Christ in though never so wicked 3. Bastards in all in and all as soon and as well as any See pag. 5. I must tell you and that from the Lord you will have a sad account to give to the Lord one day if mercy prevent not for your abusing the Covenant of grace and thrusting a fleshly generation upon the Lord when he is seeking a spiritual a holy seed to worship him and I would have you to know that those you so often and with so much contempt and reproach term Anabaptists are not so simple as you would perswade the world to believe they are able through mercy to see into your forgeries and delusions and to discover them too in a measure and to distinguish between Law and Gospel Covenant and Covenant not confounding things together so denying Christ to be come in the flesh I shall in a word give you the difference The Covenant of the Law either that with Abraham or with Moses was a Covenant without them and the mysterie or substance was hid from all though all was in it unless those few taught of God The Covenant of the Gospel is wholly spiritual and none are in it but the spiritual seed viz. true believers though hypocrites may come in to the outward profession yet they have nothing to do to be there for there is no outside in the Covenant of grace That which you call the outward Covenant is but the outward profession of the invisible grace and that is proper only to those who are in it although the Disciples did and we may admit those that may prove hypocrites yet neither did they nor may we admit any by baptism into the visible profession of the invisible grace but those we judge by the rule of truth in this particular to have true faith and if any come in that have it not to their own peril it will be Therefore if this be truth as I am sure it is what account will those give to the Lord who bring in the natural seed to the profession of the spiritual Covenant and so make them hypocrites A day will come when the sinners in Sion shall be afraid and fearfulness shall surprise the hypocrite Isa 33. So I conclude that Infants are not in the Covenant of grace nor were ever commanded to be baptized therefore have no right unto it The fourth Argument Christians ought to be baptized But Infants of Christians are Christians Ergo They ought to be baptized Answ 1. If this Argument were truth it were a very easie thing to be a Christian Born Christians by nature no need of Christ the Gospel Spirit Regeneration any thing it makes void all the whole Gospel of grace and peace a doctrine of Devils indeed Do you not remember that Paul saith If any man preach any other Gospel then what he had preached he should be accursed Gal. 1. But you have found out another Gospel Christians by the natural generation and birth Cursed be all such soul deceiving and soul destroying Doctrines You pretend to prove your Minor with much clearness As all the parings of Gold are Gold so all the children of Christians are Christians The parings of gold are true gold and the children of Christians by this account are true Christians pared out from the spiritual man being of the same nature oh high priviledge Christians can beget Christians Saints can beget Saints by natural generation Certainly if one of the preaching brethren had laid down such an assertion you would have counted him an illiterate Ignoramus one altogether unmeet to have medled with the Scriptures or to have spoken of the things of God You would have accounted him no less then a blasphemer and worthy to be burnt with his Books Well but you proceed As all the Children of the Jews were Jews by birth Gal. 2. 15. And all the Children of the Turks are Turks by birth so all the Children of Christians are Christians and have a right to Baptism Answ 1. The Jews were all in an outward Covenant and so they were born Jews viz. in that Covenant but believers are in the Covenant of grace as hath been already proved and none are born in that Covenant by natural generation and birth so that although Jews were Jews by birth yet Christians are not so by the natural birth for that which is born of the Spirit is spirit But secondly the Jews were so by birth as a distinguishing title from other Nations so the Turks are Turks and the Spaniards are Spaniards and the French are French and the English are English by birth but they neither of them are Christians by birth But you seem to mend all in answering an Objection Then we should be born Christians and not made Christians we should be born children of God and not children of wrath You answer Parents cannot convey grace to their Children but a right to Church priviledges c. unheard of nonsence and confusion miserable bald shifts men make to patch up their own inventions 1. Christians yet no grace a right to Church-priviledges yet no grace Members of the Church yet no grace page 23. Nay members of the Church Christians a right to Church priviledges holy c. and yet have no grace are the children of wrath page 23. these are like to be goodly Christians Church Members c. Yet you dislike with the Anabaptists for not taking notice of this distinction c. A strange kind of distinction to make them Christians yet no Christians Members of the Church yet children of wrath I suppose you would learn to distinguish a little better were it not to please the vulgar sort of people that so they may please you in feeding you with the Tythes A sad thing when you shall lead along souls blind with the name of Christian yet children of wrath and if mercy prevent not are like to perish eternally for all the name of Christian Thus are souls deluded by their Teachers called Christians made Church-members and yet Children of wrath c. Alike children of wrath as Heathens page 10. The fifth Argument From Christs command and commission to his Disciples Mat. 28. 19. and from the Apostles practise answerable to that command thus your argue That which is both commanded and commended that hath both precept president and promise for it may lawfully be practised by the Ministers of Jesus Christ But Infant-Baptism is both commanded and commended for it there is both precept president and promise Ergo. Well said namesake Tom Prove this and thou hast done the deed that never yet was done Prove this and I will lay down my Arguments and practise too Had you a good cause you its like would be very bold that you dare be so bold in asserting such an Argument in such positive terms when there is never a word in Scripture of either precept president or promise to the thing you are pleading for so that your Minor is denyed You pretend to prove it
adde and their Children It seems you have either forgotten or else you fear not that curse denounced against him that addeth to or diminisheth from the words of this Book The reason you render is Because the promise is to you and to your children Is not was and is now vanished Ans That Promise you so much plead for which is but one and the same you have so often reiterated already is vanished away and the children of Israel are out of the Land of Canaan c. and we are under another a better Covenant a new Covenant c. Jer. 3. 31. Heb 8. established upon better promises That promise was the Land of Canaan ours is the true promise of the Spiritual Land they had the Land of Canaan promised and it was made good while they kept Covenant with God we have the Spiritual Land promised and that is made good to all the Spiritual seed And this is the promise here intended and it is limited to all that the Lord our God shall call 1. The promise here related is intended only to called ones and it is a restriction to all the several terms before As many of you as the Lord shall call Of your children as the Lord shall call Of them afar off viz. Gentiles as the Lord shall call For the truth is that there is no promise in the Gospel but to called ones See this cleer Joel 2. 32. the Scripture to which this in the Acts relates In mount Sion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance as the Lord hath said and in the remnant whom the Lord she ll call It s the very same with Act. 2. 39. and note 1. The Call is not as you plead universal but to a remnant and those who are thus called shall be delivered saved This dashes to peeces your assertions throughout your Argument they are the called ones and they only to whom the promise belongs for the promises are all centered in Christ and given forth to the called ones not those who are outwardly called but effectually and savingly called Heb. 9. 15. Christ is said to be a Mediator of a better Testament but you will have the same so deny Christ to be come in the flesh That by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions under the first Testament Christ died to deliver his people from the transgressions under the first Covenant that so they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance Here is the promise the eternal inheritance the persons to whom they that are called not infants the natural seed but the spiritual the same mentioned Rom 8. 30. Whom he predestinated them he called c. and to them and them only the promise belongs This I doubt not but it will be enough to the judicious Reader to discover the vanity and emptiness of all you say to this sixth argument For children are not taken literally any otherwise then as called of the Lord. For the Jews crucifying Christ and wishing his blood to be upon them and their children the Gentiles having a hand in it too they mocked him c. they being pricked in their hearts at Peters Sermon the Apostle applieth a suitable medicine to their wounded consciences he doth not tell them of an outward promise a Land of Canaan an outward federal holiness for themselves children which they might have and yet be damned at last No no but a spiritual promise that might reach their souls in such a condition therefore in substance he saith Notwithstanding you have had a hand in crucifying the Lord Jesus the promise of the spirit of grace and of remission is to you as many of you as the Lord shall call and notwithstanding you have by your deprecations drawn guilt upon your children yet the promise is to them as many of them as the Lord shall call and notwithstanding the Gentiles have joyned with you in it yet the promise is to them to as many as the Lord our God shall call And this is the sense and truth of this Scripture and I do affirm that there is no Gospel-promise made to any but the called of God and all others that get into the gospel-Gospel-profession not being of the true spiritual seed God will judge them in his time And it is evident there were none baptized but those that gladly received his word v. 41. The seventh Argument à probabili pag. 40. From Apostolical practise which is in the nature of a Gospel-injunction to us We read of divers families that they baptized as Cornelius with his houshold Act. 10. 47 48. compared with 11. 14. Lydia with her houshold Act. 16. 15. the Jailor and his Act. 16 31 32. Crispus and all his house Act. 18. 8 and the houshold of Stephanus 1 Cor. 1. 16. Your Argument is this If the Apostles baptized whole housholds then Children which are an integral part of the houshold were baptized also But the Apostles baptized whole housholds Ergo. The Minor you say none will deny the Major you will prove Generals you say include particulars the word houshold is a large word and includes all old and young men women and children c. But stay a little are there any Children mentioned if not you have but probability at best and I querie whether probability be a sufficient ground to warrant a practise contradicting a positive command You say pag. 41. Many things were done that are not mentioned in Scripture that Christ and his Apostles did many things that are not written Joh. 20. ult I answer 1. If it had been done yet not being written silent authority proves nothing All you can say is but that it might be done not that it was done because it is not written 2. To look after things not written to contradict and make null things that are written take heed of that Thomas if your name sake the Collier should have laid down such a Principle you would have said somewhat to it But I pass it by a word to the wise is enough But I shall rather come to discover the grounds of your Probabilities from those families The first is in Act. 10. 47 48. Cornelius and his houshold they were first such as heard the word therefore not Infants v. 33. Now therefore are we all here present before God to hear all things that are commanded thee of God Secondly v. 44. The Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the word Thirdly they were those and only those that were baptized which heard the word and had received the holy Spirit ver 47. Can any forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the holy Spirit as well as we And he commanded them viz that had heard and received the Spirit as well as they to be baptized Where are your Infants now and where is your probability for your practise Blame me not if I undermine you for I am a Collier and must dig up the blackness that truth may appear
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
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
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
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
It s true there is grace in this Covenant yet it is not the Covenant of grace there is grace in this for it is grace for God declaratively to be a God to a People And secondly there was the everlasting grace included typically in this Covenant for it relates in the mysterie unto Christ as all outward Covenants Services and the Land of Canaan it self did Gal. 3. 6 Col. 2. 17. Heb. 4. from ver 3. to the 8. That it was an outward Covenant will appear 1. The thing promised in the Covenant was outward i. e. The Land of Canaan Object He promised to be a God unto them in an everlasting Covenant Answ 1. This was a promise in an outward Covenant as will appear Isa 10. 22 23. compared with Rom. 9. 29. Though the Children of Israel be as the sand of the sea yet a remnant of them shall be saved Now if God had been a God unto them in the Covenant of grace they must have been all saved and have continued in that Covenant unto this day but it being but an outward and typical Covenant relating to Christ the antitype and substance when Christ was come that Covenant was dissolved into Christ and is given forth upon the true spiritual account to the spiritual seed Gal. 3. 16. with 29. 2. It s said to be an everlasting Covenant either 1. because it was to continue its appointed time so called Everlasting as usually the old Testament Ordinances were so God promised in this Covenant to give the Land of Canaan for an everlasting possession yet they are and have been many hundreds of years turned out of it and if they had not yet that could but have been a poffession for them in their generations till the end of the world But the Covenant of grace reaches to eternity without end Psal 103. 17. Hence the Priesthood of the Law was called an everlasting Priesthood Exod. 40. 15. Num. 25. 13. Or secondly it s called Everlasting upon the account of Christ who was the substance and the Covenant it self when he came ending all other Covenants and Services Isa 42. 6. So Davids Kingdom was said to be Everlasting upon the account of Christ who was and is the true spiritual King of whom David was a type 2 Sam. 7. 16. Ps 89. 35 36. compared with Ezek. 37. 24 25. David was dead long before yet David viz. Christ must be their King for ever Thus it appears first from the Covenant it self on Gods part that it was not the Covenant of grace though grace was darkly and typically included in it only the enlightened renewed soul saw into it and partaked of Christ the substance But secondly it will appear likewise if we consider the second part of the Covenant on Abraham and his childrens part Every man-child shall be circumcised at eight dayes old v. 10. 11 12. Here is an external obedience suitable to an external covenant God promiseth the land of Canaan in lieu of this they must be circumcised which shall be a sign of their obedience and to God of his Covenant as the Rain-bow in another case 2. The Covenant being thus considered it followeth that notwithstanding this Covenant was to Abraham and his seed natural yet it is not to Believers now and their seed natural This denies your Minor and this Scripture produced by you doth not prove it Your other Scripture Act. 2. 39. I shall answer in its place when I come to your Argument drawn from it And whereas you say That there are some Infants in the Covenant of grace I deny it positively that there are Infants in the Covenant of grace upon your account viz. the account of nature because born of believing parents all fleshly boasting being taken away Rom. 3. 27. As the Covenant to Abraham and his seed was outward and typical so the Covenant of Christ or Christ the Covenant is to the spiritual seed and that only those who are of the saith of Abraham who do the works of Abraham they and they only are the seed of Abraham Joh. 8. 39. He is not a Jew that is one outwardly but he is a Jew that is one inwardly Rom. 2. 28 29. where as the outward Covenant so the natural seed are cut off and only the spiritual stands And whereas you say there is an outward being in this Covenant c. Ishmael was circumcjsed I say so too for in it self it was wholly outward this and all other Covenants and services were outward and typical except the first promise Gen. 3. The Covenant of grace now in the dayes of Christ is wholly spiritual Those then that were enlightened which were but few saw and enjoyed the substance in the shadow and form We first the substance and with it the form They were first brought by works to Christ we first to Christ and then to works as fruits of faith And whereas you conclude Baptism to be a Seal of the Covenant of Grace you are as much besides the truth in this as in the Covenant it self Because you have heard others say it therefore you affirm it too as children use to speak by tradition but where is your Scripture for it Did you ever read of any New-Testament seal besides the Spirit of Christ Ephes 1. 13. ch 4. 30. But I suppose because that it 's said Rom. 4. 11. that Abraham received the sign of Circumcision a seal of the righteousness of his faith which he had before he was circumcised that therefore Baptism is a seal of the Covenant of grace Oh gross mistake Abraham believed God when he first promised him the land of Canaan and commanded him to forsake all and go into it and that he would keep him and bless him Gen. 12. Here Abraham believed God and obeyed and went out not knowing whither and v. 17. God gave him Circumcision a sign and seal to confirm his faith which he had before in this promise And as Circumcision was given a seal of Abrahams faith in Gods promising him the land of Canaan so the Spirt of grace is the seal of faith to every believer of his interest in the spiritual land the substance of the outward the Lord Jesus So you are lost both in Covenant in Seal in the Subjects of the Covenant and all You mention Gal. 4. 28. I say upon the Gospel-account its truth as Isaac was heir to that Covenant so all true believers are heirs of the true promise and none else Whereas you say pag. 11. in way of answer to an objection That theirs is old and ended c. you answer That to make that old none but carnal Anabaptists will do it Your mouth is wide but let it pass I answer To make that Covenant which was of an outward land the same as ours which is of a spiritual land to bring in the natural seed upon that account when it is only to the spiritual seed none but a carnal and blind generation of men dare to do Christ saith
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
the judgement of the Church he may lawfully nay he ought to submit unto the Call of God be he high or low from the Speaker of the House or President of the Counsell of State unto the Hewer of wood and Drawer of water and this is a true Call when thus called of God therefore all you say to this is but an idle fancy you have no ground for it His second Error That Infant-Baptism is a childish thing And this you say He will own for a Truth And this I do say I still own for a Truth and that first in the Subject 2. In the Administrators You say There is an Objection lies in the way which he sets down viz. That the Infants of the children of Israel were as uncapable of the understanding of the mysterie of Circumcision as Infants are now of Baptism My Answers though reproached by you I suppose it s not for want of ignorance I shall relate them again and leave them to the judgement of the Reader only adding one more will stand and their truth be manifest when what you practise will fall in the streets It s truth that one part of Circumcisions Mystery viz. the Circumcision of the heart was as far from the capacity of Infants as the mysterie of Baptism is now 2. As Circumcision was a Type and Figure in the flesh of Christ who was to come of Abrahams Seed and there was no such capacity required because it was a Jewish Legal Type as all the rest of their external Worships and Sacrifices were leading to and representing the coming of Christ in the flesh That these are not words to please children as you pretend unless you mean the children of God but words of truth it will appear if the honest Reader do but consider that as all the Ordinances of the Jews were Carnal and Typical Heb. 9. 10. Col. 2. 16 17. So those Ordinances were given to the Natural or Carnal Seed viz. the Seed of the Flesh which was Typical likewise as their Ordinances were therefore was not the like capacity required in them as in those in the Gospel days who are directly led into the Mysterie unto Jesus who is come being the substance of all those Types and shadows 3. There was a Command for that of Circumcision none for that of Baptism you cry out O egregiously gifted Disputant Answ O egregiously ignorant Is it not the Command that gives a capacity to the one and to the other If the Lord Command the one and not the other is not that enough to silence man for ever Zac. 2. 13. I say its the Command of God that gives a capacity to the creature of obeying and there are none capable of a Duty but those that are called to the Duty and this you confess your self p. 86. that in weighty things of God a Christian must have a certain evident Rule to warrant his practise Whereas you say They were therefore circumcised because taken into the Covenant and so Church Members I shall Answer it in its place and say something to it in my fourth Answer I shall adde a fourth and that is They were capable of those things promised to them in that Covenant viz. The Land of Canaan and only the spiritual seed are capable of those things promised in the Gospel-Covenant viz. The spiritual Land Jesus Christ and all the good things of the Gospel 2. I say its childish as relating to the Administrators c. and you give a clear answer to it of just nothing I refer the Reader to it His third Error That none must be baptized until they come to perfect age To this you seem to give a learned Answer crying out of Ignorance and where it is let the Reader judge by the Scriptures I produce Was not Christ himself baptized at thirty years of age The Eunuch by Philip Acts 8. 37. And those that came to Iohn Mat. 3. and those Acts 2. 40 41 You say When any Anabaptist in England can prove that there was no Infants baptized in the Apostles time then it may be you will make use of that which I bring I shall make use of your own words before O egregiously gifted Disputant What are you so well verst that we must prove Negatives I thought that you had known so much in disputation of Reason and Scripture that if you will practise a thing then you must prove it or else it is Will worship if you can produce no precept nor president in Scripture for your practise then you have no ground for your practise but you can produce neither precept nor president for your practise Ergo. I say Is there one rule for them and another for us now if there be produce it To this you learnedly answer If he did understand sense he would see that the same Scripture-rule that was then given to the Churches directs us to a different course in gathering of Churches And truly I must be mighty wise then to understand that which is not for mine own ends such sense will prove sensual in the end Jam. 3. 13 14 15 16. and this is the summe of what you say only you would flatter the people with your love to them and its manifest it is in darkening the Truth You have produced no Scripture for another rule to us then that to them although I called for it but only Rev. 2. 2. Try them that say they are Apostles and are not but lyars I say so too and earnestly desire nay charge those who have any knowledge of Jesus to do it See who sticks fastest to the Scriptures we or you that so they may find out the lyars and detect and avoid them for they serve not the Lord Jesus but their own bellies and by their works they shall know them As for those consequences mentioned as that of Circumcision the Housholds and those brought to Christ c. I wonder that you blush not to write so audaciously as you do knowing that almost all people know the truth of what I write that these are the consequences witness The Font-Guarded Immediatly you confess that its true The first consequence is made use of but come hither all you that fear the Lord see what a shift this man makes to help himself he takes it for granted that I acknowledge that baptism is come in the room of Circumcision when I do but declare your false and nonsensical consequences not mine own conclusion I deny Baptism to be come in the room of Circumcision my grounds you may see in the Font-Guard Routed in my answer to Doctor Hall yet if it were true that Baptism were come in the room of Circumcision as Richard Sanders would have it let the babes and sucklings come and see what ground here will be for Infant baptism let Jesus Christ be King let him have but so much honour as to tell you who shall be baptized and how it shall be done the controversie will be ended If you think
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
it is of God not a wolf but a sheep not a false but a true Prophet speaking to edification exhortation and consolation they may with comfort hear and approve the speaking of such in the Church Your fourth Argument is If to appoint to the office of a Minister and the work of a Minister be all one then no man is appointed to the work of a Minister but he that is appointed to the office But to appoint to the office of a Minister and the work of a Minister be all one Ergo. Ans Your Minor is denied A man may be appointed to the work of a Minister yet never be appointed to the office For 1. Richard Sanders himself in his own practise shall confute this Logick for he saith That he Preached a long time before he was Ordained c. but he mends the matter It was in order to the Ministry But in case Richard Sanders had died before he had been ordained then Preaching and the Office of the Ministry had not been one there had been a great deal of Preaching without Office So that in this your practise you contradict your reason and you allowed your self in the thing which you condemn 2. Were these Act. 8. 4. appointed to the office they did the work but the office you read not of And those 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. they were commanded to the work but not to the office for then every one must have been officers c. 3. You have given your Argument but never a Scripture to confirm it but you endeavour to confirm one Reason by another without Scripture Take heed Richard of outing Scripture with your Reason be content to fall down under the power of truth let God be true and all fleshes wisdom so far as it opposeth God be a lye You now come to his 7. Error That Humane Learning is no way necessary to the Ministry of the Gospel and that I affirm p. 38. 39. 41. Pulpit-Guard Routed that the power of the Spirit of Christ in Saints is sufficiently able to make them to divide the word aright and to convince gain-sayers And dare you deny this Truth Is not the Spirit of Christ sufficient dare you derogate from the Holy Spirit and do you find any other Ministery or Teacher then the Spirit in the Scripture 1 Cor. 12. Joh. 14. 26. 16. 7 8. But you seem to help this again you deny not the ability of the Spirit but you question the will or if he please to do it I think that needs not be the Question but rather whether you are in the Scripture directed to any other way for the attaining of the minde of God then the Spirit and the Scripture but you question pag. 126. Whether the main and principle Doctrine of the Scriptures be so plainly laid down as that a Christian may attain unto the knowledge of the same without humane Learning you grant that if he have a Translation he may and have not we a Translation in English and is it not true but false then the Translators have done wrong but is it not true in the substance is there any material fundamental mistake if not then an English man in the English Translation may understand the minde of God as much and more if he have a greater measure of the Spirit then an Hebritian and Grecian can understand in those Languages 2. I answer that I do not quarrell against Tongues but at the abuse of them to make an Idol of them I know you may come to the knowledge of the Letter of Scripture in an ordinary way more fully with it then without it but it is the abuse of it that I quarrel at because you set it up in the room of the Spirit as if none could understand Scripture but those that have Tongues then the Faith of all others must be an implicite Faith built upon the credit of men which would prove very weak in the end 3. It s the use of Philosophy in the things of God as some of you affirm that there is a necessity of studying Arts Sciences Logick Rhetorick c. to make them Ministers as Tho. Halls Pulpit Guard make use of your tongues bring forth the truth of the Original to the people help those that want it and make not an Idol of it c. You proceed to produce some Scriptures A good account of which cannot be given without the help of humane Learning Answ In this you shew so much weakness that I would not say a word unto it were it not for one or two of them and I shall say but a word or two 1. Is there any thing material in any of these Scriptures Put case a man knew not the Emphasis of the Original as Rich. Sanders cals it Is any thing laid open by him material or 2. if so it s that which may be easily attained But to the Scriptures the first is Apostolos and what if a man never knew that it signifies Sent why might he not understand as much as your self in it for every man that knows any thing knows that the twelve Apostles and Paul were Apostles and you know no more you do not know that all that are sent of Jesus Christ are Apostles viz. Sent. The second Scripture of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Rock you seem to give a learned interpretation as if Christ intended to build his Church upon Peter so much is clearly hinted in what you say I trace you no farther in this I leave the weight of what you say concerning those Scriptures to the Reader because I am in haste As to that you say concerning Ghost I perceive you know well what the word is in the Greek and what if it were alwayes so translated in English and I think it is one of the greatest wrongs to our English translation the mispronouncing of words in pronouncing Hebrew and Greek instead of English Messias from Mesha instead of Anointed Emmanuel instead of God with us In Greek Christ from Christos instead of anointed Jesus instead of Saviour Apostle instead of Sent Baptize instead of Dip or Wash c. and Ghost instead of Spirit though that 's no Greek word Why do you not reform these things with your learning unless it be done on purpose to keep people in ignorance But you have something farther to say it seems and that very learnedly page 134. and you have much to say to this particular That there is not any Scripture understood by spiritual Christians the grammatical sense of which a man that hath not the Spirit of Christ may attain unto and page 135. That Scripture is sufficient to discover its own sense to all men diligently improving the outward helps afforded by God and that if it be the Spirits work to discover the sense and meaning of Scripture then the Spirits work is to make Notionists c. Answ And is this your spiritualness indeed That a natural man without the Spirit may understand the mind
of God for if he understand the sense and meaning of the Scripture then he understands the mind of God and this is contrary to the Scripture For the natural man doth not understand the things that are of God neither can he understand them 1 Cor. 2. 14 But we have the mind of Christ 2. If this be truth that you affirm then what is the reason that you with all your humane Learning do not yet understand the sense and meaning of the Scripture and that first in common and ordinary things as that the Covenant made with Abraham and Moses c. is not the same as the Gospel-Covenant when the Scripture saith plainly that it is not the same but another Covenant not such a Covenant as the first was but established upon better promises c. What is the reason that you do not understand that Command of Christ that it is Believers that are to be baptized and not Infants and that you understand not that when Christ saith That upon this Rock will I build my Church he means not Peter but the Rock of Peters confession viz. Christ Jesus who is so often in Scripture called The Rock or foundation stone of Sion but Pope-like think it s meant of Peter And are there not many Prophesies and much of the Revelation which is yet a sealed mysterie to you and John saith expresly Rev. 5. that the Scripture viz Christ the mysterie of God in Scripture is a sealed book that none could open it but the Lion of the Tribe of Judah Yet you say that a natural man can do it I leave it to the Reader to judge of the truth of this And 3. Whereas you say if the Spirits work be to teach men the sense of Scripture it is to make them Notionists I answer first then upon your own account your humane Learning doth but make you Notionists for you say that helps you to the knowledge of the sense of Scripture It s no wonder then that you are so far from the power of truth for you confess that with all your learning you are but Notionists at the best and truly you are but bad Notionists neither for there is much of the sense of Scripture that you are not acquainted withall You say Knowledge puffeth up Answ True fleshly knowledge such as you are pleading for but not the true saving knowledge of the Spirit of Christ for the Scripture saith expresly That without knowledge the heart cannot be good and for want of knowledge the people perish And that its life eternal to know God and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent and the more a soul knows of God and Christ of God in Christ the more he comes to abbor himself Isa 6. Act. 9. And whereas you are so much upon this That the Scripture expressions are plain and express their own meaning page 137. Else they cannot be a perfect rule and if men must understand them by or in the light or teaching of the Spirit what were this but to make the Scripture a nose of Wax as the Papists do plyable to any sense c. Answ 1. It s true the Scripture expressions are plain and express their own meaning yet not so plain as you pretend that every one may attain the sense of them for you confess that there is need of means and help to understand them Then I querie which is the likeliest means to help us to understand the meaning of the Scripture in comparing Scripture with Scripture the Spirit of Christ or humane Learning Who best knows the meaning of the Scripture that Spirit by which it was given or that humane spirit so much pleaded for that never did nor never shall know the Lord 2. The Scriptures are no perfect rule to ignorant and carnal men or hypocrites it s a perfect rule only to such who by them know the Lord and his mind by the teachings of the Spirit and so walk according to it for if it be a perfect rule then it s so to those who know it You say a naturall man may know it then a naturall man may have a perfect rule and if he walk according to it he must be saved for who so walks by a perfect rule and answers it in his walking must be justified by that rule Now the Scripture is no perfect rule of justification of life to any but the Saints not that there is imperfection in the Scripture but none comes truly to know it but those who are taught from above 3. To say that the knowledge of the mind of God in Scripture by the teachings of the Spirit is to make it a nose of Wax c. is a fond imagination For first though its true upon this account men that have not the Spirit of God may abuse it thinking they have the Spirit of Christ when they have it not Yet 2. The Spirit is truth and is at unity in and with it self and speaks but one thing I mean he doth not contradict himself though there are contradictions amongst the Saints yet it is not from the Spirit who dwels in unity but from the worldly spirit not yet subdued in them and I thought you had known at least the Scripture Zeph. 3. 9. that saith God will turn to his people a pure language that they may serve him with one consent it s not the work of fleshes wisdom but I will do it saith the Lord and how think you if not in helping them to know his mind c. And 2. Doth not your humane wisdom indeed make a nose of wax of the Scripture do you not wrest iâ— and turn it which way you please and is it not for want of the clear teachings of the Spirit there are such rentings and divisions amongst us at this day Is it not about the sense of the Scriptures all the differences in the world are at this day And do you seek to God to guide you into a oneness in the understanding of the meaning of it or to your humane Learning Oh be ashamed for ever so much to undervalue Scripture and overvalue mans wisdom as that its sufficient to find out the meaning of the Scriptures When you have joyned up all together yet notwithstanding all your Learning yea and the Spirits teaching too you have not yet attained to all the sense of the Scriptures if you had there would not be division but unity not that I question the sufficiency of the Spirits teaching in its own time but certainly you are very much to blame having gotten that which is able to teach you the sense and meaning of the Scripture with your own endeavour yet to know so little of it as you do you must needs be very sluggards or else able to resolve infallibly any place of Scripture you having that which is able as you say to help you to understand it and you think you have the Spirit of Christ besides these two being by you joyned up together in you