and errours the rest of them Inventions falslely charged by him 1. That Infant-Baptism came from the Pope and the Devil The truth of this assertion I refer the Reader to what I have said before and there you will see the Pope very probably that brought it in Higinus in the second Century 150 years after Christ 2. That Christ hath abolished the Law that is as to Believers as a dispensation in the hands of Moses see 2 Cor. 3. 11. 13. And the pure Gospel is the only Rule What son of Belial dare to deny this for the Law is brought forth in Gospel and as given forth by Christ is the pure Gospel Rule therefore though the substance of the old Command yet is called new because given forth upon the new and true account 1 Ioh. 2. 7. 8. 3. A Socinian his Tenet is that all gifted persons may preach without Ordination This is according to the truth of Scripture 1 Cor. 4. 31. 34. Where all that have gifts may prophesie none exempted except women 4. He is a Familist approving of dreams c. Answ That is false I do not approve them yet neither do I altogether deny but God may manifest himself in that way if he please not that it is my experience neither would I limit God Against Vniversities Arts Sciences not in themselves upon the humane account but as they are set up in the room of the Spirit of Christ so the wisdom of the world is foolishness with God 5. He is an Antiscripturist denying the truth of Scripture c. Answ Another most abominable falshood who will be the lyar anon Thomas Hall but you prove it learnedly 1. Because I approve of such who will not permit you to draw any consequences from Scripture because you have so much abused them with your consequences 2. Because minding some of your consequences I conclude that they are as true as Scripture if the people would but believe it You infer then that these consequences must be true or the Scripture is false I say and I supposed that you had had wit enough to understand that I spake in your language or in your sence that you account these consequences as true as Scripture if the people would believe you 3. He saith that in his general Epistle to the Saints chap. 10. p. 28. the Scripure is not sufficient to teach the knowledge of God I Query of any one who knows the Lord whether the Scripture without the Spirit of Christ doth or can teach any one true and saving knowledge and that some make too much of it that is such as Thomas Hall who think it able without the Spirit of Christ to teach the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ and if you could have told all you might have seen and said that I say there likewise that many make too little of it and that the substance of my Discourse there is to hold forth the truth and authority of the Scripture in the light of the Spirit that so souls by the teaching of the Spirit of Christ may come to a right understanding of them and that indeed its your selves that truly teach people to deny Scripture I own the truth of it and say that whoever denieth it must deny God Christ and all Religion and the truth is that your self it is that disowns it and reproacheth it too further then it stands with your own will 6. You say He is an Arian and Anti-Trinitarian denyes the Father Son and Holy Ghost are three distinct persons c. Answ I deny not the Trinity Father Son and Spirit but I deny any person in the Godhead at all that is a word or title given only to man and the Scripture you mention Heb. 1. 3. I am not altogether so ignorant of it as you would have me it is substance and not Person and this you know and abuse it not ignorantly but wilfully The same word Heb. 11. 1. is rendred substance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 faith is the substance of things hoped for not the Person that would be nonsense you must produce some Scripture where that Prosopon which signifieth Person is attributed to God or that Hypostasis is attributed to man before you can have any colour to call God three Persons or one either for he is a Spirit and will be worshipped in Spirit and Truth 7. He is an Anti-Sabbatarian he is all for a Spiritual Sabbath Answ Because I write of a spiritual Sabbath doth it therefore follow that I am an Anti-Sabbatarian have you ever seen any thing written by me against the Sabbath have you not cause to blush at your weakness or wickedness because I discover the spiritual Sabbath therfore you say I am against the Sabbath 8. An Independent as to man and creatures in the things of God but only on Jesus Christ and is this such a dangerous thing to be off from every thing save Jesus Christ 9. Arigid Separatist Answ Never too rigid in separating from Babylons false ways and worships which is no other then the Synagogue of Satan a Cage of every unclean and hatefull Bird I say it again for all your anger I must be faithfull I may not pittie or spare you for that will ruine you 10. A Perfectist see his Generall Epist to the Saints ch 15. p. 52. Answ No other then is the duty of every Saint to be that is pressing after perfection I there declare that perfection is not attainable in this life till the body of flesh is dissolved nor till the Resurrection neither I say no more of this but refer the Reader to the Epistle it self where you may see how the Hall hath stored up lyes to reproach the innocent 11. He is an enemy to all Learning he oft calls it the language of the beast c. Answ Keep it in its place and do as much good as you can with it but let it once get in the room of the Spirit then it puffs up with pride then it s but the language of the Beast of the fleshly man the smoak of the bottomless pit of mans wisdom and that which must be destroyed That the Spirit and Scriptures are sufficient for the Ministers calling c. At this you seem to rage extreamly as if this were such a dangerous Heresie that deserves no less then a stake a faggot and a fire could Tho Hall have his will let the Understanding judge I am sure I have heard one of your brethren more famous then ever your self in the eyes of the people assert this that the Scripture was sufficient for the Ministers calling c. who left out the Spirit of Christ but it seems your abilities depend upon your good old books Popish Fathers c. 12. He is against Magistrates Answ No such thing only my desire is that Magistrates should not rule where its alone Christs Prerogative I desire to give to Caesar that which is his and to God that which is his 13. Against Ministry Ans
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
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
Mat. 28. 19. you say Christ Commandeth his Disciples and in them all Ministers successively to the end of the world to go and baptize Nations you say Children are a part of the Nations therefore they are commanded to be baptized but there is as you afterwards confess a Discipling first Disciple Nations baptizing them and here is no command for Infant-baptism but for the baptism of Disciples you pretend to put off this with the dangerousness of building Arguments on the bare placing of words in Scripture you produce Repentance and Judas's sop Repentance sometimes placed before Faith yet we know it is a fruit of Faith I answer it is such a fruit of faith as is individual and upon a right understanding Repentance may as well be said to go before as to follow after for it is a change of the mind and I querie whether any man did ever believe or can believe before his mind is changed its true after believing the change is perfected more and more But this is it which I affirm That no man believes savingly without or before a change of the mind which produceth a change of the conversation As for the Sop neither Matthew nor Mark saith that Judas received it before the Sacrament Matthew saith chap. 26. 23. He that dippeth with me in the dish shall betray me but he doth not express when it was done before or after so Mark expresseth chap. 14. 20. That he that dippeth with him in the dish should betray him but he doth not tell whether it was before or after therefore what Luke saith is no contradiction but rather a clearer explanation And whereas you say you will upon the account of placing words easily prove Baptism to be before Preaching Mark 1. 4. John did baptize in the Wilderness and preach c. Here Baptism is set before Preaching say you c. but this is answered and explained by Matthew Chap. 3. 1 2. John the Baptist preached in the Wilderness of Judea saying Repent for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand and ver 5 6. they were baptized of him in Jordan And this is according to the Analogie of Scripture Preaching Discipling believing confessing of sins repenting before baptizing and produce if you can that ever baptizing was set before believing c. and not explained by another Scripture as that of Mark explained by Matthew and then take heed fear and tremble to change Scripture phrases at your pleasure for your own ends taking that first which is and must be last You may upon this very account turn out and contradict all the most precious truth of God in Scripture and this very thing strikes at it for the reason why Teaching Discipling and Faith is to precede baptism is evident that it is because its Christs appointment and there is a necessity that faith go before works for there is no work acceptable before or without faith but Thomas Hall will have works go before faith baptism before faith though Christ hath said the contrary and so make void the Law of Christ and the Faith of Jesus lay another foundation works before faith baptism before believing and so teach men to sin For what-soever is not of faith is sin And he that breaketh one of the least Commands and teacheth men so to do shall be called the least in the Kingdom of heaven Mat. 5. 19. What then shall become of those who break the great commands of Faith and Baptism that overturn the very foundation setting up works before and without Faith and that you may do it you chop and change the Scripture that so you may accomplish your own designs upon the account of Christ But all your Logical Arguments and humane distinctions will not cannot satisfie those whose eyes are enlightned to see out of obscurity and out of darkness So the truth stands firm as Christ himself that is first disciple then baptize and the practise of the Apostles answered this Command they never baptized any in the Nations but Disciples And this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Disciple all Nations holds forth the breaking down of that middle wall of partition and so the going forth of the Gospel to the Gentiles for so that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth Gentiles as well as Nations and it intends not all Nations viz. every one in the Nations but all that believed and became Disciples in the Nations Act. 10. 35. In every Nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousnes shall be accepted Now where is your command Sir for your practise so much pleaded for for you confess pa. 28. That this place speaks properly of the order prescribed for conversion of Heathens that were adult Then you have no command in this Scripture for your practise you are lost upon your own account You grant page 29. That all baptized ones must be taught but not all at the same time such as are capable of teaching are to be taught before baptizing but Infants of believers are to be baptized first and taught afterward But you have no Scripture for this it seems your word must stand for proof to those who will believe it you instance 2 Thess 3. 10. He that will not labour must not eat Infants cannot labour yet they must eat True but what is that to the thing in hand Do you think the Apostle intended that to give advantage to you to overturn the Commands of Christ there is a necessity for Infants to eat but none to be baptized unless there be a necessity to break the Law of Christ and a necessity to make them hypocrites c. You say There is a teaching after baptizing Mat. 28. 20. A teaching before and after and that baptizing is set in the middle implying that some must be taught before viz. Heathens some after viz. Infants of believers But you are much mistaken in the second but it implyeth that there is a teaching before for the working of faith and a teaching after for the building them up in the same faith for that end God hath appointed Prophets Pastors and Teachers in the Church and those Acts 2. 41. that were baptized ver 42. continued stedfast in the Apostles doctrine c. So that this is the teaching before and after baptism there intended You confess page 31. notwithstanding your bold assertion in your Argument That all your Command is but a consequential command and something equivalent to a command an implicite command a necessary consequence c. I advise you to take heed first how you lay down Arguments for the future in such positive terms to delude the simple yet confess at last it is but a necessary consequence 2. A little consider how necessary the consequence is it is such a consequence as first makes void the command of Christ 2. Makes null the Gospel of grace setting up works before and without faith 3. Makes all your worship vain In vain saith Christ do ye worship God teaching for doctrines the traditions of
children had the spirit in their infancy John Baptist had faith in the womb the Scripture saith it not its only Thomas Hall's words Jeremiah sanctified from the womb c. and what of all this its not one swallow makes a Summer because John and Jeremiah were sanctified that is set apart from the womb to their particular offices therefore all Infants are sanctified a goodly conclusion because Balaams Asse did speak therefore all Asses may speak a likely matter You say The Promise is that in the Gospel times the childe shall die an hundred year old c. Isa 65 20. that is say you They shall be blest with spiritual life and light from Christ as if they had lived an hundred years in the Church of God when that relates to a spiritual glory in the Church of Christ which is yet to come not of the Natural but of the Spiritual Seed when they shall be freed from the former weakness and temptation this Scripture Answers Rev. 21. 1 2 3. 2 Pet. 3. 13. And whereas you say though Infants cannot lay hold on Christ yet he can lay hold on them We question not Christs laying hold on them but we are not to baptize them till they lay hold on Christ Pag. 49. you say Infants have faith repentance regeneration and before you confess they are children of wrath alike the children of wrath as heathens are pag. 10. yet now faith repentance regeneration unheard of contradictions If your preaching brethren had written such palpable contradictions you would have concluded that it had been either for want of learning or through much forgetfulness but you mend the business well you think It is virtually and potentially by way of inclination c. They have the spirit and seed of faith c. The truth of this appears apparently in Infants when they are grown doth the seed of faith appear or the seed of corruption Come forth O all ye that have any experience of the grace of Iesus and work of faith with power speak you knowledge in this particular whether there be in Infants an inclination and the seed of faith or whether there be not rather an inclination to every thing that is evil and the power of corruption remaining in them Be ashamed and blush to utter such known untruths and unheard of contradictions Children of wrath yet the seed of faith inclinations to believe I say no more but leave this Argument likewise to the wise consideration of the Reader The eleventh Argument That way which doth confound the two Sacraments and take away the distinction which God hath put between them cannot be the way of God But the way of the Anabaptists doth confound the two Sacraments and takes away that distinction which God hath put between them Ergo T is not the way of God Answ There is no truth in your Minor for first where is the Scripture that saith baptism is only for Initiation and not for Confirmation it s a fancy of your own brain may not baptism be be initiation and confirmation too 2. If it be truth what you say that Baptism is only for initiation into the Church what is become of your Mr. Baxters grand Argument That they are members of the Church then not initiated in by baptism one of your Arguments must of necessity be false I say both of them as relating to Infants 3. It was the Apostles practice to baptize believers and give them the Supper too and did they confound the two Sacraments as you call them bear with me for I know no Scripture cals them so So that the way of the Anabaptists as you falsely reproachfully call them doth not confound the Ordinances but preserve them in their place to the right end according to the right rule and you it is confound Ordinances observing neither rule place nor end The twelfth Argument Such as were typically baptized under the Law may be really baptized under the Gospel Infants were typically baptized under the Law Ergo. You reason from the type to the truth In this take a view likewise of your own ignorance in not understanding the difference between type and antitype type and substance type and truth and shew me if you can any one type in all the Scripture that typed out another type you may as well say that the Jewish Sacrifices typed out the Gospel Supper c. But all types related to substances and Christ was the substance of all legal types this truth will be clear in the resolving of these questions 1. If Christ be the substance of all types whether or no the baptizing of the natural seed in the type do not represent unto us the baptizing of the spirituall seed into the substance 1 Cor. 12. 13. Gal. 3. 27. 2. Whether or no as all the natural feed were baptized into Moses and into the sea and cloud so all the spiritual seed should be baptized into the profession of faith of Jesus Mat. 28. 19. Act. 19. 3. Whether to make the substance no other then the type the Covenant of the Gospel no other then that of the Law the seed of the Gospel-Covenant the same as the Legal the administration of Gospel-ordinance on the same subjects as of the Legal notwithstanding Christ hath given cleer rules to the contrary be not to make null the Gospel and to deny Christ to be come in the flesh and so to be the Antichrist Gal. 5. 2. Mat. 28. 20. Act. 3. 22. 1 Joh. 4. 2. 3. In a word if you will make this type the ground of your baptizing Infants first then you do not hearken to Christ the substance but honour him in the type deny him in his person and spirit secondly you are to baptize them as they were in the type viz. in the cloud and in the sea What is that to your sprinkling of Infants Thirdly you may from hence if that be your warrant from whence you ground your practise baptize your Cattel too for all passed through the sea and indeed not to be a pattern to you that you might hence take occasion to sprinkle Infants so denying Christ but a type of Christ the Saviour and Deliverer of his people that as the natural seed were saved in the type so the spiritual were and are saved in the substance viz. in Christ All you say to this Argument being thus untruly grounded is but a non sequitur and so I leave it The thirteenth Argument From the priviledges that Christ purchased for Infants Those who are subjects of Christs kingdom have right to the priviledges of subjects But some Infants are subjects of Christs kingdom Ergo Some Infants have right to the priviledges of Subjects You say The seal of the Covenant is a choise priviledge I have often said and say again that Baptism is no seal of the Covenant but the Spirit To your second Argument I say there is no truth in your Major for there is not a word of Baptizing in the Text and
therefore no ground to receive them to Baptism though Christ received them and blessed them I shall answer the Scripture more at large by and by As to the third Those that Christ invites the Church may not refuse Where doth Christ invite Infants Those Infants are gone long since He saith Suffer the Infants not all Infants 2. The Church are to receive those Christ hath given rule and command to receive viz. Believers Christ may receive some Infants because he knows them The Church doth not know them therefore the Church may not receive them 4. You say They that are capable of the Kingdom and Blessing which is the greater are much more capable of Baptism which is the lesser But Infants are capable of the greater Ergo. Ans Some Infants by vertue of Election may be capable of the greater yet not capable of the lesser 1. Because not capable to understand the lesser 2. Because we are not capable to understand and know them 3. Because there is no command for it for that is it we are to walk by and that capacity in which we are to judge 5. You say If the Kingdom of heaven receive them the Church may not exclude them Ans The Kingdom of heaven of glory receives none but the elect of God the Church doth not know them therefore the Church cannot receive them c. Now to your Scripture Mar. 10. 14. Suffer the little Children and forbid them not Note he saith not suffer little children but suffer the little children not all little children but the little ones that is those that were then brought unto him You draw a Conclusion from hence to have all p. 3 4 5. It 's evident in that that he would have them to come to him that so he might take an occasion to discover a Gospel-mysterie viz. That of such is the Kingdom of Heaven that is so qualified spiritually as they were naturally meek humble teachable helpless c. This is cleer compared with v. 15. Verily I say unto you whosoever doth not receive the kingdom of heaven as a little child he shall not enter therein that is as I said before so qualified spiritually as little children are naturally Hence 1 Pet. 2. 2. As new born babes desire the sincere milk of the word c. that is not as new-born babes desire the sincere milk of the word but as new born babes desire the milk of the breast so do you desire the milk of the word Mat. 18. 2 3 4. cleers the whole Except a man be converted and become as a little child he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven So that the substance of the whole in every Scripture mentioned by you to this purpose directly presents us with the same truth viz. the humble child like qualifications of his servants and not to fill up the Church with Infants contrary to Christs command and the practise of all his servants which is to be our alone rule and president In a word the Scriptures produced for proof of your Arguments have not a word of baptism in them nor the least hint that way and for you to draw consequences from such grounds especially those consequences overturning precepts and presidents is very dangerous and unsafe and that which we are bound in duty and conscience to renounce Christ knew what he had to do and hath left us a rule for what we should do he that forsakes this rule and will not hear Christ is to be cut off from amongst his people Acts 3. 22 23. They that will draw conclusions into practise from what Christ did contradicting what he hath commanded will be found enemies not permitting Christ to reign over them and what the danger will be of such conclusions see Luke 19. 27. The summe of all is this that although Christ knows the Elect Infants and receives them yet we do not know them it 's Gods secret and we are to walk by revealed rules and are to receive none before the manifestation of faith Mar. 16. 16. Act. 8. 37. and it 's evident the Church did receive none but such Act. 2. 41 42. The Apostle in his Epistles writing to the Churches cals them Saints not Infants 1 Cor. 1 2. 2 Cor. 1. 1. 1 Cor. 14. 23. If the whole Church be come together into some place and all speak with tongues the unlearned will say ye are mad but if all prophesie c. Where note the whole Church meets together and they may being thus assembled all prophesie and were here Infants think you They might all prophesie none excepted that had the gift but women And 1 Cor. 12. 27. The Church is the body of Christ and members in particular and this body is made up of many members v. 28 29 30. and Infants are none of them Apostles Prophets Teachers gifts of healing helps in government miracles interpreters c. There is never a true member in the Church of Christ but hath some one or other of these gifts more or less here are no Infants see v. 13 14 15 16 17. The fourteenth Argument From Rom. 12. 26. you say but I say 11. 16. If the first-fruit be holy the lump is also holy and if the root be holy so are the branches The sum of all you say is That by the root and first fruit is meant Abraham Isaac and Jacob. p. 62. If it appear that there is no truth in this assertion then your Argument fals to the ground But there is no truth in this assertion Ergo. I shall make it appear 1. In the Covenant made with Abraham his posterity stood not by faith but outward observation Circumcision keeping the Law If thou be willing and obedient thou shalt eat the good of the Land if thou be disobedient thou shalt be destroyed with the sword Isa 1. 19 20. But when Christ the true root Isa 11. 10. Rom. 15. 12. Rev. 5. 5. 22. 6. and first-fruits 1 Cor. 15. 20 23. was come they not believing were broken off because not by faith graffed upon the true root For when Christ the true spiritual seed was come the natural seed and membership was broken off and only that of saith was graffed in That as the natural seed stood members upon the account of the first Covenant and promise made with Abraham so the spiritual seed viz. the seed of faith Christ being come and is the substance of that Covenant they are ingraffed into that root he being holy they are also holy according to the words of Christ Joh. 15. 1 2. 2. That this is the truth intended will more cleerly appear if you consider v. 18. Boast not against the branches i e. against the branches broken off for thou bearest not the root but the root thee Now Thomas Hall what root is it that bears the believing branches Natural parents or Christ the true root Is not he the foundation upon which they are built and the true root and stock into which they are
〈◊〉 to plunge over head and ears is another c. Answ It s one and the same for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to dip as your self confess pag. 113. though not only to dip you say the Primitive word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath four severall significations 1. To drownd plunge or overwhelm 2. To dye or dip 3. To moysten or make wet 4. To wash or cleanse Note 1. It doth not by your own confession signifie to sprinkle you have said enough to satisfie any that desireth satisfaction in this particular that your Practise of sprinkling is not according to the Scripture and in truth sprinkling is another word and another thing then Baptizing Rantizo is the Greek word for sprinkling and Baptizo from Bapto is the Greek word for Baptizing take it in which of these four you please neither of them is to sprinkle but in dipping either of all the four is fulfilled if dipped then wet then washed then drowned or plunged so that dipping is nothing short of Baptizing for the word signifieth it it s nothing beyond Baptism for it is but a plunging a wetting or washing of the whole man so that take in all the significations of that word Baptizo dipping answers them all but sprinkling answers neither and in deed and truth is not baptizing but another thing and that which Christ never commanded Sprinkling a little water in the face is not a dipping or plunging it is not a wetting or washing the whole man and in no case answers the command of Christ But for the clearing of this particular I shall give these four grounds to confirm dipping to be the true baptizing and not sprinkling 1. From the signification of the word as hath been already minded it is the conclusion of all the Masters of the Greek Tongue in the Greek Lexicons that the first and most native and proper signification of Baptizo is to dip or plunge into or under water and this your self confesse that 1. It signifieth to drown plunge overwhelm die or dip this Mr. Lee in his Critica Sacra on the word and Passor with divers others affirms whom I suppose you conclude were Masters of the Greek Tongue and this likewise Doctor Featly in his Dipper Dipt confesseth and this I finde that the word Baptizo is never rendred in the New-Testament to sprinkle nor Rantizo to Baptize therefore do no longer wrest the truth contrary to your own knowledge but be still and know that God is God 2. From the Practise of the Servants of the Lord in the Primitive times who best knew the minde of Christ 1. John who was the Messenger of Christ Mal. 3. 1. Baptized and he baptized in Jordan Mat. 3 6. And he baptized Christ himself in Jordan ver 16. with Mark 1. 9. and he came up out of the water What need Christ and John go down into the water if sprinkling would do the deed And the Text saith Mat. 3. 13. That Jesus cometh to John to be baptized that is upon Mr. Hales one account to be plunged dipped wet or washed not sprinkled and being dip'd he was both wet and washed And Joh. 3. 23. its said That John was baptizing not sprinkling in Enon neer Salim because there was much water there If sprinkling had been the thing required no need of much water To this you say 1. Water was scarce in those hot Countries that infers not a stripping naked and plunging of all that were Baptized but only the conveniency of baptizing a multitude c. Answ 1. Do you know or have you heard of any such hot Country where there could not be water had enough to sprinkle many thousands if need require 2. Was Canaan such a Country as that water was scarce in it being the promised fruitfull Land in the whole world a type of the Heavenly Canaan where were Wells digged Deut. 6. 11. Neh. 9. 25. and Rivers in abundance or else the Type holds not correspondence to the Antitype Ezek. 34. 13 Is 12. 3. Therefore for shame talk no more of a dry and hot Country it being a Land of Rivers and Wells digged c. So that if a little water would have done it as a little would have sprinkled thousands they needed not to have been baptized in Enon so the word is not at but in Enon and so these several places translated with water Mat. 3. 11. Mark 1. 8. Luk. 3. 6. Iohn 1. 26. Act. 1. 5. in the Greek it is rendred in every one of them in water although you seem to hold forth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes signifieth with yet the proper signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in and is so understood and rendred twenty times in the New Testament against once with that being the proper signification of the word and most sutable to the Practise of the Apostles and servants of the Lord. Compare the former Scriptures with Act 8. 38. and its clear they baptized in the water not because of the scarcity of water as you pretend but because there was much water without which that Ordinance of dipping could not be administred As for your Font-sprinkling there is not the least shadow of any ground for it in the Scripture and whereas you say not a stripping naked c. the Scripture mentions no such thing neither is it our Practise nor yours neither Do you use to strip naked when you sprinkle neither do we when we baptize c. 2. You say Suppose the Apostles did dip those whom they baptized yet 't will not follow therefore that we must do so too because t is only an example without a precept and so doth not binde us c. Answ 1. There was the precept both to them and us 2. they knew the will of him who gave the precept and walked according to it and we by their president know what the precept was and so it s a precept to us as well as them They lived in Judea in hot climates where was no danger of dipping c. Answ 1. And was there one way for them in Judea and another for us in England prove that by Scripture when you write next 2. Was their Country so much hotter then ours had they not Winter and Summer heat and cold frost and snow as we have Ioh. 10. 22. Psal 74. 17. Ier. 36. 22. Psal 148. 8. Therefore give off this for shame likewise Say no more their Country was hot and ours cold You say The danger of dipping in our cold Country is that many in our dayes have dyed If you intend the dipping of Believers you speak a horrid untruth I am confident that never one perished in that way But secondly if you minde dipping of Infants I know none are dipped 2. If any be no wonder if they perish being done out of Gods way having no warrant from him You confess Mr. Perkins approves of dipping in hot Countries and in men of years but denies the use of
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
they were asserted as will appear in its place I pass your Epistle and come first to your five serious Questions 1. Qu. Whether such an uncharitable censorious proud disdainfull inveterate calumniating spirit as works in this man and others of the same lump doth ever shew it self in Scripture Ans 1. If not then you have declared your self to be as far from the spirit of a Christian upon the same account as the Collier whom you so much reproach witness this very question propounded and almost every page in your book witnesseth it but I desire not to scrape them up together And secondly The truth of those titles mentioned by you pag. 6. I leave to the Reader to judge and if I am become your enemy for telling you the truth I am contented through mercy to pass under your censure Your 2. quest Vpon what ground think you should he and men of the same temper and spirit with him use such bitterness against the Ministery c. Ans 1. We never used such bitterness against the Ministery of the Nation as they have against us We never desired to get an Ordinance from both Houses of Parliament to have them burnt in the forehead with the letter B. to have them imprisoned without Bail or Main-prise c. Though this is no ground to retort bitterness again in way of revenge but rather to pitty them 2. It is not their persons but their destructive Principles against which I write the Lord who knoweth all things knoweth that I lye not I should rejoyce in their conversion and do not question but that there are many that are honest and godly of them yet in Babylon and their duty is to come forth and till then blame us not for our dealing faithfully though sometimes ruggedly with them And I would have you to know that it is not a power to persecute them we look for no I had a thousand times rather Thomas Halls desire were granted to him that I with my books were burnt together then to have a hand in the personal persecution of Tho. Hall your self or any other for any principle or practise you hold in Conscience though it be known to me that it is contrary to truth Your 3. Quest Whether this open enmity against the Ministery of England which these men proclaim to all the world inveighing against them as Antichristian be not a thing abhorred of all gracious hearts For proof of this you produce Mr. Tho. Goodwyn Mr. Philip Nye Mr. Sidrach Simpson Mr. Jeremiah Burroughs Mr. William Bridge Apol. Nar. p 6. Ans The honesty of these men I question not Yet first what they say proves not the truth of what you desire for it is not the testimony of men but of God in the Scripture that will justifie both Ministry and Church And if that would do it I could produce others of the same way I suppose none will deny but that they were equal with them for godliness and learning who say the contrary Ainsworth Smith Robinson You seem to propound a strange Querie pag. 14. Whither would these men transport and carry you Not only off from Presbytery but Independents c. Ans In the light and power of truth we would carry them to the Lord Jesus that so they might know and obey him and worship the Father in him in spirit and in truth and this is the utmost that we desire And truly this is that which is my principle and practise 1. That we are justified freely by grace And 2. that this Justification where it is in truth enjoyed works over souls to a holy and humble walking with the Lord and obedience to him in all things That it is the duty of Believers according to the command of Christ and practise of his servants in the Primitive times to be baptized and so come into Church fellowship walking as with the Lord so one with another in love performing all duties of brotherly love as becometh souls made one in so high and heavenly a calling And hither it is we would transport and carry every soul that knows the Lord and this is a journey that you who call your selves Ministers cannot endure to undertake nor suffer those that would Your 4. Question is Were such things heard of in former times among the old Puritans c. Ans They were not sensible of those delusions in that way which now appear and many of them are made sensible of it and are departed from it Gods people cannot but depart out of Babylon when once they see themselves there and hear the Lords voice saying Come out of her my people partake not of her sins lest you partake of her plagues Those that have seen themselves in Babels confusion in respect of worship being delivered cannot but discover and lay open to others the mysterie of that iniquity though all the men and Ministers of the world dislike it c. Your 5. Question Hath it not been an old trick of such as have designed the shaking of the Christian faith first to begin with the faithfull Ministers c A. Though it hath been the design of the enemies of truth so to do yet 1. That justifies not you to be the godly Ministers And 2. The servants of the Lord may not neglect their duty in reproving sin where they find it because enemies to truth oppose the Ministers of Christ And 3. We give grounds from Scripture for what we say and do Justifie your selves to be the Ministers of Christ by your works according to Scripture and we have done till then forbear giving such language as you do to the servants of the Lord for their impartial publishing and professing of truth You 'll one day be ashamed of it So you say you come to his Errors which are many His first Error That the life of Ministers and Schollers educated in Schools of Learning is an idle life Ans 1. There are no such words in my book neither is there any truth in what you say but that which I say is that God hath always in all ages made use of men of Callings to be the Ministers of his mind unto the people and I desired you to produce any example in the Scripture that God made choice of any to be the Ministers of his mind unto the people who were bred up idly all dayes of their life without a Calling I do not say that the life of the Ministers of Christ is an idle life no I know the contrary but that which I say is that you can produce no example of any that were bred up idly without a Calling called to be Ministers yet you will have Idlers and none but them by your wils and God must have them or else he must have none at all You say o confirm this he sayes A Calling is that in and by which men in the sweat of their face get their living You answer O brave definition of a Calling c. Ans I wonder you
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
men Mat. 1. 5. 9. And thus you make the Commandments of God of none effect by your traditions ver 6. I say if this be permitted to draw consequences from Scripture to overturn commands it is the most dangerous way that ever was invented to usher in Heresie and Errour and upon that account its easie to turn out almost all the truth of God in Scripture and set it at variance against it self we grant consequences rightly grounded but we deny consequences to overturn Commands and Gospel and all As for all that you say from pag. 31. to 34. it is nothing but a reiteration of what hath been said before either in this or your former Arguments And notwithstanding you are pleased to say pag. 33. That Infant-Baptism is clear enough to those who have eyes to see or hearts to believe it To see and believe what you say and take your word for all for there is neither Scripture nor Reason for it Page 34. You say Since the Anabaptists call and cry so much for a literal Command By the way Sir Are you such an enemy to literal Commands will you make void literal commands to set up your own inventions or do you envy against them because they overturn your practises You say They may do well to give you Commands for many of their practises As first what express command they have to deny the Moral Law to be a rule of life Answ They deny not the Moral Law to be a rule of life to believers in its essence but they deny it to be a rule of life as an administration in the hands of Moses But Christ having taken it into his own hands and fulfilled the righteousness of it he gives it anew unto them and it ceaseth to be any more the Law of Moses but is the Law of Christ this is cleared abundantly 1 Joh. 2. 7 8. First It is no new Commandment but the old Yet secondly It is a new Commandment which is true in him and in us because the darkness is past and the true light now shineth So that notwithstanding it is the substance of the old yet it is new because in Christ and from him to us and in us If this will not satisfie see 1 Cor. 3. 11. compared with 1 John 2. 7 8. 2. You Querie What express command against the coercive power of the Magistrate I suppose you mean in the things of Jesus Christ 1. I suppose if Magistrates command any thing contrary to the mind of Christ we are not to obey they have nothing to do to make use of their coercive power there if they do they sin and all men are commanded not to sin That it is a sin is clear That which contradicts the command of God is sin Which shall we obey God or man judge ye Acts 4 19. There was the command of God and the command of man in opposition each to other and there the command of man was sinfull 2. Jesus Christ is King of his Church Rev. 15. 3. and it s his work to make use of a coercive power to bring in souls to his Kingdom Psal 110. 4 In the day of his power his people shall be a willing people and unless you can produce any Scripture in which Christ hath resigned his power to the Magistrate I suppose he is still King of his Church and those who make use of a coercive power in his Kingdom are at best but Usurpers 3. Christ hath entrusted and impowered none but his Ministers with that work of gathering souls into his Kingdom and this they are to do in his power in his authority and in his way And those who pretend themselves to be the Ministers of Christ yet want the coercive power of the Magistrate declare themselves to be none of his not serving the Lord Jesus but their own bellies c. 4. There is the substance of an express command Rom 14. 4. Who art thou that judgest another mans servant to his own master he standeth or falleth c. And Jam. 4. 12. There is one Law giver who is able to save and to destroy who art thou that judgest another It s clear that none have power to judge and determine coercively but he that hath a power to save and destroy And the Reason is drawn from ver 11. that none hath power to judge of the Law and give sentence but he that is above the Law and if any will go about to judge others by a coercive power they are not doers of the Law but Judges This is meant only in Cases of Conscience relating to Jesus Christ not but that Magistrates may and ought to take cognizance of Civil things and sinfull actions flowing from the corruptions of men but matters Spiritual and Divine tending to Worship there it s the prerogative of God alone to judge 3. You querie What command we have to separate from the Churches which hold the foundation pure I answer None at all that I know neither do we separate from any such Churches but from Babylon and Egypt which hath been and is a cage of every unclean and hatefull birds not true or pure either in its Constitutions Members Ministery or Ordinances and we have a Command for what we do See and well consider 2 Tim. 3. from the first ver to the fift and Rev. 18 4. 4. You querie What command we have for Rebaptizing Ans I know no such thing as rebaptizing there is a command for baptizing believers and that which you call baptizing viz. sprinkling the faces of your Infants we take no knowledge of it you rantize them and say you baptize them so speak an untruth So that the just judgment of God is upon you that having changed the Subject from a Believer to an Infant you must change the very Ordinance it self from baptizing to rantizing from dipping to sprinkling So that you are wholly besides and have not the least ground to say we rebaptize for we baptize those you have rantized before it may be Thus have I endeavoured to giue you a brief account of things you desired and so I pass to your Sixth Argument p. 35. From Act. 2. 38 39. your Argument is To whomsoever the promise of grace belongs to them Baptism belongs But the promise of grace belongs to believers and their children Ergo Baptism belongs to them both This is but the same you have said before your Arguments being six in number are but two in substance Yet I shall see what you say to the business for your Minor is denied yet you are pleased to say p. 36. in confirmation of your Minor That the Minor flows from the Text the Parents believing and repenting he expresly commands them to be baptized both believers and their children Oh unheard of falshood is there ever such a word in the Text as and their Children He saith Repent and be baptized every one of you that is every one of you that are pricked in your hearts You
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
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
Not against the Ministry of Christ but of the World and of Antichrist 14. He reproacheth the Army making them all Independents and Anabaptists Ans It s a great untruth to say I make them all so that I say is that those whom you falsely call Anabaptists and Independents are the Instruments by which God hath given a being to you and the Nation I deny not what was done by any at first but I know not how it would have been at last if God had not raised up the Spirits of some to stand in the gap and your selves had like to have been the great Instruments for self-ends to have drawn on ruine had not the Lord prevenced 15. He dishonoureth and abuseth the present Power by Dedication of an absurd Heretical Blasphemous non-Licensed Pamphlet called a Discourse at Axbridge Answ I do affirm that none dare give such vile titles to such apparent truths but those whose eyes are blinded and whose hearts are hardned filled with all enmity against the truth of Jesus Christ I refer those who desire further satisfaction to the discourse it self And truly we had need appeal to the Authority of the Nation for a civill preservation it being our Birthright there being so many of your generation men of blood that will say nay swear blasphemy Heresie any thing that so you might be rid of us Finally I say no more to all your perverse and raging accusations but the Lord rebuke thee Some few Queries presented 1. Query Whether or no in all that Tho. Hall hath said he hath in any case answered the Pulpit-Guard-Routed or relieved his own Guard 2. Qu. Whether or no all that Tho. Hall hath said in his Font-Guard doth amount to so much as either a Precept or President for his Practise 3. Whether or no if not his Practise in sprinkling Infants be not Will-Worship 4. Whether the upholding of an outward Covenant and a natural Seed in that Covenant be not to deny Christ to be come in the flesh 5. Whether or no there be any Seed in the days of the Gospel accounted for the Seed but the Spiritual all the Promises made to Abraham being dissolved into Christ coming forth from him to the Spiritual Seed none being accounted the children of Abraham but those that do the works of Abraham 6. Whether or no Tho. Hall tells true or false when he saith he will prove Tho. Collier of above a thousand lyes and can name but fifteen upon his own account 7. Whether or no in those fifteen he mentions being rightly considered as before Tho. Hall be the lyar or Tho. Collier 8. Whether Tho. Hall have spoken true or false in these things following 1. In asserting that none ought to preach the Gospel but men in Office 2. In saying there is both precept and president for Baptizing Infants when he can produce neither 3. In saying that the Covenant of the Law is the same as the Covenant in the Gospel when the Scripture saith the contrary Isa 31. 31. Heb. 8. 4. In saying that baptizing Infants is a tradition from the Apostles when he cannot prove the Apostles baptized any 5. In saying that sprinkling is baptizing when they are two things 6. Whether the bringing in of all the People into an outward Covenant and form of Godliness without the power be not the way of delusion and confusion 7. Then whether the Leaders of the People do not cause them to erre A Word of REPLY to Iohn Ferriby in an Appendix to The Lawfull Preacher called The Pulpit-Guard-Relieved SIR You call your Appendix The Pulpit-Guard Relieved But whether it be A Relief in good earnest I leave to the Reader to judge If chiding railing and reproaching be A Relief then you have Relieved it else not And notwithstanding your great swelling words you 'l find there is so much in that Pulpit-Rout that neither you nor all your Gang will ever be able to extinguish it Rage you may but ruin it you cannot You say Page 2. That he is so bitter in his Expressions against the Gentleman so loud in railing against the Coat that he deserves no Answer But you are mistaken Sir they are not railings but true discoveries of Wolves in Sheeps cloathing But you say You forbear lest in this the Proverb should be verified Like to like quoth the Devil to the Collier And who is worst think you the Devil or the Collier By your own confession you are the Devil I the Collier The Devil it is it seems speaks to the Collier and surely if the Collier did the Devils work he would never reprove him for it But if the Collier do the work of Christ the Devil will fall upon him You say You will not meddle with the Looking-glass nor will you examine the Tryal and Verdict nor take notice of the strength of his Arguments I wonder what then you will do here 's like to be a goodly Relief anon A Pulpit Relief yet take no notice of the force of the Truth that lieth against it It 's just like to a company of men that will pretend they relieve a besieged Garison yet take no notice of the Besiegers or will stand at a distance and give great words and so go away boasting that the Work is done and the mean time the Besieged perish Thus have you dealt with your Pulpit-Guard And truly had not I had other occasions to write I had never troubled my head or pen to have given you a word of Answer And in this I shall give you but a word or two Thus having shifted your self from the substance of what is said in The Pulpit Guard-Rout you pretend to give a Glympse of his skill in the interpretation of Scripture The First is that of the Priests of the Law and the Ministers of the Gospel The Priesthood under the Law typed out Christ and he is the alone Priest by office I deny not Ministers by office under the Gospel but that Ministry that is of Christ never forbiddeth the preaching of the Brethren who have received the Gift though they never meddle with the office but rather encourageth to it 1. Pet 4. 10 11. And it is a truth that Corah's guilt was in doing that which was forbidden but the Saints are Commanded to and Commended for preaching Commanded to it Rom. 12. 3 6. 1 Cor. 14 31. 1 Pet. 4. 10. Commended for it 1 Cor. 11. 2. One Ordinance or Tradition and that not the least too was that they might nay that they ought to bring their gifts to the Church for the good of the whole There are diversities of gifts in the Church and all for the good of the whole 1 Cor. 12. And this Monopolizing spirit that hath so long reigned in those who call themselves Ministers hath been the cause of so much blindness in the World as hath been almost to this day And as for the Calling of the Worldly Ministry I leave the Reader to what is wrtten in The Pulpit-Guard Routed
had not fallen foul with the Scripture and have blamed him that commanded it but you are so wise and honest as to leave out the Scriptures that I grounded my definition upon Gen 3. 19. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the dust Query Doth the Lord here intend that some men must eat bread in the sweat of their faces and others must live idle The other Scripture is Eph. 4. 28. But you Answer 1. Is every thing a man doth get a living by a lawfull calling then he that sweats by robbing and stealing lives by a lawfull calling c. Answ It seems you have a minde to quarrell against the Truth because the word lawfull is not put in you will conclude Robbery is lawful do not you discover ignorance or wilfulness quarrelling against the very plain words of the Scripture which saith In the sweat of thy face thou shalt eat thy bread c. he doth not say in the lawfull sweat of thy face but that is implyed in the words so when I say in the sweat of mens face they should get their bread it s intended lawfully not by robbing and stealing and truly you manifest your self to be no friend to Truth in drawing such a conclusion from such clear and undeniable premises I am confident never a Robber in this Nation durst to have drawn such a conclusion from such undoubted truth and Scripture 2. You say Is there no lawfull Calling but that whereby a man gets his living in the sweat of his face what will you say then of Magistrates Justices of the Peace c. Answ They are not bred up Justices of the Peace but are or should be bred up in some Calling I am sure the Scripture allows of idleness in none though there may be a difference in labour yet I suppose that less then this should not be in the breeding of the greatest mens children in the Nation to be able to do things of Husbandry that so they may be able to manage their estates the better and know themselves when their business is well done And so they may be the better fitted for their Calling as Magistrates Justices of the Peace c. You say Will he call the Parliament Idlers c. Alas man he knows the Parliament is a particular Calling while it continues the Members of it being called and sent up by the Country and they being faithfull in it serve the Country As for Physitians I question not their Calling that relates unto the body but there is a difference between a Physitian of the body and of the Soul the one is natural therefore needs time of study to finde out the natural Causes and Remedies and I question not the lawfulness of breeding to School till men are fit for those Callings to which they are appointed but the Calling of the Minister is not a natural Calling but a Spiritual and only God fits and enables to it therefore for men to live out of a Calling to fit themselves for the Ministry is a very corrupt and dangerous thing for in conclusion they must be Ministers right or wrong they were bred up unto it they expect a maintenance from it c. Whereas the Ministers of Christ have ever been chosen upon another account viz. God gives gifts and the Church chooses and they are called from one Calling to another yet may lawfully live in the use of both Then you say Taylors Button-makers Seamsters c. because they do not sweat at it especially in the Winter are not lawfull Callings Alas man blindness with a witness if you quarrell so much with the word sweat why do you not quarrell against him who first commanded it But do you not know first that there is no Calling but that sometimes those implyed in it may nay do sweat 2. That the word sweat primarily relates to a mans diligence in his Calling being imployed about something that may administer to his necessity according to the Scripture so not living idly 3. You say Is it so that none live in a lawfull Calling but he that works with his hands what think you of Paul 1 Cor. 9. 6. have not we power to forbear working c. Answ 1. I did not nor do not affirm that those who are the Ministers of Christ lawfully called c. may not forbear working but that they ought not to be bred up idle till they are called and that God always maketh choice of men of particular Callings 2. That Paul might forbear work not that he must do it for he did work His hands ministred to his necessities for the Gospels sake I wonder when we shall finde any of you Ministers of the Nation in that temper 4. You say Is there no laboriousness and pains taking in the imployment of the Ministry c. Answ I know there is and notwithstanding you say that it appears by his book he is not acquainted with the labour of the minde in getting down to the bottom of things Sir I have through grace gone so to the bottom of things as hath and will root up all your Religion root and branch Ministry Church Ordinances and all therefore forbear complaining of the want of going to the bottom of things and I doubt not but that I shall go to the bottom of your Book too before I have ended But you say he adds Breeding to School is proper to children when they cannot labour to fit them for some Calling You pretend That Infants are able to labour almost assoon as they are able to go to School c. Answ 1. If you were not ignorant at best or envious you might understand that Infants are not able to labour in their Callings assoon as able to go to School and I dare affirm that there is time enough for children to get Learning to fit them for any Calling in this Nation before they have ability of body to perform it I do not judge children sufficiently capable in body for a Calling untill 14. years of Age and here is time enough for children to get Learning as for Universities we read of none in Scripture and Simson in his History of the Church saith that Clemens Alexandrinus and Pantenus were the Authors of Universities and Colledges p. 259. 2. I say That children may be fit for some Callings before they be for others and according as the Calling is unto which they are intended may their Parents give the time of breeding them some more and some less untill fit and able to manage that Calling unto which they are appointed yet all this makes nothing at all for the breeding up of Ministers unless you will make a Trade of it which I perceive is the great Work you are about When men are thus bred up and fitted for and imployed in some lawfull Calling if God now manifest his Son to and in such a one inabling him to the Work of the Lord in his own heart and in
are willing to make a Trade of Preaching that so you may uphold your honour and profit and that distinction between Gift and Office is as clear as the Sun and you say nothing in answer unto it from the Scripture but in way of comparison with the Magistrate which will not hold for men have preached and it was their duty without the Office only by Gift as in the former Scriptures but men may not be Magistrates unless called to office and the disproportion between things Spiritual and things natural is that in which natural men are lost and the wisdom of man cannot reach it But you seem with Tho. Hall to make much ado about private Preaching and to confirm it you produce two Arguments 1. If we finde in Scripture that all Christians may preach taking preaching in a large sence for private duties we owe one to another c. But you prove by Scripture that all Christians may Preach take Preaching in a large sence c. How now Richard Sanders why you are proving more then ever I asserted Where will you be anon they may Preach and they may not for that which I asserted was that gifted brethren might Preach you say all Query 1. Whether these Scriptures produced by you do at all speak of Preaching 1 Thes 4. 18. comfort one another with these words Heb. 3. 13. But exhort one another daily while it is called to day Qu. 2. If it do infer Preaching why not publick in the Church If they were to exhort one another why not in the Church What word is there that hinders that it was not in the Church and so publick So likewise in the rest of the Scriptures so that by all that is said here is no room for private Preaching unless particular exhortation so men in office may preach as well as men out of office So that because there is a private watching in the Church of Christ and a private admonition exhortation c. you will therefore call it private Preaching and if you make that Preaching then you think to limit all the gifts in the Church there so contradicting all the Scriptures before mentioned and its true all are not teachers in way of Office yet all that have gifts may nay ought to make use of them for the good of the body and the glory of Christ The second Argument is taken from women If it be lawfull for women to preach privately c. But women may preach privately c. Answ Here you lie pittifully in the dust let the Reader peruse the Scripture produced by you for proof of your assertion that women may Preach 2 Tim. 1. 5. and 2 Tim. 3. 15. See if there be ever a word of Preaching in that place or any thing that hath a tendency to it Surely you think people are so ignorant that the very mentioning of Scripture will satisfie them although it be nothing to the purpose the other Scripture Act. 18. 26. The text saith it was Aquila and Priscilla his wife The word is expounded the way of the Lord c. But how will you prove that it was Priscilla that expounded Why not Aquila if it must be preaching as well as Priscilla But what should I rake after such nonsence and confusion I do not in the least question the womens Duty in their station as well as all the brethrens which is to watch to reprove to restore to exhort c. yet this prevents not the brethrens Duty who have received Gifts from the Lord to make use of them publickly for the good of the whole and they justly forfeit them if they neglect and they may be taken from them and given to those who will better improve them and I am confident that the gifts of Christ in the Saints will confound and bring to nothing the Worldly Ministry and that so much the rather too because they so much envy and oppose the Truth and way of God in this particular You observe 3ly That I take no notice of the thing in hand when the question is stated Whether any may Preach in a constituted Church not called to Office the Scriptures my answers are grounded upon speak only of Preaching to Infidels c. Ans If you were not wilfull or blinde you might see that I prove Preaching both in and out of a constituted Church too the Scriptures I produced for Preaching in a constituted Church are Rom. 12. 3. 6. 1 Cor. 14. 31. and that it intends the Brethren without exception see ver 1. where he speaks to the Church Desire spiritual gifts but rather that ye may prophesie and none are excepted but women ver 34. 1 Pet. 1. 10 11. and as for that you make so much ado about the extraordinariness of the case of the Preaching of the scattered brethren to Infidels I have answered it in the former Treatise yet something shall I say here 1. An unlawfull thing is not made lawful by the extraordinariness of the case unless in case of saving life so the Lord will have mercy and not sacrifice as in the Scripture mentioned by you provided it be not in the profession of Christ then he that to save his life will deny Christ before men he will deny him before his Father which is in heaven so that necessity makes not an unlawfull thing lawfull If Vzzah touch the Ark he must die 2 Sam. 6. 6 7. But 2. What necessity was there in it that Paul or the scattered Brethren or Apollo should preach if it were unlawfull there was no necessity unless such as Paul minds A necessity is upon me and wo is me if I preach not the Gospel 1 Cor. 9. 16. And if this necessity was upon them I think it was lawfull and upon the same account is it lawfull for any of the Saints that have received the Gift to Preach therefore for shame forbear to tell of the extraordinariness of the Case any more if the thing in it self was lawfull and do not abuse the Scripture for the upholding of your own ends and interests and do no more charge folly upon the Servants of the Lord for their fulfilling of the will of Christ And whereas you pretend That one Scripture witnessing that God hath appointed and fixed some in office for the work of the Ministry is of more strength to condemn the liberty of preaching pleaded for then twenty Examples of gifted mens preaching Let the Reader judge of the truth of this or whether both these held forth in Scripture do not clearly speak thus much to it that both are to have being together not one to put out the other and that Office that thinks to silence Gift is no Office of Jesus Christ but that which seeks it self and its reward will be accordingly But I might conclude more sure then you that there being a fixed Scripture that Commands Baptizing of Believers is of strength enough to condemn a thousand consequences for sprinkling of Infants having not so much
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
of God but from their receiving their prophesie immediatly from God discovering things to come Whereas you say They were not called Prophets in the old Testament from the matter of their prophesie but for the manner of receiving it 1. I answer it was from both matter and manner too 2. If what you say be truth see a clear difference those 1 Cor. 14. are called Prophets not so much from the manner as the matter He that prophesieth speaketh to edification exhortation and consolation as if he should say if you would know a Prophet it is such a one as speaks to edification c. and whosoever speaks not to edification c. is no Prophet for the Apostle doth not only direct them in the manner of prophesie but in the matter too it s a word to edification and truly you either miserably contradict your selves or else do of purpose to keep souls in the dark for Thomas Hall whom you pretend to vindicate applyeth that Scripture 1 Cor. 14. 32. The spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets viz. to the probation and examination of the Presbyterie and he hath no other Scripture to prove the Presbyterian examination and probation but that yet afterwards both with him and you that prophesie is extraordinary and yet you confess that Presbyterie was an ordinary office what contradictions are these and what will you not say for your own ends You seem much to harp upon one thing and that of little consequence to the thing in hand That the extraordinary way of Revelation did denominate their sayings to be prophesies and not their foretelling things to come I say that not only that but the matter of the prophesie as well as the manner as a blind man might see or understand for if any prophesie and the matter of the prophesie proved not true he was no true Prophet therefore that the people might know a true Prophet under the Law they were to look at the matter of the prophesie not the manner of receiving it Isa 23. 26. How long shall this be in the heart of the Prophets to prophesie lies ver 28. The Prophet that hath a dream let him tell a dream and he that hath my word let him speak my word faithfully c. So that it was the faithful and true speaking of the word from whence they had the denomination of Prophet and this in substance you confess page 101. contradicting what you say p. 100. It was the extraordinary way of Revelation here it s the manifestation of their prophesie because they manifested to others by divine inspiration things past present and to come So that now you confess its the manifestation by revelation of truth that made them Prophets not the ordinary way of speaking to edification c. mentioned 1 Cor. 14. 3. As to all you say to Rev. 19 10. page 103. I may truly retort your own words I am afraid the devil hath taught you to play the Sophister for when the Text saith The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophesie you say immediatly and extraordinarily inspired Doth the Text say so or is it your own invention I leave to the Reader to judge And as for your distinction from Chap. 1. ver 2. The word of God and the Testimony of Jesus it s one and the same in substance or at most the Testimony of Jesus is but an explanation of the word of God He was banished for the word of God even for the Testimony of Jesus so the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must of necessity sometimes be understood As Col. 2. 2. the Apostle manifesting his earnest desire for the Saints that they might come to the Knowledge of God and of the Father c. which must be rendred even of the Father a word rather to explain the former then distinguish c. So that John doth not so distinguish as if he had been more excellent then the rest of the Apostles in the testimony of Jesus c. but for that it was he was banished and the truth is that the Testimony of Jesus though not so eminent as the Apostles yet if by the same spirit according to the rule of truth and according to the measure received it is the spirit of prophesie As for what you say to that Scripture 1 Cor. 14. 37. Every spiritual man is a Prophet All the Saints are spiritual Therefore all Prophets What you with so much contempt say to this doth but discover of what spirit you are and you might know that when I say the Saints are not all Prophets page 21. I intended that they had not all the same gift of prophesie to speak to the edifying of the Church and upon that account they are not all Prophets Yet secondly they are all Prophets upon a common account and are able to speak something of God and Christ as occasion is offered this God promised and hath made good that he would pour out of his Spirit upon all flesh c. So that the truth holds clear That every spiritual man is a Prophet and that according to the measure of the gift so he may and ought to speak though all are not Prophets viz. able to speak in the Church to edification exhortation and consolation yet all are Prophets and may speak occasionally to edification though not in the Church Some of the grounds you pretend to answer As that these Prophets were such as needed direction from the Apostles c. therefore not extraordinary You pretend to answer this first Because there were extraordinary tongues and the Apostle directs them and why not direct extraordinary Prophets too Answ 1. If by ordinary and extraordinary you mean the one common to all the other more then ordinary so not common to all that I alwayes have granted and shall as in the case of prophesying So of tongues All have the Spirit of Christ that is ordinary to all If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his Rom. 8. 9. yet all have not the gift of prophesie to speak in the Church as before So in those tongues there was that speech of the things of God that was ordinary to all and that of tongues which was proper to but some as Prophesie yet not so extraordinary as to be either 1. infallible therefore needed direction or 2. passing for the Apostle spake with tongues more then they all And secondly that this of tongues was not such an extraordinary business as you pretend is clear and that first from the Apostles disswading them from it as you may see at large in the Chapter and that from the unprofitableness of it both to the Church and to the world too ver 2 3. and 23 24. 2. He saith ver 5. Greater is he that prophesieth then he that speaketh with tongues and the reason is rendred because he that prophesieth edifieth the Church c. You say there is yet one reason more page 87. Praying
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