to reason thus did you never hear of Iobs losses was it because he was an Anabaptist think you or was it because God gave Satan liberty to try him for his good and may not God give Satan the same liberty to try his own servants and it may be to prove the Devil a lyar as he did in the trial of Iob have you never heard of great part of Cities Towns and Houses burnt and was it because they were Anabaptists think you As for your vile and rayling expressions I pass it by and leave it to the righteous Judge who will do right both to his servants and his enemies The twentieth Argument From the principles and practise of all reformed Churches That which is condemned by all the Churches of God and is contrary both to their principles and practise is unlawful But Anabaptism is condemned by all the Churches of God and is contrary both to their principles and practise Ergo. Answ Your Major is granted viz. That that which is condemned by the principles and practises of the Churches in Scripture and all those reformed or rather gathered upon the same principles and practises is unlawfull Your Minor is denyed for baptizing of believers hath been and is the principle and practise of the Churches of Christ whereas you produce 1 Cor. 11. 16. We have no such custome nor the Churches of Christ I say there was no such custome as the baptizing of Infants in the Churches of Christ and for those you call reformed Churches the most of them if not all brought their baptism of Infants from their mother Church of Rome So then it is not the practise of the Church of Rome or of her members that are rent from her that we look unto but the Scripture the word of truth which should be both their and our rule and when Churches or persons contradict that let them be Anathema Maranatha And whereas you are pleased as you pretend in confirmation of what you have asserted in this Argument to arraign the prisoner at the Bar so producing your reformed Churches and Divines so judging the servants of the Lord for their following of him and obedience to him Be assured you will one day know what you have done When the Lord Iesus shall appear to render vengeance to those who know him not neither obey his Gospel but to be admired in all those who believe and follow him 2 Thes 1. 8. When he will judge his enemies for all their hard words spoken against him Jude 5. and notwithstanding you can make so bold now to arraign the prisoner at the bar viz the servants of the Lord for their professing and practise of the truth yet the Lord will deliver them in his time and they shall judge their Judges And bind their Kings in Chains and their Nobles in fetters of Iron this honour shall all the Saints have praise ye Iehovah Psal 149. Although I could yet I shall in this trace you no farther but leave you to the Judgement of him who will judge righteous Judgement between us in the end referring those who desire to see more as to this particular to my book entituled The Pulpit Guard Routed So much briefly in way of answer to your Font Guarded with twenty Arguments Now I should proceed to the discovery of the weakness of your Answers to the Scruples Scripture-Objections and Answers mentioned by you in your Book in defence as you call it of Anabaptism But that first there are some Arguments not made use of that I know but are rather your own inventions And secondly because the summe of all you say hath been answered and confuted in what is written in answer to your Arguments and it would be indeed but a tautologie as you have very many in your Book and upon that account I have been necessitated to make use of many that so I might give some answer to you I shall therefore refer the Reader for satisfaction to what you say in this which follows to what I have written in answer to that which precedes that which succeeds being but the substance of that which is gone before only the second and last I shall say something unto The second Objection pag. 88. of your
to consider whether it be from above or from beneath c. You say Page 5. There is in my Book Page 19. enough granted for your Purpose T is because you do in this as in other things take but Part of what I say For though I say that none can preach according to the intention of that Scripture Rom. 10. 15. for the working of Faith and Converting of souls yet it doth not follow that every Gifted Brother may not Preach But you leave out that which follows viz. for every Gifted Brother is sent to preach according to the measure of the Gift recieved And the Mistake lieth in the word sent thinking that none but men in Office are sent of God to convert souls when Gifted Brethren are sometimes sent though not in Office Acts 8. 4. with 11. 19 21. All you say in Answer to that that gifting is sending c reacheth not the business in hand For 1. It doth not appear in those Scriptures you mention Isa 6 8 9. Mat. 10 1 5. that they were first gifted then sent Go tell them saith the Lord to Isaiah Gods putting the word in his mouth was the gifting Yet 2. I deny not in the ordinary way of prophesying and preaching gifting to precede sending first to those who are authoritatively sent by the Church or secondly to those who preach only by gift according to the measure of the gift received It is sending and they may and ought according to the measure of the gift both in the Church and out of the Church viz. in the world as occasion is offered God in those occasions calling them to it accordingly to administer Secondly you say that he is very unhappy in confounding ordinary and extraordinary Cases I answer first that extraordinary Cases make not that lawfull which in it self is unlawfull unless in cases of necessity for preservation of life then I will have mercy and not sacrifice unless it be in the bearing up of the name and truth of Christ then he that will save his life shall lose it Witness Vzzah 1 Chro. 13. 9. 10. for putting his hand to stay the Ark was smote with death So that your so often mentioning extraordinary cases helps you nothing for it s not the extraordinariness of the case that justifies the thing if it be in it self unlawfull so that you do indeed condemn the practice of the Saints recorded in Scripture for our example in Acts Chap. 8. and 11. with divers others and all for the keeping up your own Ends and Interests I am sure if you stood in the counsel and truth of Jesus the preaching of the Brethren could not would not trouble you As for what is said from pag. 8 to 10. I refer the Reader to the clearness of the assertions in my Book Pag. 9. You say The Gentleman Pretended Servants for so the word Minister signifies yet Gentle men-Masters Servants ruling over their Masters having said that the Holy-Ghost commends Learning he Replyes pag. 41. Holy Ghost is there any such word in the Scripture as Ghost You say How now which way went the Spirit of God from him what immediately inspired yet ignorant of this hath he forgotten Mat. 28. 20. c Ans Nay Sir he hath not quite forgotten it but have you indeed forgotten or else did you never learn it that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifiyeth spirit not ghost and so it is translated and read in all other languages except the English and sometimes it s truly translated in English too and the word ghost is an old English Popish ugly word which indeed if rightly considered is not so fit to be given to the Holy Spirit As for the interpretation of I. Cor. 14. 31. 32. Let the spirits of the Prophets be subject to the Prophets though I deny not what is mentioned v. 29. that the Prophets speak two or three and the others judge for the Church is to judge of the doctrine taught in it yet it s evident to any whose eyes are not shut against the truth that the interpretation of v 31 32. is in v 33 for God is not the author of confusion but of peace See his Brother Richard Sanders confuting this in his Balm to heal religious wounds pag. 202. he saith The spirit of the Prophets was subject to the Prophets that is the Spirit of Prophesie was not so violent on them but that they had power to contain themselves and to stay one for another and so to speak in order c. Here Richard Sanders confutes John Ferriby let the Reader judge As to what you say in the rest in way of Reply there being no weight at all in it I pass by it referring the Reader to the examination of that Book you pretend to Answer Where I make no question but that the clearness of the truth asserted will appear to the satisfaction of any unbyassed and impartial Reader As for your reproachfull terms which is indeed the sum of all your Answer I pass it by as unworthy taking notice leaving the controversie betwixt both you and us unto the righteous Judge who will in his own time bring it forth to the light and put a difference between those who serve the Lord Jesus and those who serve their own bellies To him and with him I leave the controversie who undoubtedly will plead his own Cause and Truth in his own Time AN ANSWER To a Book written by one Richard Sanders of Kentishbeer entituled A Balm to heal Religious wounds Called An Answer to the Pulpit-Guard Routed written by Thomas Collier SIR MEeting with your Book the Title bespeaks what I find not in it 1. You call it A Balm to heal Religious wounds c. But when I came to take a view of it I found it far from the nature of its name but it rather tends to make the wounds deeper and the breach wider your book being stuffed with as much rancor almost in every page as any I have read except Tho. Halls who writ the Pulpit and Font Guards So that if what you say of mine were a truth you have ballanced it on the other hand down to the ground viz. with reproachfull terms and as for that you call harsh language in mine it is no other then what hath been given by the servants of the Lord in Scripture upon the like occasion 2. You call it An Answer to the Pulpit-Guard Routed Two open and cleer untruths in the Title First A Balm to heal Religious wounds when it is far from it Secondly An Answer to the Pulpit-Guard Routed when you scarce come so neer as to meddle with it unless with railing and reproachful terms and if that be a sufficient answer you have done it to the purpose Or secondly in passing by the material and substantial things you have culled out some few particular things calling them Colliers Errors when they are undoubted truths unless those which are abused by you changing the terms in which by me
judgment to us is not material Yet this I shall say that it is in mercy and much wisdom For all the works of God are wrought in mercy and truth It was the will and wisdom of God that the Natural seed should have an interest in the outward Covenant and that the Spiritual seed should have a true interest in the spiritual Covenant and priviledges Therefore cease reasoning thus let God be true let God have his will though he take away all cause of fleshly boasting from us For now we have no interest in any thing in this Covenant unless Christ be ours and if Christ be ours then all is ours but lose him and lose all 1 Cor. 3. 21 22. You come you say to his fourth Error That God now reveals his will not only by the written word but by dreams and visions more credited then the Scriptures This you assert it 's none of mine as the Reader may see if he please to peruse the place It is your own invention and a lying one too And to this you adde another as great immediately following viz. That you believe the Prison at London had done me good where you heard I lately was for my Heresies Strange man I you are speaking against Dreams and yet are in the very interim dreaming you did but dream that I was in prison and I suppose it was because you would have it so you had studied deep upon the point the day before and so it seems you dream'd the thing was done What Richard Sanders dream a lye if he can dream no better then that he were as good give off dreaming or at least forbear to publish it in writing lest all men count him but as he is And what I say of Dreaming is no more but this that I dare not condemn the thing because God hath not limited himself he may reveal himself which way he pleaseth though not contrary but agreeable to the Scripture And further that it is not my experience nor any of that I know therefore may be a whimsie of Tho Halls own head This is the substance of what I say yet you dare to assert that I affirm that God reveals his will that way that it s more to be credited then the written word when all I say is that for all that I know some may have something revealed thar way although I know it not See Mr. Fox in the Book of Martyrs vol. 3. pag. 607. he relates of that good Martyr Mr. Philpot in a dream or vision he saw as it were a glorious City full of excellencies c. and it brought much joy to his soul it was cleered to him that it was a representation of the glorious Church of Christ and dare you say this was false And may not God do the like if he please though it 's not usual yet limit not God His fifth Error That the Saints need not ask the pardon of sin that it is form and custome that carries them to this petition Forgive us our sins c. It seems you resolved to lye when you began and so you will do it to the purpose but you are driven to confess the truth immediately that every one that runs may read you While any lives in the cleer enjoyment of mercy it is form and custom that carries them to that petition but if a soul apprehends want of pardon let him ask it And is this so strange unto you truly I do not wonder I believe it is in good earnest as strange as you make it It seems you know not that there is a time for all things and every thing in its season is sweet and comely There is a time to ask pardon and a time to rejoyce in the enjoyment of pardon there is a time to be merry a time to be sorry If any be merry saith James let him sing if afflicted let him pray And for that word If any soul or when a soul apprehends the want of pardon let him ask it it s no otherwise then what James saith If any want wisdom let him ask of God c. Jam 1. 5. All you say about this is either a spurning against the truth and a manifesting of your ignorance in this truth of God or secondly a declaration of what is included in my assertion That as they commit new sins so being sensible of it and of the want of pardon let them ask it His sixth Error That gifted Brethren may exercise the Ministerial or Pastoral act of Preaching in a constituted Church without any Call to the Office of a Minister Ans 1. I suppose it 's impossible for you to state any thing truly as it was laid down by me But that you pretend that what I have written is so full of contradictions that in sober sadness you know not what I would have Truly in sober-sadness I am much of the mind that your mind in writing was rather to make the Truth and my self its servant contemptible to the people then to answer the truth written in my book for else you durst not change my language into your own so oft as you do and then rail and pretend you answer me nay pretend you know not what I would have when it is so cleerly asserted from Scripture grounds not only in the generall but in particular pag. 95. 96. in seven or eight particulars and I shall at present mind but one which is the first That all the brethren in the Church that have the gift may prophesie You assert it thus That they may exercise the Ministerial or Pastoral act c. Well but you pretend you will not answer the Arguments that you will leave to your brother Hall But you pittifully cry out of ignorance in the Collier but I suppose and it s not my supposition only that it is your own pittifull ignorance makes you so to cry out against me for the Arguments you pass nor do you say any thing of substance unto those things you pretend to be Errors You say you will lay down some Observations which may serve as a key to see the weakness ignorance and impertinency of the same You observe p. 66. That I do pittifully say I Sir and No Sir And is this such a pittiful thing Let the Reader judge As to your 7 particulars instanced there is no contradiction in them For first that gifted brethren may preach according to their gift both in and out of a constituted Church is cleer and there is not any thing you have said that bears the least shew of a solid answer unto it For both of these see 1 Cor. 14. 31. Rom. 12. 3. 6. 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. Act. 8. 4. with chap. 11. 19 20 21. Act. 9. 20. chap. 18. 25 26. in all which it appears the lawfulness of the Preaching of gifted Brethren both in and out of the Church and truly I cannot think that you are so ignorant of this Truth as you pretend only you
as any president for it you would feign presidents for sprinkling of Infants if you could but you endeavour to overturn Presidents of preaching Brethren that they should not be usefull to us let the people judge of what Spirit you are of And the reason I judge is this your own standing depends so positively upon it that unless you can uphold the one and suppress the other you are like to fall together Observ 4. That in my pleading for a general liberty of Preaching in a constituted Church I do not inform how far I extend it Whether it be with the consent of the Pastor and people or whether he may Preach whether they will or no Answ I leave the truth of this likewise to the Reader to judge whether it be not often asserted in my Book pag 29. The Churches freedom or desire is Call enough if the party be gifted to it all lawfull Calls to Preach either within or without are sutable to the Gift pag. 30. The Church hath power to Call forth a gifted Brother to do service for the Church and in the Postscript at the end it is thus written In what I have written I intend that only Brethren that have Gifts may exercise them in an orderly way that is with the desire or consent of the Church as any man might easily understand so there is no truth in your observation Obser 5. That in most of his Answers he doth not reply to the Scripture reason alledged against him but declining that as a little too hard for him That I leave to the Reader to judge whether I have declined a positive Answer to all both the Arguments and Scriptures and who hath declined the Argument and Scriptures most I in my Answers to Tho. Hall or Rich. Sanders in his answer to mine So you come you say to open several Scriptures from giving any countenance to that Babel and the two first that you will speak to is Act 8. 4. and Act 9. 20 but in this you will ohserve two Rules 1. That in weighty things of God a Christian must have a certain Rule or warrant for his practise c. I like it well and if you held firm to this truth you must deny all your own practise 2. That Arguments drawn from examples in Scripture are of credit according to the credit of the persons whose examples they are c. This I own for truth likewise But you say Those examples are of men not infallible c. How prove you that dare you question it and doth not the Scripture say the hand of the Lord was with them yet dare you question the spirit by which they were guided Acts 11. 21. All the rest you say to this is nothing at all therefore I say no more but refer the Reader to what is at large answered in the Pulpit-Guard Routed as for the second Scripture Act. 9. 20. you confess That he Preached before he was solemnly set apart to be an Apostle to the Gentiles 2. You say he was sent by an immediate voice to Ananias that he should tell him what he should do but Ananias did not bid him preach but arise and be baptized c. You minde what you have from Sauls own mouth ch 22. 14. Ananias saith to him Thou shalt be a witness to all men of what thou hast seen and heard ver 15. This was no setting of him apart to the Office he told him that he should be a witness c. but did not Ordain him unto it and upon your account Saul should have been silent till he had been ordained but he was not as before and Act. 26. 16 17 18. Gods immediate sending him was nor the outward Office as you pretend You say the other Scripture he often urges and why not having often occasion 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. Rom. 12. 6. 7. These you say are far fetcht consequences Answ They are no consequences man but plain Scripture Precepts Christians must administer their gifts therefore they must be publick Preachers c. Why not publick do the Scriptures make a difference And what you say further to these Scriptures hath been answered already therefore I say no more The ntxt Scripture is Psal 145. 10 11. All you say to this is very learnedly As though this hath any relation to publick preaching when he saith they shall make known to the sons of men his mighty Acts and the glorious Majesty of his Kingdom but this you have left out you durst not put it in your Book lest the Reader should see your folly The next Scripture is 1 Cor 14. 31. This you pretend to prove was extraordinary Prophesie and not ordinary as the Pulpit-Guard Routed sayes And you say That your great work shall be to prove that prophecy 1 Cor. 14. 31. was extraordinary and not ordinary as the Pulpit-Guard-Routed sayes 1. You say You read p. 60. that the reason why prophesie was extraordinary in the Law and this ordinary 1 Cor. 14. 3. is because its a speaking to edification exhortation and comfort c. The substance of what you seem to answer to this is 1. Because such as were prophets did speak to edification therefore those who speak to edification are prophets In this you say is some Sophistry c. But give me leave to shew your Sophistry and that first in pretending an Answer when t is nothing to the purpose the end of my using these words was to present the Reader with the difference between the Prophesie of the Old Testament which was to foretell things to come and this of the New this 1 Cor. 14. is an ordinary way of prophesie for the building up of the Church that so all may be instructed and all may be comforted 2. I answer that those Saints that can speak to edification c. are prophets nay all the Lords People are prophets therefore your Sophistry nor yet your Logick will not hold for though the ground may be wet without rain yet it is not often wet without water and if a Saint a Member of the Church can speak to edification exhortation and consolation he is a Prophet if he have the Testimony of Jesus he hath the Spirit of Prophesie 2. You say The Prophets under the Law spake to edification I answer There is none questions that but that their prophesyings had that end in it and it s so to us at this day when we come to understand them but the prophesying mentioned 1 Cor. 14. was a common and ordinary prophesying in the Church for the edification of the Body That in the Law was a foretelling of things to come and therefore written to be kept on Record to posterity this not written because ordinary and as Thomas Hall confesseth it was such a prophesie as in it they might err c. So that I say again they under the Law took not their denomination from this kind of prophesying viz. an ordinary speaking to build up souls in the present knowledge
the least of which is able to help you to the infallible sense c. What then hinders that you are not infallible and yet that you are not infallible is clear for what need a difference then between Papist and Protestant yet both Learned between Episcopacie and Presbyterie yet both Learned Presbyterie and Independency yet both Learned Independency and the Baptists yet some of both Learned between them all and those that deny both Church and Ordinances yet some of them Learned too Oh be ashamed for ever of these Fopperies and let all who know the Lord look to him for the teachings of the Spirit that so we may come to know his minde and will that so we may worship him with one shoulder and let all that love the Lord Jesus say Amen This shall suffice at present as an answer to what you say of your humanity I deny not the use of means but the abuse of it I leave it to the Reader to judge You come to the 8. Error That the Ministry of England is Antichristian Answ This is a dangerous one with you it seems but because I have said so much to this in the Pulpit Guard Routed I shall wholly wave it in this place seaving both Tho. Halls assertions my answers to him and yours again to mine to the judgment of the Reader a word to the wise is enough it s a word that you cannot yet well bear therefore I shall at present forbear only give me leave to minde you with two words 1. You answer but one of my six Arguments to prove them Antichristian the rest you pass by as if the naming of them as Tho. Hall said in contempt were answer enough to them if it be I leave it to the Reader I am satisfied 2. In that which you pretend to answer what do you more or less then say the same that I have said You confess 1. It came from Rome but you think to mend it with this because the Scriptures came from Rome but if by the hand of Gods grace the Scripture was kept pure in Rome and not defiled then the case is altered but they were so kept Ergo that it is so I prove If the Scriptures preserved by the Romans have sufficient in them to overturn the very practise and Religion of the Romans then they had not a power to corrupt it for their own ends But the Scriptures preserved by the Romans have sufficient in them to overturn all the Religion of the Romans viz. Papists Ergo. The Minor I prove Those who use to corrupt Scripture do it for their own ends and interests but the Papists have not corrupted it for their own ends and interests Ergo. I mean in the Hebrew and Greek which I suppose must necessarily be that which you intend for you say the Scriptures as well as Ordination was very much corrupted by the Papists p. 169. but among us hath been restored by degrees now our Work hath not been to restore the Popish Translators but to Translate out of the Greek and Hebrew Copies which I do not believe were or are materially or substantially corrupted so that by this you teach the People to deny the Scripture and at best to take it upon the account of man reducing it from corruption I must tell you if the Collier had written as much as black as you make him he must have expected to have had all the black-Coats in the Nation about his ears and that justly too So that the Case is altered now the Scripture in its essence was kept pure but the very essence of Ordination was Antichristian and how you could bring a clean thing out of an unclean I leave to the Reader to judge As to the Argument you confess the truth of it that the Calling came from Rome but you restore it by degrees Now which is better to come to the Scripture for Ordination Ordinances c. or to retain that which is Antichristian I leave to the Reader to judge as for Austin the Monk you confess what I say only you think you mend the matter in saying that Monks were not so bad then as now and that Rome was a true Church then the truth of this I leave to the judgement of the wise these things considered 1. When Austin came into England here was some that owned Christ as History relates for as you say the Gospel had been preached in England before both by Joseph of Arimathea and afterward Lucius King of the Britains desiring it not Elutherius as you affirm but Fugatius and Damianus being sent by Elutherius Pope or Bishop of Rome they Preached and Baptized in England that King being the first King that History mentions that was Baptized in England but when Austin came those Bishops you mention with the People because they would not submit to the pride of Austin were by him persecuted and brought to ruine by this you may judge a little of the truth of Romes being a true Church and Austin a true Minister 2. Whereas you say You hope Rome was then a true Church I say you have but little ground for it for I do not believe that ever Rome was a true Church My Reason is because I do judge that never a Nation Province or City was a true Gospel-Church its true there was once a true Church in Rome but the Scripture never calls Rome a Church for a true Church of Christ are a People gathered out of the world by the power of the Gospel to believing in Christ and professed obedience to him but this was never any Nation Province or City therefore no true Church of Christ Rev. 5. 9 but such Churches were at first and so it hath hitherto continued gathered by the authority of the Civil Magistrate compelling all to come in or else they must not live under their Authority fulfilling in a measure Rev. 13. 17. by which means the true Church in Rome and all other true Churches in Relation to Form Order and Worship have been extinguished so that I say Rome was never a true Church since it became a Church nor any Nation in the World besides its inconsistent with the true Church of Christ who are a People gathered out of Nations as before c. But to draw to a conclusion The other five Arguments you pass over as having no weight in them c. I leave it to the Reader to judge if there be no weight in them I say no more only aword to your Postscript You say There is another dangerous pestilent blasphemous Book of this Colliers against Ordinances c. which you heard of but never saw it Answ I suppose you did but dream a second time and this proves false too give off dreaming or lying for shame for I suppose none dare lye so grosly as to tell you so though you dare dream a lye and publish it but there is a hand of God in it that the world may know what you are My Books are not in private if there were any such it might be gotten assuredly let this satisfie I do declare that I never writ any such Book and if any have done or do gather from any passage that I deny Ordinances though I know no passage in any from whence any can draw such a positive conclusion I do affirm that I never writ any thing in which I denyed the Ordinances of Jesus Christ and it is my judgement and practise to walk in the use of them Thus at present have I done leaving the Premises to the publick view and censure of those to whom it comes desiring the Lord to give understanding c. FINIS