c. were accepted as Church-members in general and so of every Church in particular and that even upon their Baptism although this Anti-Baptism would have you believe that in the second of the Acts Baptism and adding to the Church appear to be two distinct things whom I would have remember Solomon his advice Prov. 30.6 Add thou not to his words lest he reprove thee and thou be found a lyar But John Bunyan is now grown positive and confidently saith pag. 76. Take it again Baptism makes thee no member of the Church neither particular nor universal neither doth it make thee a visible Saint It therefore gives thee neither right to nor being of Membership at all Answ Here is a brave flourish but an impudent assertion contrary to truth but no marvel that you find him contrary to truth who is contrary to almost all Christians yea to himself and that often in one little Book Wherefore although he excludes Baptism so utterly as to say it doth not make us members at all yet I shall affirm that Baptism in a sense yea in a great measure doth make us Church-members which also J. Bunyan doth confess and that from the Example of the Primitive Saints For he acknowledgeth pag. 70. That in the Primitive times Baptism was administred upon Conversion yea he further grants pag. 91. That in the Apostles dayes Water-Baptism went before Church-Membership Now that which was administred upon the Conversion of Persons yea before they were Church-members and thereupon to be accounted Church-members which John Bunyan in his right mind is forced to acknowledge of Baptism sure must be said in a great measure to make us Church-members and Baptism being so administred in the Primitive times is it not necessary it should be so now Can we alter the Primitive manner of receiving into the Church without being guilty of great iniquity ought we not to follow the Examples of the Primitive Churches Since I have proceeded thus far having now the appearance of so good grounds I shall through God's assistance adventure to prove the necessity thereof not being at all affrighted with J. Bunyan's opprobrious censures wherein if I should affirm Baptism to be an initiating Ordinance it would appear to be true by John Bunyan's own Confession Arg. 1. For that which ought to be administred upon Conversion before Church-membership is an initiating Ordinance But Baptism ought to be administred before Church-membership upon Conversion Ergo. The Major I suppose none will deny the Minor I prove thus Arg. 2. If Baptism was so administred in the Primitive Churches Then it ought to be so now But Baptism was so administred in the Primitive Churches Ergo. The Minor is J. Bunyan's own grant pag. 70. pag. 91. The Major is proved 1 Thess 4.1 where the Apostle beseecheth and exhorteth and that by the Lord Jesus That Saints should walk as we have received from them yea in 2 Thess 3.6 he commands the Churches in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ to with-draw from every one that walketh so disorderly viz. not according to the Traditions of the Apostles Again Is not Baptism called Heb. 5.12 Chap. 6.1 2. one of the first Principles of the Oracles of God a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ part of the Foundation and what is that but an initiating or entring Ordinance Is not the laying the foundation of an house a great entrance to the building So is Baptism in the practice of Christianity And are not the first Principles in any Matter or Doctrine the initiating or entring thereinto The same is Baptism as aforesaid in Christianity I might evidently set forth that it may truly be so called but leaving that denomination I shall touching the Controversie in hand state this Proposition viz. That Baptism is a duty necessarily to be observed by Christians in obedience to God and in order to Church-Communion I say necessarily to be observed for some things are lawful for a Christian but not expedient Some things again are expedient but not necessary but other things are necessary and must be done of which sort is Baptism This Christ himself testifieth Matth. 3.15 Thus it behooveth us mark he speaketh not particularly of himself but also of his followers us And also he saith Thus it behoveth Oportet nos we must do thus to fulfil God's righteous Commands When Paul was miraculously converted he was Commanded by the Lord to go into the City and there it should be told him what he must do Acts 9.6 and what that was appears from the words of Ananias rehearsed by Paul himself Acts 22.16 Arise and be baptized This Peter sheweth the necessity of 1 Pet. 3.21 by a figurative demonstration speaking of the Ark of Noah Wherein few that is eight Souls were saved by Water The like figure whereunto saith he Baptism doth also now save us Surely the Ark was so necessary for their Salvation viz. their preservation from death that only they that were therein were saved and the Apostle tells you Baptism is the like but as he afterwards explains not the putting away the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good Conscience towards God Now how necessary a good Conscience is and how much to be pressed after I think I need not tell you and Baptism is the answer of a good Conscience towards God it is so venerable an Ordinance notwithstanding John Bunyan is pleased to slight it saying pag. 104. We are not the better if we do it or the worse if we do it not not the better saith he before God nor the worse before men That those who are subject thereto are said Luk. 7.29 to justifie God what greater applause can men have and on the contrary those that do not submit thereto reject the Counsel of God against themselves and must not this be concluded to be a necessary duty yea surely it was Commanded by Christ himself Matth. 28.19 to be administred to all Disciples Disciple all Nations baptizing them c. teaching them that are so baptized to observe the same vers 20. in the performance whereof Christ hath promised his continual Presence wherefore Peter gave this counsel to the distressed Jews Act. 2.38 that cried out in great terror What shall we do Repent and be baptized every one of you As this was his advice to the distressed so also it was to those that received the holy Spirit plentifully Acts 10.48 He commanded them to be baptized in the Name of the Lord. It seems it is an Ordinance meet to be observed by all sorts of Christians the Jayler and his house Acts 16.33 Lydia and her house vers 15. Crispus and his house Acts 18.8 Samaria Acts 8.12 the Eunuch vers 38. yea all without exception that gladly received the Word were baptized and thereupon added to the Church Acts 2.41 I might be large herein but John Bunyan hath spared my labour for he yields the case and confesseth pag. 122 123. That Baptism is an holy
Christ's Ordinances to holy Ordinances to enjoyned duties I know not surely what if not this discovers Faith Again an Ordinance of Christ an holy Ordinance a Duty enjoyned and yet no discovery of Holiness Is it not Holiness it self to obey Christ's Ordinances his holy Ordinances to perform duties enjoyned Thus the wise are taken in their own craftiness 1 Cor. 3.19 Further Is not a real subjection to Christ's Ordinances a real performance of those Duties enjoyned us the best declaration of a willingness thereto yet all this John Bunyan is pleased positively to deny although he doth not only confess concerning Baptism as aforesaid viz. That it is an Ordinance of Christ an holy Ordinance a Duty enjoyned But further tells us It is of excellent use to the Church pag. 64. But what is that It seems it is no discovery of Faith nor Holiness nor a willingness to subject to Christ's Laws it is of no use in these things nor of any use in Church-Communion what excellent use is it then of John Bunyan answers It is a representation of the Death and Resurrection of Christ an help to our Faith yea meet to instruct us in the most weighty matters of the Kingdom of God pag. 64 65. Reply Well said John Bunyan it seems now Baptism is good for something the Devils sometimes were enforced to confess Christ saying Mark 3.11 Luk. 4.34 41. We know thee who thou art Jesus the Holy One of God although they were his great Enemies Even so J. B. is in this inconsistent not only to Truth but also to himself for sure the obedience to such an Ordinance as is ordained by Christ a representation of his Death and Resurrection a help to our Faith an instruction in the most weighty matters of the Kingdom of God an enjoyned Duty is a discovery of Faith and Holiness and a declaration of subjection to Christ's Laws And if so then it is the Rule of Communion John Bunyan himself proposeth in his aforementioned description pag. 70. and so the cause he hath wilfully lost but no marvel that men are deceived when they stand up against the Ordinances of Christ But tarry We must not conclude he saith Baptism is no initiating or entring Ordinance into Church-Communion and herein is the mistake to think it is so because in time past Baptism was administred upon conversion pag. 70. Answ If by time past he meaneth the Apostle's dayes which I presume he doth for he further confesseth that Water-baptism in the Primitive times was generally submitted to before Church-Communion pag. 91 92. I wonder where is the greatest mistake whether in John Bunyan's vilifying the Ordinances of Baptism or in the observation thereof according as himself confesseth the Practice of the Primitive Church and that upon Conversion before Communion sure there can be no mistake in following so good a pattern But he proceeds to tell us The Word doth not testifie it to be an initiating Ordinance pag. 70. Answ What testimony need we have further than your own Confession out of thy own mouth thou shalt be judged Is not the Primitive pattern their general Practice a sufficient testimony Doth not the word of the Scripture enjoyn us to follow that Example But peradventure J. B. would have a plain Text to say Baptism is an initiating Ordinance wherein I commend John Bunyan in putting the question into such terms as he well knew were not to be found expresly in the Scripture he thought it would make most for his advantage and might carry the best gloss in the denial which to illustrate he tells you pag. 71. It wants the nature and power of such an Ordinance for that which is the initiating Ordinance saith he doth give to the partakers a being of Church-membership in that particular Church by which it is administred without the addition of another Church-act And this he endeavoureth to prove by the Example of Circumcision which saith he pag. 71. was to the Jews an initiating Ordinance whereby they were made forthwith Church-members and also none so accompted nor admitted but those that did partake thereof Answ His proofs for what is here said are various although when enquired into there is no such thing to be found and therefore I may say it is a deceipt of J. B for as he saith of Baptism so must I say of Circumcision by the Word there is no such thing to be found Where is Circumcision called expresly in Scripture an initiating Ordinance yet J. B. is pleased so to call it upon far less grounds than there is for Baptism so to be called for if Circumcision was such an Ordinance as he describes what must be said of Sarai Rebeka Deborah and all the holy Women of old who at once John Bunyan shuts the Church-door against and will not suffer them to enter It is well God's thoughts are not like mens Surely I might upon better grounds than J. B. prove That some uncircumcised persons were admitted to Church-fellowship For if uncircumcised persons were admitted into the Temple of God to pray there c. Then uncircumcised persons were Church-Members for the Temple was more peculiar than the Passeover But Anna and divers Holy Women uncircumcised persons did reside in the Temple Ergo. Yea further if I should say Holy Women did eat the Passeover I suppose I should not be gainsaid although it overthrows John Bunyan's position but we see this like the Sodomites that whilst they endeavoured to break open the door of Lot's house they were so smitten with blindness that they could not find the doors of their own Gen. 19.11 this astonished them But John Bunyan is more obdurate for he yet persists in the defamation of Baptism and tells us p. 74. First There was none debarred or threatned to be cut off from the Church if not first baptized Secondly That Baptism doth not give a being of Membership in this or that particular Church by whose Members the Parties are baptized Answ First how can J. Bunyan expect any instance to be given of the debarring of any unbaptized Person when that by his own Confession pag. 91. in the Primitive times they were generally even all Disciples baptized upon Conversion And if so much less can it be expected to find any threatned to be cut off from the Church because not first baptized there not being in those dayes such an Heretick hatch'd as would so explode Baptism To the second That Baptism doth not give a being of Membership into this or that particular Church I answer It is not required if considered distinctly neither did Circumcision so although much boasted of Did Circumcision give a being of Membership in particular Churches distinct one Person to be a member at Jerusalem another at Capernaum c. and there only No surely he that was a member in one place was a member in all and therefore J. Bunyan's needless questions and assertions pag. 74. might have been spared for the Eunuch Cornelius Lydia the Samaritans
Ordinance of God a duty enjoyned such who receive the Gospel And what can be more said if it be a duty enjoyned it is a necessary duty c. Wherefore I shall only add for Confirmation some Arguments as follow viz. Arg. 1. If the non-subjection to Baptism debars men from Church-Communion Then the subjection thereto is necessary in order to Church-Communion But the non-subjection to Baptism debars men from Church-Communion Ergo. The Major is undeniable the Minor I shall prove thus Arg. 2. If the walking disorderly not according to the Traditions received from the Apostles debars men from Church-Communion Then the non-subjection to Baptism debars men from Church-Communion But the walking disorderly not according to the Traditions received from the Apostles debars men from Church-Communion Ergo. The Minor is proved 2 Thess 3.6 where the Apostle commands That all who walk disorderly not according to their Traditions should be debarred Communion The Major I prove thus Arg. 3. If the non-subjection to Baptism be a disorderly walking not according to the Traditions of the Apostles Then the Major is true But the non-subjection to Baptism is a disorderly walking not according to the Traditions of the Apostles Ergo. Nothing in this Argument can be questioned except the Minor and that surely cannot be denied by John Bunyan with whom I have now to deal for by his own Confession pag. 64. Baptism is an Ordinance of Jesus Christ an holy Ordinance of God pag. 123. and that of excellent use to instruct in the most weighty matters of the Kingdom of God p. 65. an enjoyned Duty p. 122. an apparant Tradition of the Apostles for in those dayes he confesseth pag. 70. it was administred upon Conversion and used then to go before Church-Communion Again Arg. 4. If the non-subjection to Baptism be a sin against God a rejecting the Counsel of God against our selves and the breach of a good Conscience Then it debars men from Church-Communion But the non-subjection to Baptism is a sin against God a rejecting the Counsel of God against our selves and the breach of a good Conscience Ergo. The Major I think none can deny and the Minor is evident by John Bunyan's own Confession as aforesaid and the Scriptures before alleaged Matth. 28.19 7.29 1 Pet. 3.21 Further Arg. 5. If all Church-Members in the Apostles dayes were baptized Then Baptism is necessary to Church-Communion But all Church-Members in the Apostles dayes were baptized Ergo. One would think this Argument should put the matter out of doubt both Propositions being acknowledged by John Bunyan himself yea urged by him as weighty truths for he makes the Example of the Primitive New-Testament-Churches the ground of his Communion p. 52. yea so far that he saith He dares not do otherwise than they did And if we follow that Rule proposed by himself we must not do otherwise and what then Surely they baptized all Church-members before Communion as he confesseth pag. 91. But that I may not conclude with the Confession of a man so various although it may well be alleaged against himself as in one little Treatise to speak so many inconsistencies I shall proceed to another Argument Arg. 6. If all Church-members are commanded to be baptized Then the subjection to Baptism is necessary to Church-Communion But all Church-members are commanded to be baptized Ergo. The Major is apparent The Minor I prove thus Arg. 7. If Baptism is commanded to all Disciples Then it is commanded to all Church-members But Baptism is commanded to all Disciples Ergo. No man can doubt of the truth of the Major that believeth Church-members to be Disciples which I suppose no Christian in his right mind will deny And the Minor I shall prove from the words of Christ Matth. 28.19 20. Go teach all Nations baptizing them c. the Text is read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which being interpreted is Disciple ye all Nations baptizing them c. viz. those that are Discipled as by the Grammatical construction of the words may appear teaching them that is the baptized Disciples to observe or keep diligently all things whatsoever I have commanded you One whereof was to baptize those that were discipled But it seems that either J. B. was never a baptized Disciple or that his Instructors forgot to teach him this Rule of Christ or else he hath soon forgotten what he learned if it be not a perverse transgressing of what he knoweth and so guilty of many stripes Luk. 12.47 But to return since John Bunyan is pleased notwithstanding his aforementioned Confessions to deny Baptism to be the Rule of Communion let us hear what Rule he would have which he thus declares pag. 78. Even that rule by which they are discovered to the Church to be visible Saints and willing to be gathered into their Body and Fellowship Answ Well said but how must that be if not by obedience to Christ's Ordinances to the holy Ordinances of God yea the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ is not the subjecting thereto a discovery of a visible Saint and a willingness to be gathered into the Body even the Church John Bunyan to this pag. 79. answers No it is not saith he the practising of a circumstantial but the commendation of their Faith by the Word of Faith and their conversation by a moral Precept wherefore he tells us pag. 79. That when Paul had declared his Faith he falls down to the body of the Law saying Receive us we have wronged no man we have corrupted no man we have defrauded no man 2 Cor. 7.2 From whence with divers such Instances and Paraphrases of his own thereupon he concludes pag. 79. That by the Word of Faith and good Works viz. Moral Duties Gospelized we ought to judge of the fitness of Members by which we ought also to receive them into Fellowship Answ We read that Moses put a vail over his face to hinder the splendor of his countenance from dazling the eyes of the beholders but lo here J. B. puts a vail over his face to impede the discovery of his perverting the Ordinances of God and the Rule of Communion which that I may so far put away that he may appear as he is Concerning what is said Consider First how this Thesis is consistent with John Bunyan's own judgment concerning Circumcision for sure Baptism is not more a Circumstance than that yet by his own grant that was of old the Rule of Communion Secondly Why in his sense he should call Baptism a Circumstance I know not it hath been proved a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ a Foundation-principle Heb. 6.1 A necessary duty a duty enjoyned to those that receive the Gospel and is it notwithstanding all this but such a Circumstance the Lord God of Heaven judge between us Again He comes to affirm pag. 79. what is the Rule of Communion viz. To have our Faith commended by the Word of Faith and our Conversation by a
the moral Precept Evangelized is perfect But may not I herein use John Bunyan's own words and turn them against himself as one justly guilty of Fictions and Scriptureless Notions for where do you read in Scripture of the Law Evangelized Surely the contrary is often found and although James as it is urged by John Bunyan Chap. 2. prelling love which he calls the Royal Law and indeed was before the Law given upon Sinai 1 Joh. 2.7 urgeth it to be according to what was before written yet he doth not call the Law given upon Sinai the Royal Law or the Law of Liberty as J. Bunyan falsly pretends contrary to Paul's words who saith Gal. 4.24 It was a Law although as much Evangelized in his dayes as now which gendreth to bondage yea the Ten Commandments written in stone so exalted by John Bunyan he calls the ministration of death 2 Cor. 3.7 of condemnation vers 9. and placeth it in opposition to the ministration of the Spirit and of Righteousness which is the glorious Gospel of Jesus Christ that needeth not have any recourse to the Law being in it self much more perfect as indeed the Law of Liberty which James intends As also Paul saith Rom. 8.2 The Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the Law of sin and death Wherefore in short The Apostle James doth not as John Bunyan pretends exalt the Law given upon Sinai as the Rule of Communion but writing to the Brethren of the dispersed Twelve Tribes whom he well knew were zealous of the Law he endeavours thereby to convince them of their Duty as Christ did to the Jews Joh. 5.39 45. And Paul the Heathens by the words of their own Poets Acts 17.28 confirming the Truth by the witness of themselves Tit. 1.12 as I also often take occasion to do from J. Bunyan his own Confession although I should be as far from making his words the Rule of Truth as Paul the writings of the Heathen Poets which never were alleaged to that end yet J. Bunyan might as well affirm it as to say that James Chap. 2. calls the Law given upon Sinai the Law of Liberty which also he is pleased to avouch as the Rule of Communion pag. 82. alleaging the words of Paul I am under the Law to Christ which sure as he shunned naming the place he might have been ashamed to have instanced in this case it being only a Parenthesis in 1 Cor. 9.21 where Paul having declared his endeavours to gain many that it might not be thought John Bunyan-like he would wave Christ's Ordinances or pervert his Doctrine he tells us That in all this his condescention before spoken of he is not without Law to God but under the Law to Christ having as if he should have said great respect to his holy Ordinances which must not be violated by any means not the Law of Sinai for if himself may be heard he saith Gal. 2.19 That he was dead to that and that dead to him as is confirmed Rom. 7.1 2 3. by the Example of a Widow whose Husband is dead from whence the Apostle concludes vers 6. That we are delivered from the Law that being dead wherein we were held whereupon sure it may be concluded of John Bunyan as Paul saith 1 Tim. 1.7 He would be a Teacher of the Law although he understandeth neither what he saith nor whereof he affirms although we know the Law is good if a man use it lawfully as farther appeareth in that Distich pag. 83. where he saith Communion is forbidden with such as live in the transgression of a moral Precept alleaging Paul's words 1 Cor. 5.11 If any man that is called a Brother be a Fornicator or Covetous or an Idolator or a Railer or a Drunkard or an Extortioner with such a one no not to eat Paul saith not John Bunyan tells you if any man be not baptized or joyn with the unbaptized these saith J. B. are fictions and Scriptureless-notions Answ I must say to John Bunyan herein as was said to Peter Matth. 26.73 Thy speech bewrayeth thee If any man that is called a Brother c. They were Church-members whom these words were spoken of and already baptized by John Bunyan's own grant and therefore Paul needed not to say If any be unbaptized for there was none such amongst them but it seems there were some that so far degenerated from their Profession as to be guilty of some of the aforesaid Evils wherefore Paul tells them without the Law of Sinai they ought to be excluded from the Church for the Gospel of Christ Jesus permits none such wicked persons to be retained We say therefore Although upon Confession of Faith and submission to Baptism c. We ought to receive persons into Fellowship and Church-Communion according to the pattern of the Primitive Churches yet if any such shall be guilty of the aforesaid Evils they must be again separated according to the blessed Rule of Christ which Paul by the afore-said words intends wherein although he doth not say If any man be unbaptized c. having then no occasion for such words yet sure it is great impudence in John Bunyan to say they are Fictions and Scriptureless Notions Is it a Fiction to deny Communion with those that are disobedient to a Principle of Christ's Doctrine is that a scriptureless Notion Doth not the Scripture say If any man transgresseth and abideth not in the Doctrine of Christ whereof Baptism is a part he hath not God 2 Joh. 9. and v. 10. If any man come like John Bunyan and bring not that Doctrine he is to be rejected But to colour the design John Bunyan proceeds to tell the World pag. 83. That the Word of Faith and the Moral Precept is that which Paul enjoyns the Galatians and Philippians still avoiding outward Circumstances he might as well have said Baptism Hence therefore saith he when he had treated of Faith he falls point-blank upon moral Duties urging pag. 84. that in Christ neither Circumcision nor Vncircumcision availeth any thing but a new Creature and that peace is promised to as many as walk according to this Rule Gal. 6.15 16. Which Rule he would have you believe excludes Baptism and therefore he adds pag. 86. In Christ Jesus no outward or Circumstantial thing but a new Creature wherein he proceeds to tell us a fair tale from whence he concludes pag. 90. That seeing Baptism is no initiating Ordinance nor visible Character of a Saint no breach in a good and holy life nor intrencheth upon any man's right but his own Faith may be effectual without it and his life approved by the worst of his enemies he may keep the Law wherefore his friends should not dishonour God in breaking the Law Alleaging the words of James Chap. 4.11 Speak not evil of one another Brethren for he that speaketh evil of his Brother speaketh evil of the Law and judgeth the Law From whence he reasons That the
I say he is conscious of the weakness and fallacy thereof otherwise he would never have spent so much time in vain as to alleage afterwards Ten other Reasons to confirm his Opinion and Practice when he had done it so invincibly before unless therewith as the Red Dragon with his ten horns he is minded so to push against the Truth that he might overthrow it root and branch For the prevention whereof although it need not much be feared from John Bunyan I shall adventure a further encounter to try the strength of his Weapons and the force of his Reasons The first is this Reas 1. Because the true visible Saint hath already subjected to that which is better even to the Righteousness of God which is by Faith in Jesus Christ c. He is therefore to be received not by thy light not for that in Circumstances he jumpeth with thy Opinion but according to his own Faith which he ought to keep to himself before God as Paul saith 1 Cor. 10.29 Conscience I say not of thy own but of the other c. pag. 94 95. Answ Here you have John Bunyan's first Reason wherein he tells you the true visible Saint hath subjected to that which is better But can a man be a true visible Saint that visibly opposeth Christ's Ordinances He that hath my Commandments and keepeth them saith Christ Joh. 14.21 he it is that loveth me he is my friend Joh. 15.14 And our Saviour renders the Reason thereof Chap. 14.23 If any man love me he will keep my words And again vers 24. He that keepeth not my sayings loveth me not surely without offence I may add Is no true visible Saint But John Bunyan not forgetting to oppose the Lord Christ will vindicate such disobedience and tell you the Saint he describeth hath subjected to that which is better Well be it so doth it therefore follow the less must be despised I hope John Bunyan will allow The life is more than meat and the Body than raiment yet the lesser must be received for the preservation of the greater Besides had not Paul the greater when he was Converted to the Faith Yet Ananias although he was informed that he was a chosen Vessel which was the better commands him to be baptized Acts 22.16 Had not Cornelius and his Companions the greater when their hearts were purified by Faith and also replenished with the Holy Spirit Acts 10.44 Chap. 11.15 17. yet Peter commands them to be baptized Yea had not Christ himself the greater to whom the Spirit was not given by measure Joh. 3.34 Yet when John peradventure upon the same account as John Bunyan pretends forbad his Baptism Matth. 3.14 Christ answers vers 15. Suffer it to be so for thus it behooveth us to fulfil all righteousness Baptism it seems is no indifferent thing although John Bunyan would have you believe it so alleaging as aforesaid the words of Paul 1 Cor. 10.29 which words only have respect to the eating of meats which were permitted although not enjoyned wherein therefore if a weak Brother should be offended they were advised not to eat for Conscience sake Conscience saith Paul not of thy own for it is lawful in it self but of the other who thinks it unlawful touching which J. Bunyan pretends that you might think him to make his way plain it may be objected that what the Apostles wrote they wrote to such as were baptized and therefore the Arguments in the Epistles about things Circumstantial respect not the case in hand To which he answers First that this is a mistake the first to the Corinthians the Epistle of James the first and second of Peter the first Epistle of John were expresly written to all the godly as well as to particular Churches pag. 86. Secondly That if Water-baptism as the Circumstances with which the Churches were pestered of old trouble their peace wound the Consciences of the Godly dismember and break their Fellowship it is although an Ordinance for the present to be prudently shunned for the Edification of the Churches is to be preferred before it Answ Touching this as is here said I must tell you first J. Bunyan is mistaken and sure he either mistakes or forgets himself for is not this the same J. Bunyan who in the same Treatise confessed pag. 91. That in the Apostles dayes Baptism went before Church-Communion Yea he further saith pag. 92. It was then generally practised by all Disciples and if so then sure the fore-mentioned Epistles although general were directed to baptized persons Secondly Those things which the Apostles treat of as indifferent were such only as were permitted either to be done or not done wherein many times there was no expedience in the performance thereof as Paul saith in the aforementioned 1 Cor. 10.23 All things are lawful but all things are not expedient Wherein he also saith All things edify not and therefore adviseth That no man should seek his own but every man his Brothers wealth but there is no such indifferency in Baptism which hath been proved a necessary Duty if that be a Circumstance it is a necessary Circumstance that must be performed Although J. Bunyan supposeth it may pester the Churches trouble their Peace wound their Consciences c. wherefore in his judgment although an Ordinance to be shunned How Do Christ's holy Ordinances ever pester the Churches trouble their Peace wound the Consciences of the Godly dismember and break their Fellowship I never heard it so to do but very efficacious on the contrary But if so let me tell you it is an evil sign even as when the stomach is offended with wholesome food A sign of an evil heart from whence undoubtedly the cause thereof proceeds But I 〈…〉 think it is but the delusion of John Bunyan to conceit it as once Ahab counted the holy Prophet Elijah the troubler of Israel 1 King 18.17 Wherefore herein let us not be perswaded to shun that which ought to be imbraced But rather as David said to Michael 2 Sam. 6.22 let us resolve that if it be accounted vile and evil to obey our God in his Holy Ordinances We will yet be more vile Thus much for the answer to his first Reason His second follows Reas 2. Observe secondly One Spirit one Hope one Lord one Faith one Baptism not of Water for by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body one God and Father of all and through all and in you all is a sufficient Rule for us to hold Communion by also to endeavour the maintaining that Communion and to keep it in unity within the bond of peace against all attempts whatsoever p. 96. Answ What presumption is this in wresting the Holy Scripture which perswadeth to unity amongst other Reasons because there is one Baptism But John Bunyan would have fellowship with the unbaptized contrary to what is here intended by the Apostle and that as he saith because this one Baptism is not of Water Although the
Circumstance or Substance which is apparently false God is hereby made the Author of sin for in this Reason he urgeth That the Church ought to bear with the sinful infirmities of their Brethren For those he saith are caused for want of Light And how come they to want Light he tells you pag. 94. It is God that creates Light and he that with-holdeth So that God not creating Light in their hearts causeth them to err and to be guilty of sinful infirmities Is not here verified what is written God shall send them strong delusions to believe a lye Is not this according to the words of that idle Servant Matth. 25.24 who saith of God he knew him to be an hard man reaping where thou hast not sown and gathering where thou hast not strawed So saith John Bunyan who without Repentance may expect the like sentence Reas 5. I come now to his 5th Reason p. 104. Because a failer in such a Circumstance as Water doth not unchristian us This must needs be granted not only from what was said before but for that thousands of thousands that could not consent thereto are now with the innumerable company of Angels c. wherefore what is said of eating or the contrary may as to this be said of Water-baptism neither if I am baptized am I the better neither if I be not am I the worse not the better before God nor the worse before Men Whereupon after some plausible words he concludes pag. 106. seeing the things wherein we exceed each other are such as neither make nor mar Christianity let us love one another and walk together according to the glorious Rule above specified meaning to have Church-Communion with unbaptized persons Answ To love one another I should readily consent for we ought to love all men But for Church-Communion I cannot until I see it proved that we ought to do so which I am sure John Bunyan hath not for he hath not yet proved it lawful much less expedient but further from being necessary which he pretends And surely this Reason cannot sway a wise man to do that which is not proved lawful I say this Reason which is grounded upon a false Position for although Baptism doth not make a Christian yet the want of it may mar a Christian and the neglect thereof unchristian men For he that despiseth God although once honoured shall be lightly esteemed 1 Sam. 2.30 A good Conscience may be put away 1 Tim. 1.19 that there may be need of the formation of Christ in the heart again Gal. 4.19 John Bunyan's instance of the thousand thousands that did not consent to Baptism which are now as he saith in Heaven is no sufficient proof that it ought to be or that it may be despised now I suppose he will confess there are thousand thousands as much in Heaven as they who did not believe that Christ was then come in the flesh but he that denieth it now is Antichrist 1 Joh. 4.3 And notwithstanding John Bunyan's confidence if he should now deny Christ come in the flesh it would unchristian him I might give many more instances in this case but from hence you may perceive how inconsiderate he is to conclude that of Baptism from false grounds which Paul speaketh of eating meats which were lawful to be eaten or not eaten Would any wise man oppose such indifferent things to an Ordinance and Institution of Christ Jesus sure Obedience to express Commands whatsoever we are before men makes us better before God Reas 6. I come now to his 6th Reason p. 107. I am therefore for holding Communion thus because the Edification of Souls in the Faith and Holiness of the Gospel is of greater concernment than our agreeing in or contesting for the business of Water-baptism That the Edification of the Soul is of the greatest concern is out of measure evident c. Answ John Bunyan's Position here stated he endeavoureth by divers Reasons to prove viz. That the Edification of the Soul is of the greatest concern which I here omit because whilst he endeavoureth to prove that he mistakes the matter in question for it is apparent that Baptism and the rest of Christ's Ordinances are the means appointed for the Edification of the Souls of men and if so the Argument is fallacious and must fall which surely he is himself conscious of and therefore to prevent it he saith pag. 109. Know that the Edification of the Church of God dependeth not upon neither is tyed to this or that Circumstance Much said but little proved wherefore in short I may answer You have only J. Bunyan's word for it who herein doth not only exclude Baptism but also whatsoever he is pleased to call a Circumstance whereof the Supper of the Lord is one by his own confession pag. 64. so that it also is excluded by him from Church-Edification contrary to what is declared of the Primitive Saints who walking in the fear of God having Fellowship one with another were edified yea Paul accounts Church-discipline for the Edification of the Church 2 Cor. 13.10 And in truth all Gospel-Ordinances are for Edification so that if we must press after that it obligeth us to press after the means tending thereto But J. Bunyan seems to put a little gloss upon the matter viz. When there is in the hearts of the Godly different perswasions about it then it becometh them in the wisdom of God to take more care for their peace and unity than to widen their uncomfortable differences Thus J. Bunyan would have the Churches to be like Simeon and Levi Brethren agreeing in iniquity to bear with sin and to wink at the trangressions of Christ's Ordinances rather than to disagree thereupon contrary to the advice of the Apostle who as he withstood Peter to the face because he was to be blamed Gal. 2.11 directs That if any Brother walketh disorderly viz. in disobedience to Christ's Ordinances he must be withdrawn from 2 Thess 3.6 But John Bunyan to perswade the Churches to strike hands in disobedience and to countetenance their doings therein alleageth pag. 110 divers instances of unlawful things done of old yet winked at if not approved To all which if it be so sure the Apostle's words Rom. 6.1 What shall we say thereto shall we continue in sin that grace may abound God forbid might to sober men be a sufficient answer But that I might discharge my duty herein I shall give for the better satisfaction of those concerned a particular Answer thereto in order His first Instance is of Aaron pag. 109. in these words Although Aaron transgressed the Law because he eat not the Sin-Offering of the People yet seeing he could not do it with satisfaction to his own Conscience Moses was content that he left it undone Levit. 10.16.20 Answ John Bunyan tells us That Aaron transgressed the Law because the Law was against his Conscience and that Moses was content therewith but surely then Moses was not faithful in
neither himself Apollo or Cephas were Crucified for them And also one Baptism they were not baptized into the Name of any but Christ wherefore he exhorts them to leave off their folly and pride and walk in love as they were commanded but not to slight Baptism as John Bunyan whose tongue hath no bounds is pleased to say Paul did making no matter at all thereof in respect to Church-Communion But I wish he may be ashamed of his thus wresting the Scriptures and the intentions of the Apostle who alwayes spake reverently with an holy estimation of Baptism not like John Bunyan who in a little Treatise both commends and depraves it thereby rendring himself conspicuous for his instability But if you ask why the Apostle spake after that manner saying I thank God I baptized none but Crispus and Gaius c. Know it was not because he made no matter thereof as to Church-Communion but to take away the occasion of their contention as he declares himself lest any should say I baptized in my own Name And whereas John Bunyan seems to take advantage at those words I know not whether I baptized any other And from thence concludes contrary to the Apostles thoughts That he did not heed who were baptized by any body as much as if he should say that he did not heed whether they were baptized or no. I must answer That I wonder any wise man should urge such a Conclusion from Paul's words especially John Bunyan who confesseth Baptism is an holy Ordinance and was obeyed by the Corinthians and if so Paul must needs know they were all baptized and then no matter by whom viz. which of the Apostles But to take away that occasion of boasting concerning himself he tells them he did not know whether he baptized any but the persons aforenamed which is no strange thing for a Minister to be ignorant of for unless he keep 't a Register how should he remember it There be some in our dayes that dare not slight Baptism touching Church-Communion yet can say in this case as Paul did Further whereas it is alleaged that Paul said I was not sent to Baptize but to Preach Know herein he did not slight Baptism but placed it in its due station That Paul was sent to baptize is evident for he tells you whom he did baptize and if he had no Commission for it then it may be truly said he baptized in his own Name But he intends that he was not principally sent to Baptize but to Preach as he saith in another case 1 Tim. 2.14 The Man was not deceived but the Woman Whence you have the same terms which must be understood the Man was not primarily deceived but the Woman as the Text saith was first in the transgression In the next place John Bunyan begins to flatter and tells you He would not teach men to break the least of God's Commands and acknowledgeth therein Baptism to be an holy Ordinance pag. 123. A duty enjoyned to such as receive the Gospel pag. 122. But it is the abuse thereof he saith wherein he himself is apparently guilty that he complains against and therein forgets himself and saith without any ground or truth What is Baptism Baptism is nothing What John Bunyan A holy Ordinance nothing an enjoyned Duty nothing Where are we now He answers pag. 124. That it is no strange thing for God cryed out against his own Institutions when abused by the People Isa 1.11 12. To what purpose is the multitude of your Sacrifices c. saith the Lord Reply But is not this John Bunyan's blindness or at least his crafty endeavours to insinuate his own opinion Did ever God cry out against his own Institutions against his own Appointments No verily the complaint was against the People that they performed such things contrary to God's Institutions and therefore it is not as J. Bunyan presumes to say that the Ordinances are nothing but to what purpose are they they are vain and why so because not performed according to the Institution wherefore the Lord adds Who hath required these things at your hands It must be known that God appoints the manner of the performance as well as the matter yea the qualifications of the persons performing it whereof if any be wanting we swerve from God's Institution wherein I will say of Baptism that although it is a necessary duty yet if it be not accompanied with such qualifications as God requires it profits not it is in vain So also may be said of Faith which without works is dead Jam. 2.20 yet verily it would be strange presumption for a man to say in general Faith is nothing yea if those Israelites whom Isaiah speaks of had walked honestly as to men which it seems they did not and denyed the offering Sacrifices the observation of the Sabbath and the appointed Feast I appeal to all sober Christians whether therein they would have been blameless No sure God often punisheth for the neglect of those Institutions and therefore I shall conclude the answer to this Reason with our Saviour's words Matth. 23.23 These things you ought to do and not to leave the other undone I come now to his 9th Reason pag. 125. which is this viz. If we shall reject visible Saints by calling Saints that have Communion with God that have received the Law at the hand of Christ that are of holy Conversation amongst men they desiring to have Communion with us as much as in us lyeth we take from them their priviledges and the blessings to which they are born of God Answ Oh man full of all subtilty how long wilt thou labour to deceive Can a man considering what hath been said be a visible Saint that denyeth Christ's Holy Ordinances Can we be assured that a man hath Communion with God who rejects his Counsel Can a man be said to receive the Law at the hands of Christ that denyeth his Institutions and lives in disobedience to a Duty enjoyned Can they truly desire Communion that refuse to obey Baptism when required What Paul saith to the Corinthians and other Saints is nothing to our present purpose for they were all baptized by your own confession And what you say afterwards concerning the Supper is as little unless you could prove that unbaptized persons have right thereto and ought to participate thereof which when you do you may peradventure have a further answer Touching what you say further in this Reason stuffed with Eighteen Fancies of your own brain I think a wise man will not judge me obliged to answer in particular Wherefore I will only say That it seems like the design of Baalam who of old was intended to curse Israel only herein appears a difference God met Baalam of old and forbade him thereby restraining his purposed designs But it seems as if God hath given this man over to belch out the fruit of his own imaginations that in him might be verified the prediction of our Saviour Matth.