was because I knew it would be likely to stirre up passion and settle prejudice in the people in which I find by that he hath printed chap. 1. 2. especially in the very beginning I was not mistaken and I hoped to bring the dispute to writing which is the best way to clear truth and I suspected as I had cause Mr. Borastons and the then Magistrates and those reputed godly persons devices and motions which were then by many conceived to be contrived for the Parsons endes the continuing his power and profits by keeping up that rite which ingratiates the profane and formal persons to him Whereunto that Mr. B. hath been subservient is the grief of many and might well befit Mr. B. to repent of When I saw I could not get Mr. Bs. arguments in writing I got what notes I could of the dispute from others writing or my own memory and knowing that vauntes were given out of Mr. Bs. victory I did as well as I could summe up his arguments and answer them Jan. 20. and after went to him upon his motion Jan. 25. to confer with him which was friendly on both sides yet that which I hoped and I conceived he promised that though he would not send me his arguments in writing which I again moved yet he would transcribe them for such as should come to him to be resolved in that point after sundry puttings off was not obtained But instead thereof in March the weeke afore I removed from Bewdley I met with the passage in his Epistle Dedicatory to the people of Kederminster to which I after opposed my Valedictory Oration in Bewdley chappel March 17. 1649. and printed the same in effect in my Antidote in May following Now Mr. B. alleadgeth he had reason for his not sending his arguments to me to keep me from erring they being not desired for my self but my people I remained very confident of my self that when I sent to him I heap'd so many untruths about matters of fact I knew that he durst not answer me lest the very naming my untruths might cause me to say he reproached or railed that his conference was with me in private because he thought my pride of spirit would not permit me to confesse truth openly that he wrote the passage in his Epistle to Kederminster out of zeale for God compassion to mens souls my opinion and preaching being like to do more hurt against the Church of God then drunkards and whoremongers and therefore he had cause to be bitter in his writing To all which speeches I reply He had reason to conceive I desired satisfaction for my self by my desiring his Animadversions and by my letter to him Sept. 10. If not yet to have given them in writing which he had as he saies before at Coventrey preached and were ready by him had been a neighbourly part to men that were his frequent hearers But his prejudice against my opinion and uncharitable conceit of my pride as heretofore Mr. M. and Mr. Ley interpreted my most equal motion in humility of spirit in the end of my Examen to be the challenge of a braving Goliath so now any opposing what 's determined by Synods and leading writers must be condemned as comming from pride are a sufficient reason not to gratify me but to do what he can against me and this must be counted zeale for God and his insolent bitternesse justifiable as being in pretence against a pernicious sin not yet proved but indeed against a truth discovering an error whereby the prime ordinance of Christianity is miserably corrupted He speaks of a fearful passion a feaver of passion I was in when I first read the passage in his Epistle against Anabaptists such as he would not be infor all my revenues if I had not a free vent for my spleen in pulpit and presse he doubts it might have spoiled me 'T is true when I first read it unexpectedly in Mr. Ds. house I was stirred in my spirit out of the sense of the wrong done to me and the truth by it and not meeting with the book before I wrote out the passage but that by word or carriage I shewed such passion as he speaks of I am certain is his tale-tellers addition whose conscience may perhaps one day tell him of his ill Offices in opposing truth and nourishing differences between me and Mr. B. Mr. B. hath a jerke at my Revenues by which he would have the world believe it is very great and such as were desirable for himself whereas his outward estate considering his being an unplundered or not much plundered single young man heir of a good estate in Land besides his sequestration is more likely to suffice his uses then my estate my uses though I blesse God it is better with me through the favour of some eminent persons sensible of my hard usuage then it would have been if the party opposite to me had prevailed and I could reasonably hope when for no other cause but the publishing of my Examen my remove from the Temple in Londen with my wife and children above a hundred miles in the middest of winter was necessitated Not content with this jerke about my revenewes page 202. He tells me in print of being Parson of Rosse Vicar of Lemster Preacher of Bewdley Master of the Hospital of Ledbury besides meanes of my own and yet complaining of want I and my family might be put to in my bookes and he addes You made so light of having no lesse then four market-townes to lie on your shoulders as if it were nothing and then sath Pious sober men think it his duty to say what he did To which I reply Mr. M. is taken for a pious sober man yet in his Defence of his sermon page 3. he accused me most deeply of a Socianian plot of questioning all conclusions inferr'd by consequence from scripture the injury of which I shewed in my Apology sect 11. yea his own words in his Defence pag. 205. You neither there nor here deny this argument from a consequence to be sufficient for practice of some things in the worship of God which are not expressely laid down in the N. T. refute this calumny yet to this day I never found that he did any thing to right me The like may I say of Mr. Robert Baillee of Glasgow in Scotland notwithstanding his false criminations before mentioned and my writing to him about them How Mr. Geree used me is shewed in my Apology sect 6. yet his Vindiciae vindiciarum was presently after published without any shew of remorse of conscience for what he did And now Mr. B. tells me pious and sober men advise him to say that which as he puts it down is false and exceeding injurious to me to wit that I had foure market-townes on my shoulders which every one will interpret to be 4. beneficial places under my charge together besides meanes of my own and yet complain in my bookes of
favour to be visible Churchmembers should by sweet experience be convinced of their errour and be taught better how to understand that all our children are holy Page 518. He calls the disputes about baptism perverse and fierce which did so directly touch the controversy as might irritate me to fall on it at Bewdley and make those that told me think he did gird at me which he denies pag. 166. He mentions a speech of mine to Mr. D. whom he terms a godly man that truth is not to be suspended for peace and saith When the times changed which his words page 220. interpret to be meant When the ordinance against heresies and errors ceased to be in force I spake against Infant-sprinkling prest them to be baptized again mentioned in Sermons Mr. M. Mr. Blake and himself when my doctrine prevailed not though since I have gotten above 20. rebaptized disciples whom I often visit and confirm that I charged them with hypocrisy with their blood on their heads that M. Ms. plea from circumcision for infant-baptism is heresie that by my definition of heresy Independants must be judged Hereticks that I sought his arguments in writing to put them in my Review of the dispute with Mr. M. and to ing age him in the Controversy whence he gathered I was unpeaceable set to carry on my opinion and to make my self a party To all this I reply 'T is true some conceiving Mr. B. in his speeches had a fling at me and it seeming likely to me I did speak to the purpose Mr. B. saies I did not imagining that a speech upon a conference in a shop without its limitations and cautions should have been as it is by Mr. B. published and refuted as my error but indeed willing only that Mr. B. should know that in my case I was not to suspend my asserting of truth for fear of losing of peace as I alleadge in my Apology sect 3. And I professe I wonder that such as Mr. M. Mr. B. and others that were so earnest against Bishops and ceremonies though warres did follow and had a great hand in putting them on should now the warres being so well abated be so impatient that Infant-sprinkling is questioned It is untruely surmifed that the change of times was the cause of my opening my self fully in the congregation at Bewdley My first meddling with it was when Mr. Bayly had so unjustly charged me in his Anabaptisme chap. 4. page 92. with spoiling infants of all interest in the Covenant of grace making circumcision a seale to the Jewes only of earthly priviledges denying to the Jewish infants all right to the Covenant till in their riper years they become actual believers Which with other fals accusations about twenty in that one page I intreated by letter my dear Father-in-Law Mr. Henry Scudder to advertise him of after that I might stand right in the thoughts of that worthy man Mr. William Hopkins of Bewdley now with God I shewed him how he wronged me and then cleared my self in my cursory exposition on Ger. 17. brought his book with me into the pulpit and read a passage of Mr. Ms. Defence part 3. page 98. for my vindication which was presently sent up to London But Mr. Bayly doing nothing to right me I wrote to Mr. Bayly and because Mr. Rutherford had my letter to send to him I wrote since to him to know what became of my letter but have had no answer After this I was moved to preach what I did which was but little till December 1649. when I found my tenet on the day of fast to be humbled for blasphemies and heresies which was as I remember March 10. 1649. reckoned as by others so by Mr. Obadiah Sedgewick in his Sermon before the Lords among heresies with which I found afterwards the censure of 52. Ministers about London to concurre stigmatizing me by name as holding four pernicious errors in my Examen and when the ordinance against blasphemy and heresie was published which Mr. Boraston though not required yet published at Ribsford to which Bewdley Chappel relates that he might proclaime me an Heretick Which necessitated me to speak what I did not the change of times it 's known I spake as much in the hardest times to my opinion as since nor unpeaceablenesse in me as Mr. B. surmised What I preached was in no clamourous manner as Mr. B. would intimate calling it exclaiming but in a way of proof and answer as sober Divines do in the like case My na ming any was when I recited their words for which though I was reviled once in London when refuting Doctor Crisp I named him and Mr. B. in a letter to me and since in print reckons as no small fault yet I ever did and do still think it to be necessary when the books are in mens hands and the Auditors are not likely otherwise to know we recite their opinion truly nor whose error we refute I do not believe I used those words Mr. B. sets down as mine Let them budge at it c. though it 's likely I might say it 's one of the chiefest signes of sincerity to embrace every truth and hypocrisy not to receive it for carnal respects not out of anger that men were not of my mind but to justify my self after I had fully handled the point about baptism which I think was either after or immediately before the dispute I used the Apostles words Act. 20. 26 27. nor do I deny that sith our Lord Christ doth Mark 16. 16. make baptisme some condition of Salvation I think those that are taught that Infant-sprinkling is not the duty Christ requires of being baptized and that water baptisme of men at years upon profession of faith is a necessary duty which I had sufficiently proved at Bewdley and yet neglect it do hazzard their salvation living in disobedience to a manifest duty yea the prime duety whereby they ought solemnly to engage themselves to be Christs Disciples I have gotten no Disciples to me and though more then 20 in Bewdley have bin baptized after profession of faith since my removal from them whom with the whole Town I think my self bound by many ties as often as I may to visit and confirm yet not rebaptized It is true to shew how unreasonable the accusation of my tenet as heresy is I have sundry times said that Mr. Ms. position in his Sermon page 35. That all Gods commands and institutions about the Sacraments of the Jewes bind us as much as they did them in all things which belong to the substance of the Covenant and were not accidentall unto them is one of the most manifest heresies being condemned Acts 15. For it expressely asserts that the Gentile Christians are still bound to some rule of circumcision contrary to the Apostles determination Nor did I frame a definition of heresie to make good what I said of Mr. Ms. tene though I deny not the definition I gave with some
which I moved to be considered whether it were not near Mr. Bs. doctrine Aphorisme 73. of Justific and in my Antidote sect 8. page 24. said it is near to it Hereupon Mr. B. adjudgeth this dealing so grosse as he never found in any Jesuite a shamlesse charge and page 190. the vile ebullition of rancor and malice in a most evident falshood that hath left no roome for blushing And then cleares himself from the sense in which the Antinomists held it and then addes Now what doth Mr. T. but bring this as the same tenet with mine when it is even directly contrary To which I answer Mr. B. page 189. in these words Your language about the absolutenesse of the Covenant is too like many of the tenets of the Antinomists in N. E. useth the same dealing with me which he chargeth me with towards himself For he doth or might know when I say with many Divines the Covenant is absolute I meane it as they do in respect of the first promise Heb. 8. 10. I will write my lawes in their hearts which Doctor Twisse and many other prove must be absolute or else the grace of God must be given according to mans desert as the Pelagians held which thing I expresse plainly in my Examen page 164. whereas the Antinomians make it absolute in respect of justification in which I am assured that Mr. B. knew by conferences with me that I was against them and yet he chargeth me with symbolizing with them But recrimination is no purgation 2. It is not true that I bring it as the same tenet with Mr. Bs. but neare it which is so true that however their in tent and his were contrary yet their words are the same For Mr. B. Aph. 76. and in the first edition of the Saints everlasting rest page 11. saith Doubtlesse the Gospel takes faith for obedience to all Gospel-precepts of which the workes James 2. 16. of giving food or clothing to a brother are a part which if true he that is justified by faith is justified by works and so Mr. Bs. proposition is the same with the Antinominians however he used it to a contrary end it 's the same medium though Mr. B. prove one conclusion by it and the Antinomians another and I think is condemned by the censure of them of N. E. in Mr. Bs. sense as well as the Antinomians But Mr. B. goes about to clear himself from error in it and singularly and then saith How can Mr. T. have ground to think that no Minister in England is of my judgement and then challengeth me to confute the doctrine of his book or leaves to judge whether I be not a meere empty calumniator And addes that these words of mine I am sure in his letter to me he saith he was hissed at from all parts of the Kingdome are a relation like the rest from a bitter roote so most falsely when I had his letters which might have directed me to speak truth that the words from all parts of the Kingdome are my addition which is become ordinary with me Then mentions the occasion of the passage in his letters my offer of help to him for dividing ends but he thought he had no need of my help and was resolved not to engage with a renter of the Church To which I answer 1. My exceptions against his doctrine in his Aphorismes have been sent to him afore his death though not to answer his challenge yet at the motion of his Postscript I conceive he erres 1. in making justification by faith to be onely in law title 2. In making a first and after continued justification 3. In making it a continued not instantaneous act 4. In making obedience to all Gospel-precepts an essentiall part of justifying faith and not a fruite onely 2. I did no where say that I thought no Minister in England is of his judgement though I said I thought he had not made one Minister of his judgement 3. to the crimination of my speaking falsely I will set down his own-words in his letter to me That pamphlet of justification I well knew was likely to blast my reputation with most Divines and the issue hath answered my expectation I am now so hissed at by them that I feele temptation enough to schisme in my discontents I had hot his letter by me when I spake those words not out of a bitter roote but to answer the prejudice against me as conceived singular But there was no falshood in my speech by most Divines and from all parts of the Kingdome being equipollent And if this be to adde falsely our Lord Christ will be found to adde falsely Mat. 15. 8 9. c. my offer of helpe to him in what we agreed was not for dividing ends but because of his complaint of weaknesse of body and want of time for study It seemes he accounted me a renter of the Church afore my preaching at Bewdley the many Sermons on Mat. 28. 19. against Infant-baptisme for discovering of the error of it in my bookes without other practises It appeares thereby that even then when he seemed to be most friendly he had hard thoughts of me and however he protest of his love yet his misinterpreting so many of the things I have done or said to him and at last casting up his accusations in his book in charging me with frequent untruths schisme pride worse then the Devil in accusing my own children with bitter scoffes and insulting tauntes with other aggravations and expressions beyond brotherly and neighbourly respects yea I may I think say a sober minde are undeniable evidences of want of love to me and candour towards me if we may judge what is in a man by his deedes rather then by his words As for his pretence of zeale for God the peace of the Church and the duty of brotherly reproof were he never so much in the right and I never so much in the wrong for my judgement yet these could not justifie his carriage to me And if other Ministers deale with me as Mr. B. Mr. M. Mr. Baillee Mr. Geree have done without doing me right after their false criminations of me I shall have temptation to think that they have learned a principle like the Jesuites to think it no sin to say as bad as may be against a supposed Anabaptist for the Paedobaptists cause SECT X. That Mr. Bs. charge of accusing and disputing my children out of the Covenant of Christ is vaine and some inquiry is made how they are in the Covenant I Have now gone through Mr. Bs. Epistles and History vindicated my self and the truth from many objections There are many other things which are scattered in his answer to my Valedictory Oration and Corrective of my Antidote which are somewhat besides the dispute it self which I shall rather point at then insist on because many are scarce worth the taking notice of but for the esteem Mr. B. and his book have gotten
with men Page 165. what he speaks of my exceeding high and passionate disposition was but his misdeeming likely upon misinformation neither my words nor carriage shewed it Page 166. what the supposed girds were is set down before out of his now printed book whereby it seems my few disciples as he miscalls them are at least excused and no notorious falshood chargeable on them That which he saith I forced him to the disputation I conceive is not right how it came to passe is shewed above that there were thousands of people there I think is overlasting the tale of the dispute is made to prepossesse men with prejudice I told him before that such a dispute was not fit to satisfy and I gave him my reasons and I propounded the way used at the Conference at the Hague judged best by Dr. Raynolds but the way Mr. B. took he liked best and his carriage of it looks like an artifice cunningly contrived to please the common sort of Schollers and others of which few can discerne between sleight and solid proofs But I doubt not my answer will prove Mr. Bs. arguments to be meer trifles The untruths charged on me page 167. are upon his mistake of the words written before him I said not to be used by Mr. B. but by others mentioned next before That his passage was like to be the beginning of a schism among those of Bewdley was no jest but a conjecture which the event hath proved true how he misrepresents my words of charging their blood on them and hypocrisy to them is before shewed it 's not true I had been long time working a fearful schisme unlesse by accident it being true which Mr. Allen and Mr. Shepherd say Advertisement to the Reader pag. 27. scarce truth or error can now adaies be received but in a way of schisme His lines were likely to be the beginning of a schisme in that it was taken as if Anabaptists and with them my self were adjudged hereticks by him which if it were an untruth yet it is so like a truth that I think he that shall read in one period what Mr. B. sayes of Hereticks that they end in wicked lives and in the next find the instance in Anabaptists and after me named as one of them will conceive he called them and me hereticks And however he protest he doth not yet his asserting me a Sect-Master page 188. and his inclining to Vossius c. their definition of an Heretick page 171. and his words page 259. make me think he comes not much short of counting me an heretick To his allegations of my speeches concerning Mr. M. and Independents I have answered before I may say the doctrine was one of the first heresies yet not censure the men that hold it as heretical it 's one thing to be formally an heretick and another thing materially to hold that which denominated a party heretical In my Examen I tell Mr. M. and now Mr. B. that I think none of those glorious lights mentioned held Mr. Ms. position I do not judge all hereticks that be against my opinion but that they may be more justly stiled heretiques then my self Mr. Bs. quicknesse in replying afore he weighed my speeches or perhaps my scantnesse in expressions out of warinesse what I said to him whom I found very captious hath I perceive created me these hard censures That which Mr. B. saies page 172. he dare say of me I dare say is false The inference which he calls strange is none of mine the passage and time of writing it do still prevaile with me to conceive that he wanted a spirit of love through ill surmises of me Page 174. Infant-sprinking or pouring water on them will not be proved baptisme I shall not ease sinners that own their infant-sprinkling as baptism by my assertion that I tell them they never sinned against their baptisme and engagement is a fiction of Mr. B. in which he hath a pretty art I said not Mr. B. gave us a title to make us odious but that might make us odious which imports the term might make us odious not that Mr. B. had that purpose in using it Page 175. He hath a discourse from the end of the accuser and the opposition of justification to accusation and condemnation to prove That it is proper language to say he accuseth another who denies a supposed priviledge to be due to him By the same reason the accusers accusation may be said to be condemnation and execution too for that is the end of the accuser I had thought accusation noted the accusers act not his end that justification is opposed to accusation and condemnation shewes they are distinguished the one being the charging with a fault the other passing sentence I must confesse I yet understand not his language of accusing without charging with a fault nor do I think any law-dictionary doth so define accusation I do not think the non-visible churchmembership of infants is poenal or deprivation of a mercy now it being only by the alteration of the Church-frame Whether the not acknowledging infants visible churchmembership be a denying a mercy reall or imaginary whether there be injustice scorne or any error in my tenet about it is to be examined in answering his book What I do hold I do it not without natural affection to my children out of conscience of maintaining truth The very same he chargeth upon me for denying infant-baptisme might mutatis mutandis by the same reason be charged on him for denying infant-communion I do judge this Rhetorical or Satyrical passage of Mr. B. to be a meer trifling in a serious matter That which is said page 176. of my disputing my children out of the Church by denying them to be visible Church-members is Mr. Bs mistake in defining visible Church-membership as I shall shew in examining the 27. chap. of the first part of his book It 's not true I deny all infants to be in Covenant with the Lord their God or that title to salvation which upon promise they have in point of law Mr. Bs. conditional Covenant gives no title till the condition be put which he will not say is true of any infants but the elect who alone are children of the promise in the Apostles language Rom. 9. 8. pag. 177. he saith I do all I can to keep infants out of the visible Church but I deny that to hinder their baptisme is to keep them out of the visible Church or that to baptize them is to bring them in If it be why have they not the communion according to that which we reade 1 Cor. 12. 13 Are Janizaries who were baptized children of Greek Christians therefore visible members of the Christian Church Mr. B. though he had the Copy of my Sermon yet misrepresents my words I said not that it is the Devils part to say that the infants of believers are members of the visible Church but my words were it being an error
9. 20. Luke 16. 29 31. yea John 5. 39. Christ referres them to the Scriptures notwithstanding his miracles 3. Because though true miracles are never to be distrusted yet Christ hath foretold us Mat. 24. 24. There shall arise false Christs and fals Prophets and shall shew great signes and wonders insomuch that if it were possible they shall deceive the very elect and the like is foretold 2 Thess. 2. 9 10. Revel 13. 13 14. 4. Because true miracles themselves do not testifie immediately concerning the doctrine but the person that he is sent of God and consequently of his doctrine John 3. 2. and then they are wrought by the person himself As for other providences or real wonders if not wrought by the person but on him though they should be dreaded and observed as Gods workes and when we have examined the doctrine by Scripture they have great influence on us either to confirme or unsettle in an opinion yet they are rather discoveries of Gods judgements of men and their practises then their opinions and yet therein we may mistake thinking Gods judgement may be against one when it is against another and thinking them worse then others contrary to our Saviours doctrine Luke 13. 1 2 3 4 5. And in the relation of such accidents there is not alwayes that certainty that may settle a person as appeares by the mistakes of many and many such are invented and related with much art and confidence so as to deceive credulous people frequently In a word I conceive Mr. B. himself saith in effect as much as I say I know wonders that are not miracles are not to be interpreted or trusted to contrary to the word for Satan by Gods permission may performe them and Antichrist may do lying wonders 4. He excepts against me that I say God would rather have us judge that they are stumbling blocks that people should not receive the truth and most of his invectives are against this Answ. Nothing is so well said but may be depraved when a mans words are misinterpreted My words are We may think we ought to determine that God may order accidents so as to become stumbling blocks that people should not receive the truth rather then by any accidents to determine a truth to be an untruth Which are different from that which Mr. B. sets down as my words 1. He recites my wordes thus they are as if they spake of the accidents next mentioned whereas my words are God may order accidents so which note onely accidents possible 2. Whereas my words were comparatively spoken to this purpose that accidents are so far from being a rule to determine of truth that God sometimes orders them to become stumbling blocks which is the same with that of Moses Deut. 13. 3. The Lord your God proveth by signes and wonders of the false Prophet to know whether you will keep his coommandments Mr. B. recites them thus We are to judge they are meaning such accidents stumbling blocks that people should not receive the truth as if I had spoken positively of those particular accidents forementioned that God did order them to that end whereas I onely to give reason of my advise of warinesse set down my observation comparatively and spake of accidents that might be not of what were Which being thus stated Mr. Bs. exceptions are answered and shew either his inconsideratenesse in what he saies or proneness to misconstrue what I speak That which he puts in by the way of his opinion concerning the sin against the Holy Ghost as if it did lie much in an infidelity against the convincing testimony of miracles and of the not believing true miracles and of Gods ordering some wonders and the accidents in New England may be allowed him yet makes nothing to prove that remarkable providences of God are a safe rule by which to judge what doctrine is true and which is false As for his words of me that it seemes if I had seen the wonders of Egypt I would not onely have been hardened as Pharaoh but judged God laid them as stumbling blocks I leave others to judge what spirit they proceed from and do resolve that though he paint me as an incarnate Devil or worse I shall take him for a Saint though a very distemper'd one Page 198. the Scribe hath written in my words or none of them in stead of or to them onely SECT XIV That Mr. B. doth not rightly expound Christs rule Mat. 7. 15 16. nor is the unholinesse of men a note to know false doctrine by PAge 199. He would vindicate his interpretation of Mat. 7. 15. from my exception and saith Christ tells them how to discerne whole parties of false Prophets and not how to descerne every particular man that is such But this is onely his saying and the contrary is proved by these reasons 1. Those false Prophets Christ saies we shall know by their fruits whom he bids us beware of but they are not onely whole parties of them but also every man that is such Ergo. The Major is plaine by the term them which referres to the false Prophets ver 15. the Minor I think Mr. B. will not deny 2. They are known by their fruits which did come to them in sheepes clothing but inwardly were ravening wolves for them ver 16. relates to such But these are particular men as such and not onely whole parties otherwise Christ should not bid beware of one false Prophet nor censure such a one as a wolfe but onely whole parties of them which had been very imprudently done so to expose his disciples to be a prey to single wolves and onely warne them to take heed of a company of them together Then he askes me But what real Horeticks can Mr. T. name that had holy lives It is hard to answer his question because of the difficulty to determine who is a real Heretique some onely making him an heretique that holds an error against the foundation others any error against the doctrine of Christ some make it necessary that it be held with pertinacy some with a party some against self-conviction Mr. Bs. speeches shew he is not fully resolved Nor is it easie to determine who erres nor what degree of holinesse is necessary to a holy life or how it may be known But I told Mr. B. in my Antidote Pelagins Aâ—minius and some others have been reputed Heretiques and to have been of holy and so have many zealous Papists and others But however saith Mr. B. the best have made nothing to sacrifice the unity and peace of the Church to their fancy and rent it in pieces to strengthen their party whence Mr. B. seems to infer they had not holy lives but were wicked I answer if any man of purpose do so I cannot think him to live holily I know the wisdome from above is peaceable Jam. 3. 17. Yet holy men thinking their fancy to be Gods truth may out of zeal to their opinion rend
I pray with him may perish of schism or zeal for it I am not conscious that truth I avouch will stand when Mr. Bs. rotten pillars fall to the ground To many questions and charges in sundry pages 213. c. an answer may be gathered from what is said before SECT XIX The six imagined errors charged on me by Mr. B. are cleered from his censure MR. B. addes a confutation of six of my pretended errors The first was onely a speech of mine in conference on occasion of Mr. Bs. words in a Sermon which were taken to be a fling at me and my meaning was this that the truth I maintained and such like being about a thing of frequent practise so that by reason of ignorance sin will be committed were not to be concealed when if it be it is like to be lost for the peace of the Church that is to prevent differences in opinion and the breaches in communion that by reason thereof do by accident from the corruption of men fall out Mr. B. opposeth it as if I meant a man must not suspend any truth of the Scripture no not though a total breach bringing bloodshed ruine c. follow yea by his last argument he would insinuate as if it would follow on my tenet that every one that doth but think it is a truth that Christ is not God that there is no God c. that he will think himself bound to reveale it to the world though it turne all to confusion and after his satyrical veine saith He that had rather see the Church in this case then his doctrine of Anabaptistry should be concealed is good for nothing but to make an Anabaptist of that I know To which I answer my meaning in that speech of mine was this that no truth of God that a person is certain is such and can demonstrate so to be which concernes the faith or practise of Christians through concealing of which they shall erre and sin is to be concealed when a person may perceive by circumstances that if he conceale it at such a time the contrary will be established and so truth be lost in the eye of reason though much trouble follow thereon And this I resolved heretofore in my book of scandals chap. 4. sect 20. not that I know of excepted against by any ground on Pauls words Gal. 2. 5. avouched by many Divines and without which the Waldenses Hussites Protestants will be condemned for opposing the Monkish profession halfe communion c. though warres followed thereon And our present and former non-conformists will be deeply guilty of sin in opposing the Prelacy ceremonies canons c which hath been one cause of the great troubles of the land which have proved greater then any raised by the Anabaptists And so far as many prudent men can discerne many of the Presbyterian Ministers of the land do as little regard the peace of this land at this time through discontent that they want the establishment of discipline after their mind as any Anabaptist heretofore did And I presume they that sit at the sterne do find the so called Anabaptists as faithful to the publique cause as their opposites As for the two next errors about others then Ministers baptizing and administring the Lords Supper Mr. B. delivers as much himself as the errors pretended affirm in these words page 221. In a case of necessity as if people were in the Indies where no Ministers can be had if any fay that it is better a private man baptize and adminster the Lords Supper then wholly omit them I will not deny it and he gives two reasons But faith he Mr. T. speaks it in reference to our ordinary case in England Concerning which I answer that for baptizing it is true I speak in reference to the case in England all or most of the Ministers ordained being against baptizing of persons of years sprinkled in infancy and there lying upon them that see infant-baptisme a corruption a necessity to be baptized upon profession of faith there is a necessity that they be baptized by persons not ordained by laying on of hands of the Presbytery though I do conceive laying on of hands an ordinance in force from 1 Tim. 5. 23. and 4. 14. Act. 13. 3. Heb. 6. 2. Nor do I like the argument from Numb 8. 10. to prove that non-preaching elders may lay on hands conceiving no Mosaical ordinance concerning any positive ceremonial rite belonging to the Jewish service is a rule to us now and therefore do wish there were either by authority or consent of Churches some way of restoring it till which I see a necessity that persons not ordained yet preachers of the Gospel do baptize But for administring the Lords Supper though I acknowledge it most fit in many respects it should be received some Minister ordering it not so much for the consecrating of the Elements as they call it by vertue of office as for the comely and edifying dispensing of it by prayer and exhortation the ordinance being holy and to be performed with much reverence to which none are so fit as a Minister that is set apart for the word and prayer yet whereas it is claimed as a part of the Ministers office to be Minister of the Sacraments or as they call them seales and it is aggravated as if it were the sin of Uzzah or Uzziah for any else to do it and too much I think is ascribed not onely by Papists but also by others to the power of order and many require it as a Ministers duty to give them the Sacrament and if Mr. Bs. doctrine be good in his treatise of the Saints rest page 651. Their being baptized persons or members of the universal Church is sufficient evidence of their interest to the Supper till they by heresie or scandal blot that evidence Ministers cannot deny it them without instustice and hereupon many perplexities are in Ministers about giving the Lords Supper and perplexities in receivers from whom they receive it it being taught that they do justifie their Ministery and own them as their Ministers who receive the Lords Supper from them and it is taught that Ministers have a power to deny some the seals and this is made a chief part of their government I have I confesse said and I think it still true that a company of believers though they have no Minister ordained in case of want of an ordained Minister may some one or more in holy and seemely manner by giving thanks praying and declaring the end and use of that rite and guiding the action remember the Lords death in breaking bread and this may be truly a Sacrament as it is called and acceptable to God if performed with a holy heart And my chief ground is because whereas it is made one of the chief disorders in eating the Lords Supper at Corinth 1 Cor. 11. 20 21. that in eating every one took his own Supper before other
page 273. and said it was of dangerous consequence And indeed I think it so still For I think it will follow that except a Magistrate can shew his commission from Christ that he is an usurper and then none is bound to him but to suppresse him then no infidel is a lawfull Magistrate who denies Christ and it will be questionable whether this will not extend to a non-churchmember or an excommunicate person then a Magistrates doing of right to an infidel against a believer or to one believer against another as putting him to death is an act for Christ as Mediator and if because all power is given to him in heaven and in earth therefore magistracy so as that all power must be derived from Christ as Mediator then a Fathers power over his child but sure that is in a Father by nature nor do I think it any part of the curse then ruling Presbyters should do the acts of civil Magistrates as having plain title to rule under Christ. Nor do I think Mr. B. hath answered these arguments or the rest but that however he proves Magistracy to be from Christs appointment and to be subordinate to his laws and accountable to him and ought to act for him yet not that the commission of every lawful Magistrate is from him as Mediator I think it will follow if Mr. Bs. position be true that supposing Christ had not been Mediator there had been no lawfull Magistrate and that Dominium fundatur in gratia which was heretofore denied And sith Christ is heir of all things and believers onely are Christs and all theirs 1 Cor. 3. 22 23. it would be considered whether by parity of reason the Saints might not intitle themselves to all power and all mens estates which was charged on Anabaptists at Munster But I find I digresse and therefore stop till more liberty draw me to a fuller handling of it SECT XX. Many learned men with the Oxford Convocation of former and later times take Infant-baptisme onely for an unwritten tradition MR. B. proceeds to answer my Antidote termes it a Corrective for a circumforaneous Antidote but the Antidote will appear to be good if taken notwithstanding his disgraceful term of Corrective without vertue Page 299. He prints two passages of Dr. Whitakers for the late Oxford Convocation to reade and referres to the like in Davenant But whatever Doctor Whitaker thought yet that the Antients did take Baptism of Infants to have been an Apostolical tradition unwritten seemes to me from that which is said in my Examen part I. sect 5. not avoided by Mr. Ms Defence In the Council of Basil in the oration of the Cardinal of Ragusi it is asserted Item nusquam legitur in canone Scripturae S. quod parvulus recenter baptizatus qui nec corde credit ad justitiam nec ore confitetur ad falutem inter fideles crudentes computetur Et nihilominus Ecclesia it a determinavit et statuit c. And in principip hujus Sacramenti baptizabantur solum illi qui per se sciebant fidem interroganti respondere To which purpose Walafridus Strabo many hundred years before and Vives about that time whose words are alleged in my Exercitation the title page and sect 17. Erasmus resp Archiep. Hispal ad artic object 61. Sunt et alia innumera quae prisci non ausi sunt definire sed suspensae pronunciatione venerabantur quod genus est an parvuliessent baptizandi And commonly the learnedst Papists do instance in Infant-baptism as an unwritten tradition in force and whereas it is objected that Bellarm. and others do bring Scripture for it Becan manual lib. 1. c. 2. sect 24. answers aliqua possunt probariex Scriptura quando constat de vero legitimo Scripture sensu So he saith it is concerning Infan-baptism which is proved from John 3. 5. but that the sense whereby to prove it is onely manifest by tradition Which is confirmed in the Canon law and Schoolmen an Infants-baptism was not reckoned perfect till the Bishop laid on hands which act was called Confirmation to wit of the imperfect Baptism in infancy Molinaeus in his Vates l. 2. c. 7. cites the canon dist 5. de consecratione as determining that without the Sacrament of Confirmation no man is a full Christian. Can. omnes et Can. ut jejuni Thomas 3. parte summae q. 72. art 9. dicit hoc sacramentum esse perfectionâ—m Baptismi innuens Baptismum esse imperfectum nisi accesserit Confirmatio Lumb l. 4. sent dist 7. A. omnes fideles per manus impositionem Episcoporum post Baptismum accipere debent in Confirmatione Spiritum sanctum ut pleni Christiani inveniantur Bellarm. tom 3. de sacr confirm c. 12. confirmatio est complementum perfectio baptismi Lib. 2. de effec Sacram. c. 8. est Confirmatio quaedam perfectio consummatio Baptismi Jewel Defence of the Apolog. page 218. allegeth it as Caistans tenet that an Infant for that he wanteth instruction in faith therefore hath not perfect Baptism Consonant hereto is the conceit of the common people that they have not their full Christen dome all they be Bishopped But that it may appear even learned Protestants speak near the same I will cite some of their speeches Among which I will forbear to recite the speeches of the Lord Brook and Mr. Daniel Rogers alleged by me in my Exercit. sect 18. and cleered in my Apology from Mr. Rogers his latter glosse nor the opinion of Mr. Bedford who judged with the Romanists that the Scripture gives us proof onely of the reasonableness of Infant-baptisme as I gather by Mr. Bs. I answer to him page 305. Dr. Field of the Church fourth book chap. 20. The fourth kind of inadition is the continued practise of such things as are neither contained in the Scripture expressely nor the examples of such practise expressely there delivered though the grounds reasons and causes of the necessity of such practise be there contained and the benefit or good that followeth it Of this sort is the Baptism of Infants which is therefore named a tradition because it is not expressely delivered in Scripture that the Apostles did baptize Infants nor any expresse precept there found that they should so do Yet is not this so received by bare and naked tradition but that we find the Scripture to deliver unto us the grounds of it Doctor Prideaux fasci Controv. Theol. loc 4. sect 3. q. 2. Paedobaptism rests on no other Divine right then Episcopacy Doctor Jeremy Taylor in his Liberty of prophesying sect 18. num 34. after he had ventilated the point on both sides saies there is much more truth then evidence on our sides meaning Paedobaptists To all which I will adde the words of Theophilus Philakyriaco Loucardiensis that is Mr. Young as I am informed an eminent man in the late Assembly and Mr. Marshals friend that holp him in the first part of his Defence in his Dies Dominica lib. 1. c. 10.
of more credit concerning the Antiquity of Infant-baptism then Augustines who as I shew Apology sect 6. and elsewhere did often inconsiderately call that an Apostolical tradition which was commonly observed in his dayes within the compass of his acquaintance Cyprians speech if it be rightly brought by Mr. B. will prove all still-born Infants to be lost being not of the visible Church Catholick That which Mr. B. page 266. saith fully satisfies him part of it is false the rest so frivolous that I can impute his satisfaction to no other cause then his inconsiderateness The very same or like plea will serve for communion of young children in which yet Mr. B. is not satisfied But to me it is very good satisfaction that baptizing of Infants is but an innovation neither agreeing with the institution of Christ nor the Apostles practise nor known till it began to be conceived necessary to give grace and to save from perishing yet then disswaded and not practised but in case of iminent danger of death nor maintained on any other ground till Zuinglius his dayes What the Churches of Anabaptists so called have done in London that Mr. B. should so much lament till I know what it is I take to be a Calumny That Anabaptists have been in danger by the instigations of Preachers and writers it is a marvel to me that Mr. B. should not understand who can hardly be ignorant whence the ordinance against blasphemies and heresies came That any of my Antagonists are turned out of house and home is unknown to me surely not for non-conformity to rebaptizing most certain that if any such thing hath been done it was never by my procurement nor I think any of the Churches of Anabaptists That which Mr. B. page 267. saies that the same men that subscribe the Anabapiists confession have many of them written other kind of doctrine elsewhere I doubt whether it be true I find him onely naming Paul Hobson page 147. and citing some passages of his of which that which is most liable to exception Mr. B. himself gives us this excuse in his Saints evelasting rest part 2. chap. 1. sect 2. page 169. not understanding that they affirm and deny the same thing in several expressions so that however his expressions be dangerous yet it is probable he held not the Socinian opinion which he contradicted in the subscription to the confession but onely discovered his weakness And yet Mr. B. I think is not ignorant that so holy learned a man as M. Pemble near the beginning of his Vindicae gratiae hath a like conceit of Gods never hating the elect but being reconciled from eternity taking reconciliation for an immanent act in God which as I imagine Mr. B. would excuse in Mr. Pemble so might he with a like charity excuse the other in Paul Hobson What he cites out of Cyprian I wish Mr. B. had Englished it and that both Anabaptists and their opposites would learn it Page 268. he saith if my book of scandals were read men may perhaps receive a preservative from my own hand from the danger of my opinion to which I say I wish my book of Scandals were more read nor do I fear that my doctrine will be the lesse embraced for reading it if my interpretation of my own words justified even by Mr. B. be received as I shew before Page 269. he tells us the Levellers were Anabaptists but I cannot yet learn of any of them he names except Den that was so though I deny not but there might be sundry of them such likely of the Free-willers disclaimed by the seven Churches in London and that they were but few in comparrison of the rest by the Newes-books I gather the Levelling businesse was carried on by such as were in no gathered Church but lived above ordinances As for Mr. Bs. dark criminations I can give no answer to them unlesse I could plow with his heifer and find out his riddle But my hope is those great instruments of God to break the enemies of those that are termed Sectaries though Mr. Bs. words seem to forebode and misdeem evil of them will and do prove better then he discribes them though I imagine they be not Anabaptists Nor do I like Mr. Bs. obscure satyrical criminations they having some shew of a malevolent mind Whatever Mr. B. may conceive of the danger of the Anabaptists way in other things I am sure if they would keep themselves onely to this to be baptized upon profession of faith they should be in a safe way even in the way of Christ. SECT XXII The speech that no one Countrey is gathered into Christs visible Church contains no malignancy to Christ but is a manifest truth MOst of that which is in Mr. Bs. answer to the last section of my Antidote hath either been replied to before or in some other part of my writings or will fall into the main of the dispute wherein I doubt not but I shall fully vindicate my argument against the visible Church-membership of Infants from the different cause of the Jewish and Christian Church though the thing be so manifest to wit that the Christian Church was otherwise gathered then the Jewish that I see nothing but meer wrangling in the questions Mr. B. propounds And to his words page 279 280. Sir if you were my Father I would tell you that when you say Christ makes no one City Countrey Tribe his Disciples you speak most malignantly and wickedly against the Kingdome and dignity of my Lord Jesus I answer I meet so often with Mr. Bs. high charges upon palpable mistakes and weak proofs that I fear his misguided zeal or natural distemper hath brought him to an habit of ill-speaking My words were not as Mr. B. sets them down but thus no one Countrey or City or Tribe together were gathered by the Apostles or other Preachers into the Christian visible Church but so many of all as the Lord vouchsafed to call by his word and spirit which hath neither wickedness nor malignancy against the Kingdome and dignity of the Lord Jesus but a manifest truth expressely taught in the Holy Scripture as congruous to the glory of God and the Lord Jesus 1 Cor. 1. 26 27. 28 29. Not many wise men c. Ergo not the whole Nation Revel 5. 9. out of every Nation Ergo not the whole Nation as he did the Jewes in the Wilderness The relations in the Gospel and Acts of the Apostles plainly prove it true that by John Baptist Christ the 12. and 70. Disciples was no entire Nation City Countrey or Tribe gathered into the visible Church-christian but parts of them and those fewer then the adversaries who in every place were so numerous when the Christians are counted at some few thousands as that even at Jerusalem and elsewhere they prevailed to disperse Christians by persecution Nor do Mr. Bs. questions prove that into the Christian visible Church any one whole Countrey City or
explaining himself and yielding to other things which might sift the truth then I found him 2. It is not true I forced Mr. B. to the dispute The words of my letter dated December 27. 1649. foure dayes before the dispute were these Sir my message was this sith I intend on the next Lords day to prosecute what I have begun in examining the Hypotheses upon which the argument from circumcision for infant-baptisme which is the Paedobaptists Achilles is built I was willing to invite you to be a hearer and if you judged it meet to oppose what you should think good in a Logick way without Rhetorick Yet if you choose to come over either Munday or Tuesday I shall be ready to justifie my doctrine openly or privately by word or writing as it shall be judged convenient Mr. B. choosing Tuesday Jan. 1. a seat was provided for him with some kind of State Ministers and Schollers such as they were sent for over the Countrey placed on each side Mr. B. which with Mr. Bs. carriage in the beginning to propound that question which I had not then meddled with in my Sermons or printed books about the manner of baptizing and in that manner as served for no other purpose but to create prejudice besides his fallacious disputing in the beginning did cause apprehensions in me of the designe of bearing down me and the truth by indirect wayes which before I dreamed not of which if Mr. B. were not privy to yet was he instrumental to promote which I confesse did not a little perplex me and streightned my thoughts and expressions 3. That Mr. B. did conceale his arguments me thinks he should not deny who denies not that he would not give me animadversions on my written notes nor let me have his arguments in writing To the rest of his questions answer enough is already given 4. It is no untruth that I had scarce time afforded me to repeale his arguments yea at first it was expressely denied me till Mr. Good informed Mr. B. that it was the rule of Schools the Respondent should repeat the arguments And it was once confessed ingenuously that Mr. Bs. syllogismes were so long as that they could not be easily repeated which was very true of some of them contrary to the use of Schools being hypothetical syllogismes to prove an hypothetical proposition It is true that Mr. B. would open his termes viz. the chief terme visible Church-member when I asked him by what note he meant Infants were discernable as visible Church-members he did not tell me his note to my best remembrance and when I did distinguish of visible by profession or some other way because I did not express the other member of the distinction though I could not do it till he explained what other way he conceived as being a visible Church-member besides profession he derided me 6. It is true also that he checked me with Satyrical quips as that he could not help my memory when I did not repeate rightly his long syllogisme hat he came not to be catechized when I asked him of his meaning about the terme visible His speech of my defying the armies of Israel and calling give me a man to dispute c. for my uncircumcised opinion is conservant with Mr. M. and Mr. Ley their unjust and false charges of me to which I answered in my Apology sect 7. and Mr. Bs insulting speech thereupon is not without shew of vain glory Page 211. He blames me for desiring his arguments in writing though not denying the validity of any one of his reasons against writing many mens writings being yet unaswered by me my answer to Mr. Ms. Defence being weak that I have done him great injury in forcing him to write Answ. The desire I and others had to see his arguments in writing was because we could not otherwise well judge of them which he might easily have done being those as he saith he preached at Coventrey and had written in his book at the dispute and therefore might have been easily communicated to us His reasons against writing I took to be excuses of his unwillingnesse to gratifie us in our request and that they were meer excuses his printing proveth to which he was never ferced by me as he falsely pretends in his title page and if he be injured it is by himself whose own minde or some others designe using him as their instrument carried him to it and though I am glad to see his arguments in writing yet I take it for the greatest injury that ever I received from man that he hath so unworthily abused me and the truth which I pray God forgive him expecting also if he live both righting me and the truth Of answering Mr. Cobbet I have said enough already Mr. Church and Mr. Rutherfords are in effect the same with Mr. Ms. and others by overthrowing in my Sermons the Hypotheses of the Covenant seal Baptismes succession to Circumcision they were answered Mr. Drew's main argument page 23. though his book by the Author of the lawfulnesse of obeying the present govenrment be judged to be written with sharp reasons and mild language yet either there are foure termes in it or else it concludes we are to circumcise The dispute of Mr. Baily had been shewed to be very fallacious if my letter to the press had found one willing to print it I desired to have Mr. Bs. arguments in writing besides these because he was better known to those of Bewdley I compare not my self with men excellent in writing nor do I think I used the terme silly people though Mr. Bs. notary so wrote it page 212. How unseemly Mr. Bs. language was I have said afore I conceived it necessary Mr. B. should explain his termes to satisfie the people who could not judge of his proof without knowing his meaning which might have been done and yet strict disputing observed which Mr. B. denied though this were or should have been the end of the dispute and the occasion of it led him to it If for peace and for fear of scandal be equipollent as I take them to be in these speeches then Truth must not be lost for fear of scandal and no truth is to be concealed so as to be lost for peace differ not as much as truth from a most destructive falsehood as Mr. B. saith page 215. Austin I think hath the words I cited in that Sermon my book of scandals page 273. and in my Apology page 5. though perhaps I am mistaken and the speech be Gregories whose words in his seventh homily on Ezech. are thus cited by Aqu. 2. 2. q. 43. art 7. Si de veritate scandalum sumitur ut tilius nasci permittur scandalnm quam veritas relinquatur My traducing Mr. B. in my pulpit mentioned page 217. was nothing but citing his words which was not frequent nor is it if rightly done any injury when the book is published What is of me and not of God