last being joyned together in History as the two first great Preachers of the Albigenses and Waldenses the first was a Priest the last a Monk hated and persecuted very much by the Romish-Church These being driven out of several places where they stoutly opposed the Popish errors were at last received at Tholouse in Provence and they that followed their Doctrine were called Petro-Brusians and Henricians Now to prove these to be against Infant-Baptism the Author in conformity to his old friend Mr. Tombes betakes himself to the Ecclesiastical Historians that have written of the State of the Church in the several Centuries since Christ for from them must we fetch our light touching matters of Fact in the Countries where they lived or from such who have made it their peculiar work to write the History of the Waldenses as Perin c. The Protestant century-Century-writers are either the Magdeburgensian Divines or Lucas Osiander I shall give a brief account of what they say of the Waldenses concerning the point under debate and so leave the Reader to judge on which side the truth lyeth whether on ours or our Opposites and shall premise this caution that the Reader do not mistake and take that to be the judgment of those Writers concerning Peter Bruis and Henricus which they transcribe out of the Popish Records Councils Edicts c. And what they relate of them they have it from two Popish Abbots viz. Bernard and Cluniacensis 1. Concerning Bernard the Magdeburgenses tell us Cent. 12. c. 5. that he in his 66th Sermon in Cantica flyes out against these men accusing them to be Hereticks he chargeth them 1. To be Manicheans 2. To deny the Lawfulness of Oaths 3. That 't is unlawful to Baptize Children 4. That it is unlawful to eat any thing quod ex coitu generatur and accordingly saith Bernard they denyed the lawfulness of eating Flesh and Milk These were then a terrible sort of Fellows if we may believe that old Superstitious though otherwise devout and some think Pious Abbot who is commonly known by the name of St. Bernard And certainly if these Petro-brusians were guilty in these things they were even Monsters in nature What to deny our little ones both Milk and Water too O Cruelty But as these good men cleared themselves from these false imputations and calumnies so also do the Magdeburgenses in their History speak highly of them and that which is sufficient for their Vindication The other cited by the Author is Lucas Osiander Cent. 12 262. And I doubt some prejudice to his cause Osiander may arise from citing him Whatsoever Osiander saith concerning Peter Bruis and Henricus of their being against Infant-Baptism he taketh it out of the Works of Peter Cluniacensis another Popish Abbot and he doth Calumniari fortiter lay very many abominable errors to their charge and among others he accuseth them of this Venial one of denying Infant-Baptism Now if any credit may be given to this Abbot it must be per totum throughout in all or else in nothing And verily if his Testimony be valid as Mr. Tombes would have it accounted and the Author from him our opposites need not glory in such Waldenses that they comported with their opinion nor we be troubled at their dissenting from us Let us now look into the wicked and false Testimony or Account this lying Abbot gives of those two precious Ministers Peter Bruis and Henricus as Osiander takes it out of his own Writings Exorta est progressu temporis vires acquisivit haeresis Albigensium Ea Romae primo caepisse putant postea verò in comitatu Tolosato etiam intra viros Illustres longe lateque sparsa dicitur quin etiam in Angliam penetrasse scribitur Dogmata haec illis attribuuntur inquit Osiander 1. Baptismum abjiciunt 2. Corporum resurrectionem negant 3. Carnem comedi prohibent 4. Christum non esse Deum nec assumpsisse de Virgine sed de Caelo carnem duxisse 5. Ecclesiam non posse aliquid possidere nisi in communi c. There arose and in progress of time gathered strength the heresy of the Albigenses that is said to take its rise at Rome then dispersed far and wide over the Country of Tholouse that amongst men of quality moreover they say that it got into England They are charged to hold these Opinions saith Osiander They cast of Baptism meaning that of Infants They deny the resurrection They forbid eating Flesh as Bernard before They say Christ is not God neither took he flesh of the Virgin but brought it down from Heaven That the Church should possess all things in common By this time I suppose we may conclude that these Waldenses were vile persons or Cluniacensis a lying Abbot and this latter we do not in the least question Furthermore as if the Author had never enough of him he tells us that the Magdeburgenses set down the Assertions of Peter Bruis against Infant-Baptism Transubstantiation Tombe's Examen pag. 25. Worshipping of Images Purgatory which are distinctly and at large answered by Peter Cluniacensis But you must know he had never any personal conference or dispute with him But that I may not remain in the Author's debt for what he quotes out of the Magdeburgenses I shall requite him with what I find in Osiander who tells us that the said Cluniacensis doth profess twice in his Writings that he would not accuse the Waldenses upon uncertain report but from their own Writings nay farther he chargeth them that they denied the Divine Authority of the Old-Testament and all the New except the Gospels Evangelium creditis Epistolas Fauli cur non Suscipitis Respondetis quia non adeo certa nobis autoritas est earum i. e. You believe the Gospel why not also the Epistles of Paul your answer is because the Divine Authority of them doth not so certainly appear to us And upon that account saith Osiander Cluniacensis spends two whole Chapters to prove the Divine Authority of the Scriptures against them I shall conclude this with Mr. Marshal's words to Mr. Tombes upon his quoting Cluniacensis to the same end as my Antagonist doth He saith that Reverend Minister that reads that railing Book of Petrus Cluniacensis will find that he acknowledgeth most of what he layes to their charge to be upon the report of others Now me thinks the Author should blush at his indiscretion for introducing such a Popish Calumniator for an evidence in this matter and if he believe this Abbot slandred Peter Bruis and his followers in these things I hope he will excuse the Reader if he believe he did noless when he chargeth them to be against Infant-Baptism that Children who dyed before they could actually believe were damned which is another Article Cluniacensis brings in against them one as true as the other I see by this that when men are engaged in a cause and wedded to an opinion they will not
Infant-Baptism ASSERTED VINDICATED By SCRIPTURE And ANTIQUITY IN ANSWER To a Treatise of Baptism lately published by Mr. HENRY DANVERS Together with a full Detection of his Misrepresentations of divers Councils and Authors both Ancient and Modern WITH A Just Censure of his Essay to Palliate the horrid Actings of the Anabaptists in Germany AS ALSO A Perswasive to Unity among all Christians though of Different Judgments about Baptism By OBED WILLS M. A. Vt Christus Infantes ad se venire jussit ità nec Apostoli eos excluserunt à Baptismo quidem dum Baptismus Circumcicisioni aequiparat Paul Col. 2. apertè indicat etiam Infantes per Baptismum Ecclesiae Dei esse inserendos c. Magdib Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 4. p. 354. LONDON Printed for Jonathan Robinson at the Golden Lyon in St. Paul's Church-yard 1674. THE PREFACE THere is a New Treatise come forth concerning Baptism the Design whereof is to prove the Baptism of Believers and to disprove that of Infants There is great Cracking about it and some cry it up for a None-such that it is unanswerable and as I hear the Author himself Ixion-like falls in love with his own shadow and being Philautia nimis inflatus puffed up with the excellency of his performance glories much and pretends that he hath not only proselyted many of the Vulgar sort but some also of the Ministry And it is very certain that at its first appearance last Summer divers persons were Dipped in these parts and as I have been informed 7 or 8 in a day in the City of Bristol and in all likelyhood we may hear of many more this Summer for those who are inclinable to the Way are now grown so politick as not to profess their Faith till warm Weather This I do assure the Reader that the Book as to any thing material in it hath been many times answered before ever it came forth and that 's the reason belike we have heard of no Reply since it hath seen the light which is now about twelve Months All the Mediums he useth to maintain his Opinion are such trite and out-worn things that they have been in effect trampled upon and confuted again and again Nevertheless such is the Clamorousness of some men that they affect to have the last word when in modesty they ought to be silent and consider that it is their duty to unlearn a darling Errour and no dishonour to strike sail to convincing Reason Great Endeavours have been used to undeceive the Antipaedobaptists and 't is the unhappiness of many Godly and Learned Divines instead of meeting with answerable success to have their Pains contemned and their Persons loaded with Aspersions The Author of the Treatise I am to examine hath only affixt H. D. to the Title-page that is as appears by a Second Edition lately come forth Henry Danvers although in regard of the principal Materials the Book hath more reason to pretend to J. T. that is John Tombes for its Author For although H D. hath for some years lived a solitary contemplative Life and hath had opportunity for study yet owneth he not so much Scholarship if they say true that know him as to compose such a Piece nor is he so well acquainted with Fathers Councils Schoolmen had not most of it been prepared to his hand Indeed I find he is somewhat vers'd in the Magdiburgensian History though he hath made very ill use of it But for the Argumentative part especially the Opposition made against Infant-Baptism both the Method and Matter of his Treatise declares where he hath been fishing for I find very little in it besides what is borrowed from Mr. Tombes his Exercitation and Examen long since answered by M. Marshal Dr. Homes Mr. Gerce Mr. Blake Mr. Baxter But forasmuch as the Contest hath taken a Nap for about 20 years it was thought fit to give it one lusty jog more and awaken it again And in regard those Polemical Discourses are rarely found in Vulgar hands but are thrown aside into Corners and lie solitary as neglected things in Studies and Booksellers Shops the Author and his Coniederates out of their dear love to their Darling Opinion thought meet to make some good improvement of the late Liberty granted by his Majesty's gracious Declaration and to take up the Gantlet again and fall to the old Trade of Wrangling For some men are of a restless Spirit and if their Hands be tied up from fighting they will do it with their Tongues and Pens The Preface is made up of Invectives against the Assertors of Infant Baptism but mostly against Mr. Baxter by reason of some Passages of his in a late Book called The Christian Directory against which he seems to have a very great zeal but I fear his envy against his Person doth exceed it For do but compare the Preface with the Epilogue of our Authors Treatise and you will find he seems to entertain a better opinion of John of Leyden then of him I understand Mr. Baxter will speedily write something for his own Vindication and I long to see it that so nothing that he hath said in his Christian Directory may prove a Stumbling-block to the Weak and more confirm the Antipaedobaptists in their Errour The truth is those people are very sensible how much he hath wounded their Cause and are glad with an occasion of wounding his Reputation But I profess I could not but smile to observe how he seems to bewail the Indiscretion of Mr. Baxter and rebukes him for Printing his Judgement in some Points that refer to Baptism and other things at such an unseasonable time as if he had hit upon the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the fittest opportunity to declaim against Infant Baptism But doth he take this to be a fit time of the day to use his own Phrase to widen Differences and set us at farther distances when we are almost sinking under fears and daily expectations of troubles Is it a fit season for us to be wrangling when Gods Rod is shaking over all our Heads Must he at such a time enter upon the old Obfolete Controversie and inveigh against Childrens Baptism which evermore hath occasioned heart-burnings and fruitless contendings especially when 't is disputed against with a lofty bitter and disdainful Spirit of which we perceive too much in this last attempt Ah! what a restless Genius is there attending some Opinions and how careless of the Churches Peace are the Abettors of them What the Author himself speaks pag. 308. from Clopenburg's Epistle of the Anabaptists heretofore in Germany is too true of some of those in England viz. That they suffer not the pure Reformed Churches to be edified without daily conflicts For not only heretofore in times of Liberty but even now under restraint some hot-spirited Persons publish their Tenents with such a rigid and condemning Spirit that it proves the greatest hinderance of Union and Conjunction amongst us in this Nation The
but rather as the Magdeburgenses do Cent. 2. p. 111. to the Mystery of Iniquity Mr. Geree of vind Paedobapt which so works in the Church of Rome in their corrupting and contaminating the simple forme of Baptism Indeed saith Mr. Philpot the Martyr to his fellow-sufferer that scrupled Infant-Baptism and afterward was satisfied by the strength of his Arguments if you look upon the Papistical Synagogue only which have corrupted God's Word by false interpretation and hath perverted the true use of Christs Sacraments you may seem to have good handfast of your opinion against the Baptism of Infants but for as much as it is of more Antiquity and hath its begining from God's Word and from the use of the Primitive Church it must not in respect of the abuse in the Popish Church be neglected or thought inexpedient Nor hath the Baptism of Adult Persons in former times been free from many corrupt and ridiculous Human inventions as Dr. Homes out of Binius and Epiphanius shews at large The Council of Carthage tells us Bin. Ca. 34 de rebus Eccles Cap. 26. that sick men lying speechless might be Baptized upon the witness of men touching their former condition The 4th Council of Carthage orders That those of ripe years to be Baptized must be dyered Bin. Cap. 85. and kept from Fesh and Wine a long time and after that having been examined several times must be Baptized Epiphanius declares that the Eunomians called Anabaptists do Rebaptize all that come to them Epiphan Anacephal pag. 108. Edit lat Bazil turning their Heads downward and their Heels upward Some of the Anabaptists called Hemerabaptists thought that none could be saved unless they were daily-Baptized whence they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gerard. Joh. Voffus de Anaebaptismo Thes 17. Gastius de Anaebap Exod. p. 50. daily Baptists and so were cleansed from their Sins Singulis diebus mergerentur ita ut Abluantur Sanctificentur ab omni culpa Secondly Another small plot or piece of tunning lyes in linking some spurious Authors with those which are Authentick to render also their Authority Suspicious There are some Ancient Writers which are very express for Infant-Baptism of great Authority in the Church of Rome which are rejected as spurious or interpolate by the Protestants such is that of Dimysius the Areopagite and the Decretal Epistles who notwithstanding have in high account the Testimonies of those Ancients viz. Justin Martyr Irenaus Origen Cyprian c. which are reputed as Authentick and of undoubted truth 3. There is much Impertinency in his Historical Account that is not concerned in the Question As the Story of Constantine Dedication Consecration or Baptizing of Churches and Bells Exposure of the Reliques of Saints for adoration Prohibiting Priests Marriages with much more ejusdem farinae But what is all this to Infant-Baptism 4. There are some errors or falsities in it As Tertullian's standing up against Infant-Baptism in the 3d Century when he stood up no more against it than he did against the Baptizing of Young-men that were unmarried and Young-Widows also whose Baptism he would have delayed 'T is certain he argues for the delay of Baptism in some cases praecipue circa paroulos Tertul. de Bapt. C. 8. especially that of little ones meaning the Children of unbelievers as is conceived by Estius Pamelins and divers others A Second Error respecting this Century is That the Magdeburgenses tell us they altered the form of Baptism from dipping to sprinkling referring us to Cent. 3. pag. 129. where they speak no such thing nor any-where else in the whole History of Baptism A Third Escape is That Infant-Baptism was not in use in the greatest part of the 4th Century either in the Latin or Greek Church Now this is very false nor will that help him which he adds afterward Scil. It is true saith he towards the latter end of this Century it is said that in some parts of Africa they did Baptize Children as Magdeburg Cent. 4. p. 415. but they say no such thing it is only the Authors own saying and really it troubles me to see so much prevarication every-where Take Reader the true account of what the Magdeburgenses say de Ritibus circa Baptismum about Baptismal Rites They are large in this Chapter and begin it thus That the power of Baptizing was in this Age in the Priests and principally in the Bishops and then in Presbyters and Deacons and then a few lines after they tell us Baptizabantur autem publice in templis cujuscunque sexus aetatis conditionis homines Persons of each Sex and of all Ages and Conditions were publickly Baptized in the Temples Nor hath this Chapter any such passage at the beginning middle or latter end that in some parts of Africa they did Baptize Children 5. I will not say there is a Tincture of prophaneness but am sure of something like it in that saying of the Authors pag. 128. of his Treatise viz. In this 6th Century saith he we meet with a dreadful piece of Infant-Baptism viz. The Heads of 6000 Infants that had been murdered buried in a Warren near a Monastery as testified by Vldricus to P. Nicolas Cent. 6. p. 338. But the Magdeburgenses are not so bold as the Author to call such horrid murder Infant-Baptism A tender conscience me thinks should be afraid thus to play with Holy things 6. This History of his affords some contradiction to himself I mean to what he hath before written for in the first part of his Book Cap 2. pag. 7. he quotes Bede for a Testimony that the Baptizing of Believers is the only true Baptism Bede saith That Men were first to be instructed unto the Knowledg of the Truth then to be Baptized as Christ hath taught c. Cent. 8. p. 220. Whereas in this his Second part of the Treatise which is for disproving Infant-Baptism pag. 130. Bede also concludes for the Baptizing of Infants Cent. 8. p. 218. 7. We observe too great a boldness in those scandalous Reflections which he casts upon the Churches of the Reformed Religion sparing none neither Lutherans nor Calvinists nor Episcoparians nor Presbyterians But me thinks 't is a piece of great indiscretion to fly out so much against the Church of England for if she be contented to give the Antipaedobaptists indifferent good quarter although they do not conform to her why should any of them vilify her in this manner As for the Kirk of Scotland the Author may more securely mock at it and there is no danger in having a fling at the Directory or at the old Parliament's Ordinance of May 2d 1648. which made it imprisonment to affirm Infant-Baptism is unlawful CHAP. III. Containing his Exceptions against Infant-Baptism because built as he says upon 1. Fabulous Traditions 2. Mistaken Scriptures with an Answer thereto 1. The first and Principal ground saith he that hath been asserted for this Practice is Ecclesiastical and
to scatter saving Grace in this Nation which are if not raised yet fomented by Anabaptism And their Principle he conceives hath been very prejudicial to the Conversion of young-ones amongst whom usually the stream of converting Grace runs because it speaks an actual disingagement from all relation to God his Covenant Church and Ordinances till of their own choice they take them up at years of discretion Now whilst persons live loose from such engagements as in their proper nature and tendency further Conversion no wonder if the work goes slowly on among them 3. By confounding the World and the Church together which Christ hath separated Not so For Baptism is God's Sheep-mark as Mr. Ford calls it to distinguish those that are of his Fold from such as graze in the wild Common of the World what confounding is there in this Principle That not only they who do actually profess Faith in and Obedience to Christ but also the Infants of one or both Believing Parents are to be Baptized and they only 7. By introducing and establishing many Humane Traditions and Inventions of Antichrist This is Mr. Tombe's his 6th Arg. Exercit. p. 1. Many of which and some of the worst attend the Baptism of grown Persons in the Church of Rome as Chrism Exorcism c. And when Mr. Tombes urged this very Argument against Infant-Baptism Mr. Geree tells him it was rather a Motive than a Reason against it to move peoples affections against the inconveniences following it rather than to convince the unlawfulness of it But that which is lawful in it self cannot reflect any scrûple of unlawfulness upon that which occasions it And if any corruption occasioned accidentally and separable from an act of Worship could cashier it then farewel Baptism it self Prayer Lords Supper and all that is Sacred for what a world of superstitious devices have the wanton and superstitious Heads and Hearts of Men taken occasion from them all to devise and practise it is so clear there needs no instances to be given 8. By being saith he such a Make-mate such a Bone of Contention and that among themselves too that own it as well as with those that oppose it The Lord open the eyes of those who are so zealous against Infant-Baptism that they may see their own nakedness consider the beam that is in their own eyes certainly whilst they judg our principle condemnation is written in their own foreheads First how furiously do they contend among themselves What a heat is there between Mr. Bunyan and Mr. Paul both of them for Baptizing Believers the former having published a little Book whose Title is Differences in Judgment about Water-Baptism no Bar to Communion or to Communicate with Saints as Saints proved Lawful of which I have before hinted complains in the Epistle to the Reader That the Brethren of the Baptized way would not suffer them to be quiet in their Christian Communion but did assault them for more than 16 years and as they had opportunity sought to break them in pieces meerly because they were not in their way all Baptized First He professeth that he denyed not the Ordinance of Baptism though they feigned it but all that he asserted was That the Church of Christ hath no warrant to keep out of their Communion the Christian that is discovered to be a visible Saint and walketh according to his light with God And for this Orthodox position they charge him to be a Machivelian a Man Devilish Proud Insolent Presumptuous words saith the poor Man fitter to be spoken to the Devil than a Brother He puts out his Confession of Faith upon which Mr. Paul makes reflections and tells him he defies all the Brethren of the Baptized way and Blasphemes them that dwell in heaven p. 3. That he belyes all Expositors p. 13. and calls upon the Heavens to blush at his insolency p. 35. that his Inferences are ridiculous top-ful of ignorance or prejudice and deserve no other answer than contempt p. 43. and then falls to prayer the Lord judg between us and this accuser to whom we shall say no more but the Lord rebuke thee And what sayes Bunyan to this in his Book of Differences in Judgment about Water-Baptism First that in his simple Opinion their rigid and Church-dividing disquieting Principles are not fit for any Age and State of the Church pag. 1. and I wish there were not too much truth in what he saith he accuseth them for endeavouring and perswading him to break Communion with his Brethren tampering with others that their Seeds of division might take and prevailed so far as to rent and dismember some from them and that the judgment of God so followed their design that the presons which then they prevail'd upon became afterward a stink and reproach to Religion I find our Author falling upon this good Man two to one is odds and lashing him to the purpose for his last Book you have it at the end of his Treatise of Baptism He chargeth Mr. Bunyan with absurdities contradictions traducing the Wisdom of Christ hainous Errors and fundamental mistakes whose Principles saith he are presumptuous savouring of ignorance and folly contradicting the Wisdom Authority of Christ ridiculous man of egregious ignorance and self-condemned and at last that he is one that pleaseth not God and is contrary to all Men which last must be understood with a limitation of all Men like himself But why should Professors of Religion throw so much dirt in the Faces of their Brethren that dissent from them Tantaene animis caelestibus irae Sure such language becomes not Christians Let it be supposed that they have truth on their side this is no good way to propagate it it needs not tali auxilio nec defensoribus istis The Wisdom which is from above is first pure then peaceable The Servant of the Lord must not strive but must be gentle towards all In meekness instructing those that oppose if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledgment of the Truth 2 Tim. 2.24 25. But haughty and uncharitable Spirits follow not this Rule if they be set upon a point though controvertible they have such a fire of zeal within that it breaks out into a flame that consumes the good name and credit of any that dare oppose it Your Opinionists if they have Faith they will not follow Paul's advice and keep it to themselves but are infinitely desirous to propagate it and are the severest Censurers in the World Two other Antipaedobaptists viz. Mr. Allen and Mr. Lamb being come off from that hide-bound Spirit of having Communion with none but those of our own Judgment are also lasht in the Authors Postscript They have saith he both declined the Truth and their Books which were pen'd with great Judgment strength of Argument and Authority of Scripture in his Opinion shall rise up in Judgment against them without Repentance for declining the Truth so confident is the Author
that he speaks by way of Prophesy that what they have writ shall not only live as a Witness for God and his reproached Truths but as a living Testimony against themselves in their unreasonable and unrighteous departure from the same except they repent to all generations if these Man cannot appeal to Heaven touching their own integrity so thundring a Sentence must needs trouble their Consciences Moreover if I mistake not they are divided amongst themselves about the Administrator of Baptism as unwholsome word because unscriptural Pastors Teachers Ministers we read of but no Administrators some holding none but men in Office may give Baptism others that a private Man may do it especially in case of necessity and Mr. Tombes favours this Opinion Praecursor pag. 72. and he gives his reason for it viz. because all or most of the Ministers ordained in England are against Baptizing of Persons of years Sprinkled in Infancy and there lying upon them that see Infant-Baptism a corruption a necessity to be Baptized upon Profession of Faith there is a necessity that they be Baptized by Persons not Ordained I like a man that will speak plainly his mind I will be as plain in opening mine and I think I have hit upon the truth namely that the Opposers of Infant-Baptism must hold that unbaptized Persons ☞ may Baptize and a Church with true Ordinances may be of unbaptized persons or else they must disown their new Baptism and all their Ordinances and turn Seekers For the first of their Administrators must either Baptize himself or else was Baptized by some Person Baptized in Infancy that is with them by an unhaptized Person Lastly I want not Instances to shew how impatient they are of having their adored Opinion contradicted and must prepare my self for the hard Censures of my Antagonist and his Party and had it not been for the honour of truth and love that I bear unto it they should have gone on till Dooms-day though I believe God will shortly break the neck of their ridged Principle before I would have disturb'd their quiet and exposed my self to their ill-will It is sufficiently observed and deplored by sober Christians that are unaddicted to faction how turbulent this fort of men have alwayes been as in forreign parts so in our own Country in the propagation of their Opinion and how distastful it is to them to have any thing said against their way There is a sad passage quoted by the Author himself pag. 308. of his Treatise out of Cloppenburg's Gangrene viz. The Troops of Anabaptists that dwell in Friestand although they trouble not the Commonwealth they suffer not the pure Reformed Churches to be edified without daily conflicts and what a stir they kept in Gemany with those Godly Ministers Luther Zwinglius Musculus contesting with them disturbing their Churches you shall hear shortly in our Animadversions upon the Authors historical part at the latter end of this discourse 9. By being an occasion saith he to stir up much bitter hatred wrath strife emnity persecution against those that oppose it How have they been followed with Stripes Imprisonments Confiscation yea Death it self Something of this may be layd at their own door as before hath been manifested in the persecution of the Tongue to which they are so much addicted but as for those Martyrs he speaks of that have suffered stripes imprisonment death we find very few of them in Fox his Martyrologie and none of them punished purely for opposing Infant-Baptism but the Antichristian Tenets of Rome Transubstantiation the Mass c. for which other Protestants suffered and some of them were put to death for asserting dangerous errors and for sedition here in England and multitudes for horrid acts beyond the Seas as shall appear in the Historical Narrative 10. By confirming hereby the whole Antichristian Interest as made good by the Preface An unworthy calumny and spoken without the least ground of reason only because Mr. Baxter hath declared his single Judgment in some things in reference to Baptism in some of which he speaks not positively and dogmatically but as I remember he qualifies it with such expressions as I think so or suppose so and how doth the delivery of his private Opinion about it render Infant-Baptism it self a point that confirms the whole Antichristian Interest that is not derived thence and hath no reference to or favour for it and when many Paedobaptists differ from Mr. Baxter and are unsatisfied at those passages in his Christian Directory Absurdities 11. By ushering in great Absurdities viz. 1. That Persons may have Regeneration and Grace before calling This is no Paradox to those who have heard of John Baptists being Sanctified in the Womb. I could here turn the Author to several places in Mr. Tombes his Works where he dares not deny but Infan̄ts may have the seed of Grace but I have spoken to this before only take notice of that is his Praecursor pag. 13. It is not doubted but Infants belong to the invisible Kingdom of the Elect but how they attain Salvation is not so certain if by a Seed of Faith and Holiness without actual exercise the thing is more easie to conceive c. And again he saith There are Believers of two sorts either in the Seed or Fruit either by Ordinary or Extraordinary Operation in one of which wayes Infants are or may be Believers 2. That Persons may be visible Church-members before Conversion And is that such a wonder We have proved that Chapter 6. Part 1. They were Church-members under the Law why not under the Gospel when were they excluded 3. That Persons may Repent Believe and be Saved by the Faith of another We own no such thing 4. That Types and Shadows profit after the Antitype and substance is come introducing thereby the Birth-priviledge The weakness of this is discovered before proving the Covenant made with Abraham still to continue to Believers and their natural Seed as you may see towards the end of the 3d Chapter Part. 2. 5. That the better to exclude Believers-Baptism new Church-Covenants are invented c. This is directed only against one sort of Paedobaptists called Independents whom he saith in point of order do err more than Prelate or Presbyter owning Infant-Baptism and yet denying them the right of Church-membership this is answered Chap. 6. Part 1. by shewing that they own the Infant Seed of Believers to be Church-members that is of the Universal Visible Church before Baptism and the reasons for it as also why they admit them not into their particular Churches when grown up till they make a serious Profession of that Faith into which they were Baptized and claim the priviledg of Communion Contradictions 12. By the manifold Contradictions that attend the Practice 1. By asserting that Baptism is a Symbol of present Regeneration wrought and yet apply it to ignorant unconverted Babes so uncapable of Regeneration This is a crambe bis cocta answered again and again
something of a greater concern For the design of that envious One hath been in all Ages to sow tares of Division He it was that made the first Schism in the glorious Communion and hath ever since out of an intense hatred to the peace and quiet of mankind stirred up Emulations Wrath Strife and mutual Antipathies in the minds of men especially among Christians hath he laboured to his utmost to foment and cherish Differences to agitate Schisms and to rend and tear the Church of Christ into divers Sects and Parties and by his notable subtilty and influence upon our corrupt nature to make our very Arguings and Contendings for the Faith once delivered too often managed with Pride Prejudice and carnal Interest a means rather of widening than healing our Breaches So that in our Contests of this nature if we gain but a grain of Truth we are in danger of losing a pound of Charity There is as the Apostle James terms it a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a bitter Zeal bitter indeed in its root issuing from a root of bitterness within and bitter in its fruits accursed discords and irreconcilable distances amongst Brethren The consideration whereof hath made me even jealous of my self lest in the foregoing Responsatory-discourse any thing hath dropt from my Pen which may tend rather to the exasperating than convincing our Opposites for 't is hard in disputes both not to be provoked and not to provoke Nevertheless I hope the Godly Sobery and Ingenuous amongst them will put the best interpretation upon all and the rather because they cannot but perceive how tender I have been of them manifesting respect to such throughout all the Discourse And though I contend with what I conceive is an error in them yet I cannot but love their persons for I know there are some of that Perswasion who for their eminency in Grace ought to be had in estimation by us And I would always distinguish the Humble and Holy from the Heady and High-minded the Tender and Conscientious from the Turbulent and Factions of that Party And Oh! how much do I long to see all rigidness on every side remov'd and a sweet correspondency and complyance between God's People though of different judgments as to the Subject of Baptism I have for more than twenty years considered the point and weighed what hath been said on both sides and cannot possibly be brought to judg it a matter of that moment as to break Communion or to be prosecuted with so much Vehemency as it is by some of the Dissenters 1. It being only about a point not so expresly revealed but that Godly Persons both in Christ visibly may differ in their light about it 2. Also it being only about the right or wrong application of an external Ceremony or Solemnity of Christ's Institution for Baptism in the outward Act of it can be esteemed no more Wherefore I could heartily wish there were a reviving of the Primitive Moderation when Christians did bear one with another and allow a liberty in matters of an higher nature without breach of Communion For I verily believe the Church of Christ hath received more prejudice by contesting about this thing than is commonly thought of for it hath always produced heart-burnings amongst Christians and undermined the Power of Godliness And it would be more for the honour of Religion if our Spirits were so attempered and sweetned as to indulge each other a latitude of practice according to our light and perswasion without imposing or condemning according to the Apostolical Rule Phil. 3.15 16. Certainly the differences that are amongst us about Baptism were they put in the Ballance of the Sanctuary to try whether they bear proportion to the distances and animosities attending the same they would be found too light And if Austin did so much lay to heart the breach which was between two single persons Jerom and Ruffinus concerning which we have spoken before in our Answer that he cryed out Hei mihi qui vos alicubi simul invenire non possum c. Wo is me that I cannot find you both together I would even fall down at your feet with much love and many tears I would beseech you for your selves and for one another and for weak Christians for whom Christ died that you suffer not these dissentions to spread Oh! how much more cause have we to lament the breaches of so many thousands of God's People and to use our utmost endeavours to repair the same I wish there were more of Melancthons Spirit amongst us who professed that though he had many domestical troubles yet the publick wounds of the Church arising much from the difference 'twixt Lutherans and Calvinists about the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper which Christ intended for a bond of love as he did the other of Baptism did most deeply afflict him Oh! how sad is it to behold the Staff of Beauty and the Staff of Bands Zech. 11.10 11. Zeph. 3.9 so broken amongst us And that we cannot call upon the Lord and serve him with one consent Those were Halcyon and blessed days when the multitude of Believers were of one heart and one soul when they held communion in Doctrine in Fellowship in breaking of Bread and Prayer When the People of God could hear together and pray together and receive together Act. 4.32 When those thousands of Believers were as if they had but one heart and soul to animate and actuate them in God's service What an eminent answer was this of Christ's Prayer Joh. 17.21 That they all may be One 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the words are very emphatical it is not said that they may love and agree though this be intended Burges on Joh. 17.21 but those words that they may be One is as if the Church of Christ should be but as one person and as the Apostle argues none ever hated his own flesh Eph. 5.30 and we are members of his Body and of his Flesh and of his Bones On this account there should be no divisions amongst the Members of Christ for they are one Spirit as it were They should no more hate one another than a man doth his own flesh And Dionysius the Arcopagite calls the Godly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is persons closely compacted into One according as the Apostle hath it Eph. 4.16 where he speaks of the Body's being compacted For they should be as the Pearl which is united in it self and is called Vnio He that is joyned to the Lord saith St. Paul is one Spirit One Spirit in himself One with God and One with all his People In order to this blessed Unon and Accommodation of the Godly I shall in all humility address my self to both Parties to them who are for and to them that are against Infant-Baptism 1. To the Dissenters in general 2. To the Antipoedobaptists in particular 1. Concerning the first of these the Dissenters in general that fear God I can with great