L 
 
 More PROOFS . 
 
 INFANTS 
 
 Church-meAberftiip 
 
 AND 
 Confequently their Right to 
 
 BAPTISM: 
 
 Or a Second Defence of 
 
 our Infant Rights and Mercies. 
 
 •-' • ■ ■ ■ t ^ 
 
 In Three Parts. 
 
 The Fir ft is, The plain Proof of Gods^ ute > or 
 Covenant for Infants Church-merabcp^P fro ™ th . e 
 Creation, and the Continuance of \t/^ tne J 11 ""."": 
 on of Eaptifnv, with the Defence << that Proor ^ ainIt 
 the Frivolous Exceptions of W- X omfjes * . „ 
 
 And a Confutation of Mr. TjfJw hls Arguments againft 
 Infants Church-memberuVp* 
 
 The Second is, A Confusion of the Strange Forgeries >of 
 
 ' Mr. H. Datum agaip* the Antiquity of Infant-bap nfm. 
 And of his rn^ny Calumnies againft my Self and 
 Writings. / 
 
 With a Catal^ie of fifty fix New Commandments and 
 Doctrines* which He, and the Sectaries who joyn with 
 Kim in thofe Calumnies feem to own. 
 
 The Third Part is, Animadverfions on Mr. Dmvm% W> 
 ply to Mr. irilles. 
 
 Extorted by their unquiet Importunity from anjjrnei! 
 Vrfrcr of the Love and Peace of^all True Chi 
 
 -x-*~ 
 
 By Richard Baxter 
 
 London^ Printed for N. Simmons at the 
 J; Kolinfon at the Gol<kn-Ucv in St. Pauj 
 
 \\\\L / 
 
 
The Preface^ 
 
 Reader, 
 
 THefrfi year of my Miniftry I fell 
 into a doubt about Infant -Ba- 
 ftifm • arid I was Jo ignorant 
 as not to unde'rftand the na- 
 ture of that folcmn Covenant and Invefti- 
 tare , and the Parents duty of entring 
 the Child . into the Covenant with God > 
 and what the Vow was which then was 
 made : when time, and light had fatufied 
 f»e t I retained as charitable thoughts of the 
 Anabaptifts, as of almojl any that I differ- 
 ed from. About 16^6, 1647^ 1648. they 
 made more ftir among his than before : Mr* 
 Tombes living near me 5 we continue fytft 
 peace, not talking of our differehcej/fFor 
 J purpofely avoided it in publtckJtnd frt- 
 A 3 vite r 
 
i ne Fretace. 
 
 vate, tmlefs any asked, my opinion. At laft 
 his Converts came to me, and told me that 
 if I would not anfwer him in writing, 
 they mufl take it as an encouragement to 
 them to be Baptized • and confeffed that 
 he fent them, or that they came by his 
 confent : To avoid long writings, one daycs 
 dijpute vpas thought a fljorter way. That 
 difpute with many additions 1 was ne- 
 cefjitated to publtfh ; with fome returns 
 to fome after arguings of Mr. T.V. He 
 wrote what he thought meet on the 
 other .fide. I thought I had done with that 
 work for ever: But in 1655 he fent to 
 me again 5 and drew from me the Letters 
 here recited. Thefe without my confeut he 
 publifhed with an anfwer in the midfi of a 
 great Book : I left his anfwer thefe nine- 
 teen years, or thereabouts, without any Re- 
 ply ; as alfo the re [I of his books agamfi me, 
 I thought it not lawful for me to wafle my 
 precious time on things fo little neceffary: 
 A man may find words at length to fay 
 for almofl any cau.fe. I partly know what 
 can be ' faiaagainjl thy, and every book that 
 J have wrhten. And I know what I can 
 Reply. And I partly foreknow what they 
 can fay to that Reply y and what I can fur- 
 ther fay in the defence of it ; and fo talk 
 
 on 
 
The Preface. 
 
 on till we have wrangled away our Chari- 
 ty and our Time : and mufl all this be 
 printed, to enfnare poor readers ? But at 
 laft Mr. Danvers bath laid a neceffity upon 
 me : I had filently paft over all his vain 
 Reafionings, and all his accusations of my 
 writings, and all his falfifications of Authors, 
 had he not called me fo loud to repent of 
 fandering fome for being Baptized naked: 
 And when I found it my duty to fpeak to 
 that ? I thought it ft to [ay fomewhat of 
 the reji , paffwg by what Mr. Wills hath 
 dene more fully in an answer to his book. 
 
 "there are two forts of men called Ana- 
 baptifts among us : The one fort are fiber 
 Godly chriftians y who when they are re- 
 baptized to fatisfie their Confidences, live 
 a?nong us in Chrifiian Love and peace • and 
 I lb all be ajbamed if I Love not them as 
 heartily , and own them not as peaceably, 
 as any of them (hall do either me or better 
 men than I that differ from them. The 
 other fort hold it unlawful to hold Commu- 
 nion with fuch as are not of their mind and 
 way, and are fchifmatically trouble fome and 
 unquiet , in labouring to increafe their Par- 
 ty. Thefe are they that offend me, andother 
 lovers of peace. And if God would per- 
 fwade them but fierionfly to thivt of thefe 
 A 4 * obvi~ 
 
 / 
 
The Preface. 
 
 civic us quefthits\ it might fomewhat flop 
 them. Oj. i. How inconflderable a fart of 
 the i fa I Church they hold communion 
 
 with :' And unchurch almofl all the chur- 
 ches Earth? Qu. 2. whether they can 
 po/f fe that ever the Church on Earth 
 
 win Unite upon their terms 7 of rejecting 
 aU thctr Infants from the vifible Churchy 
 and renouncing all our Infant Rights and 
 Benefit f conferred by the Baptifmal Cove- 
 nant of grace } Qu. 3. And whether if they 
 continue to the worlds end y to fepar ate from 
 almofl all the Churches and unchurch them^ 
 their employment will not be flill to ferve 
 the great enemy of Love and Concord^ a- 
 gainft the Lord of Love ■ and Veace, and 
 againfl the profperity of faith, and godlinefs^ 
 and againfl the welfare of the church and 
 fouls j and to the jcandal and hardening of 
 the ungodly f 
 
 THE 
 
§ r??f t ft? $??$ 
 
 THE 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 First Part* 
 
 T 
 
 HE Preface. P*g' * 
 
 e^/% Tombew ^ ^" fr « £ | 
 
 K.^sAnfwrtoit. 1 ™*Z 
 
 Mr. TV* fecond Letter. P^ 
 
 zJMr.l.'s third Letter. P* 1U 
 
 r. B.'i A/™:"* diivW hy*'-^"?^ 
 
 llions : HisAnfrvers are confuted Sett. i> 2, 3, 
 4. The many Qaeftions to be handled, i^uett. 1. 
 
 Jiifc»fj wrt »^ C h » Y c h ~ mmher !' r r P ; *£ 
 
 Sed. <. Queft.2. J* w" nofnlytbe Infants ct 
 
 the C^regamn- of Ifrael ifc* w«* ^W- 
 
 members. . * t &**>!■ "«g»J 
 
 Church-members. V. •* 
 
 A 3 
 
 / 
 
The Contents. 
 
 Se&. ii. The Ihzelites Infants were members of 
 the Church Vniverfal. p. 26. 
 
 Sed. 12, to the 1 8. Infants were members of the 
 Jews Church as well as Commonwealth, p. 28* 
 
 Sed. 18. Quell. 4. There wot a Law or Precept 
 of God obliging Parents to enter their ChiU 
 dren into Covenant with God^ by accepting his 
 favour , and engaging and devoting them to 
 God ^ and there was a promife of God , offer- 
 ing them his -mercy , and, accepting them when 
 devoted as afore faid, &c. p. 3 1 
 
 Sed. 19, &c. Vifible Church-memberfirip what it 
 is ? And that it is a benefit, p. 3 2 
 
 Se&. 22. Legal-right to Infants Church- ft ate gi- 
 ven by Gods Covenant : Mr. T.'s confuted and 
 the cafe opened. p. 3 5 
 
 Sed. 23, 24. This Right is the effect of Gods Law 
 or Covenant. p. 44, — 46 
 
 Se&. 25, 26. The proof of Parents obligation to 
 £nter their Children into Covenant: what we 
 mean by a Law ^ Mr. T. maketh nothing of 
 Church-memberjhip. p. 46, 50 
 
 Sed. 27. Precepts oblige to duty, and the promt- 
 fes give right to benefits. p. 54 
 
 S:&. 28. No Tranfeunt faB without Gods fta- 
 tute y or moral donation, or covenant, made the 
 Ifraelites Infants Church-members, proved , to 
 Sed. 44. p. 56 
 
 Sed. 44, 45. Infants Church-member ftnp in ft it u- 
 ted by God at mans creation and the conftitu- 
 tvon of Gods Kingdom at the fir ft. P*72 
 
 Sed. 46. Infants Church-memberfijip continued or 
 renewed by the fir ft Law of grace made to 
 
 Adam, 
 
The Contents. 
 
 Adam, Gen. # 3. 15. to Seft. 49. Chrifts being 
 the Head in Infancy proveth what it is brought 
 for , and forceth Mr. T. to grant the caufe. 
 
 Sed. 49. The fame proved by the expo fit ion of 
 this Covenant in that made to Abraham vindi- 
 cated againfi zJMr. T. who again forfaketh his 
 caufe. p. 9j 
 
 Sed. 50. No proof that there was ever' one 
 Church-member who in that ftate had an In- 
 fant born to him y who was not alfo a Church- 
 member, p. 104 
 
 Sed. 51, 52. How far the Law of Nature pro- 
 veth what I ajjert. The Church-fiate of In- 
 fants no difadvantage , but a great benefit : 
 
 f* wherein proved , to Sed. 59. p. 105 
 
 Sed. 60. More particular proofs , as of Cain , 
 Abel, Seth, Noahs Sons, &c. p. 116 
 
 Se&. 70, to 79. Proving the point fully from the 
 Covenant with Abraham. p. 124 
 
 Sed.79, to 86. The point proved by the promifes 
 to the Ifraelites. A virtual caufe may be long 
 in being before it be formally a caufe , and 
 may caufe at lafl without any change in it felf y 
 but in the recipient* p. 1 30 
 
 Sed. 86. The proof from thefecond Commandment 
 vindicated, p. 135 
 
 Sed. 87, to 93 . Proofs from divers other texts. 
 
 P- 137 
 Sed. 93, to 96. The cafe of Infants in the womb* 
 
 i>;i4o 
 
 , Sed. 96, 97. Thefe ftattttes not repealed. t Mr. TV* 
 • conceit that Cods promt fe cannot ft repealed , 
 
 Jr con- 
 
 / 
 
The Contents. 
 
 confuted. ■ p. 1 4 1 
 
 Sed. 98, to 107. Divers Que ft ions offered to con- 
 
 ftderation, p. 145 
 
 Sed:. 107, ice. Ten humbling Qaeftions to Mr* 
 
 T. ( publified by himftlj again ft my will*) 
 
 The fuller proofs from the New Teftament only 
 named as being before handled. p, 159 
 
 A Confutation of the many .(^Arguments by which 
 Mr, T. would prove that Infants were not 
 Church-members under Chrift, p. 161 
 
 The Contents of the Second Part, 
 
 THE Preface : Sed. 1. Of C out rover fie s ± 
 how far g'jod or bad* with whom fnarp re- 
 buke and tar m ft contending it a duty > and with 
 whom not : And whofe duty it is. p. 1 85 
 
 %t6i. 2. Of the weight of the prefent font rover- 
 fey that yve make it not greater or lefl than it 
 is: And the ft ate of it in part. p. 1 98 
 
 Cbap. 1, The occafton of this Bool^, from Mr. 
 Danvers. p. 211 
 
 CI*, a p. 2. More of my pre fen t judgement of the 
 Anabaptifts and their can ft , with a motion to 
 them for Communion and Peace. p. 2 16 
 
 Chap. 3. \A general view of A/r. Danvers £00^. 
 
 p.234 
 Chap. 4. aJMr. Danvers Witneffes againft Infant- 
 baptifm. His fad forgery againft the Dona- 
 tifts dttctlcd : His marvellous falftpcation of % 
 
 Auguftines 
 
The Contents. 
 
 Auguftines third and fourth books again ft them 
 de bapr. Th^e f aid books vindicated. They prove 
 that the Donatifts confented to Infant ~bapttfm> 
 and that the whole Church held it ^ and no Chri- 
 stian thought it vain. His forgery again ft 
 Vincentius Vi&or : His ftander of Crefconius. 
 His /lander of all the Novatians. His ftander 
 of the Ancient Brittains detetled. His reafons 
 for the Brittains being again ft Infant -baptifm 
 confuted: where many more untruths are de- 
 ufted, of them and many others. His forge- 
 ries or falfe ftorics of the MefTalians, called by 
 
 him^ Dadoes, Sabas, Adulphus, Simonis 
 
 His ftander of Fauftus Rhegienfis — His 
 
 deceit about Albanus. His grofs falff cation of 
 Nicephorus and ftander of Peter of Apamea 
 and Zooras. His falfe ftory of Adrian Biftwp 
 of Corinth ^ and his falfe report of Gregories 
 dealing with him, Hps fable of Egyptian 
 Divines. His fitlion about one Bermius, and his 
 falflfication of Beda concerning him. His for- 
 gery about Hincmarus Laudunenfis , and of 
 Hincmarus Rhemenfis charge again ft him. His 
 ftander of the WMtnks^heretofore detetted^and 
 further by Naucleru*. A reference to our former 
 proofs of the antiquity of ' Infant -b apt i /w.Nazian- 
 £ens judgement. His audacious abufe of Cy- 
 prian and the Carthage Council. My revest- 
 ed ajfertion of the novelty of Antipcdobaptifn:. 
 
 p.2? 9 
 
 Chap. 5. Mr, D.'s great Calimnie of my f elf re- 
 
 futed, as if I had falfly reported, (bat fome at 
 
 that time were baptized naked, p. 281* 
 
 Chap, 
 
ine concents. 
 
 Chap. 6. His abufivc Citations of my Writings as 
 for his caufe. p. 285 
 
 Chap. 7. His many perfonal accufations of me ex- 
 amined. Whence it is that fo many boldly 
 fpeak^ evil of the things they know not. His 
 reproach of [_ every one of my Non-conform- 
 ing Brethren, that my Doctrines in the parti- 
 culars accufed by him are heynous to every 
 one of them, ~\ when I remember not any one 
 of them that hath ever to me exprejfed his dif- 
 fent y much lefs endeavoured to change my judge- 
 ment - y but many that have prof effed their appro- 
 bation. His vain talk^ of my being loft with 
 my friends ^ by which he implyeth that they are 
 Hypocrites in concealing it , and would make 
 me one in feekjng the applaufe of man. His 
 many fal(hoods in his accufations of felf-con- 
 tradiition and mutability. I. Absut Epifco- 
 pacy * 2. About Non-conformity : What he 
 meaneth oy my fheltring my felf in their Tents 
 in a ftorm , and with their indulgence coming 
 forth of my hole. ] 3. Of my friendjlnp to 
 Calvin and Arminius. 4. Of the Parliaments 
 caufe^fke. 5. Of Tradition., 6- Of Popery. 
 7. Whether a Contr over fie may have difficult ob- 
 jeclions again fi plain proofs. His Catalogue of 
 my heynom errors : A ]uft demand from the 
 Non-conformiftsy if there be any fuch } whom he 
 doth not flander : and from himfelf p. 288 
 
 Chap. 8. The new Religion of my Backbiters : or 
 a Catalogue of fome Dotlrincsof Mr. Danvers, 
 and the reft that joyn in his accufations of my 
 WritingSy if indeed they hold the contraries tj 
 
 that 
 
The Contents. 
 
 that which they accufe, tu their ace u fat ions 
 feem to fuppofe ^ viz. fifty fix New Command- 
 ments and Doctrines. The good that thefe men 
 do. ^ P- 31? 
 
 Chap. p. Mr. William Aliens vindication of hiw- 
 fe If again fi Mr. D's mifreport ^ and my Tefti- 
 mony concerning Mr. Allen and Mr. La nib. 
 
 P- 333 
 Conclufion , an Admonition to Mr. Danvers for 
 
 his Repentance. p. %ij 
 
 The Contents of the Third Part. 
 
 Chap, i.np HE frightful aftell of his Reply. 
 
 X / P-345 
 
 Chap. 2. His impenitent falfe allegation of Wit- 
 neffes againfl Infant -hapt if m. Of Tenullian $ 
 whether Cyprians Dotlrine was Antichrifiian. 
 Wickliff vindicated at large, from his exprefs 
 words. Berengarius vindicated. P- 349 
 
 Chap. 3. Mr. T>'s j unification of his flander of 
 the Waldenfes confuted. His witneffes exa- 
 mined, and his unfaithfnlnefs opened •, and the 
 cafe of the Waldenfes more largely explicated. 
 
 1. ... * P-379 
 
 Chap. 4. His impenitence in Calumniating the 
 
 Donatifts and Novatians as again]} Infant- ba- 
 ftifm, reprehended. p. 400 
 
 Chap. 5. His renewed Calumny of the Old Brit- 
 tains reproved. p. 403 
 
 Chap, • 
 
The Contents. 
 
 Chap. 6. His raft rt port of Bijhops Ufhers cen- 
 [tire of me, Confidered. p. 404. 
 
 PofHcript. The Teftimony of Smaragdus/jiAly open- 
 
 . ed: And the reports of Peter Abbas Cluniacen- 
 fls, and Bernard Abbas Clareyallenfis. Their 
 weak^ difingenmus courfe of Printing my words 
 as again fi my felf ( in a jheet called Mr. Bax- 
 ters Arguments , &c. cry ed about the fireets ) 
 as if the' necejfity of profeffed faith for our 
 
 • felveSy would prove that our profejfed faith and 
 dedicating them to God, were not fitfficient for 
 the baptifmal reception of qur Infants, p. 407 
 
 Readers, 
 
 MY pain and greater bufmefs deny me time .to collect 1 
 the Printers Errata, though I fee divers % and there- 
 fare muft leave the difcerning of them to your felycs. 
 And I again admonifti and intreat you, that the detection 
 oftheextr aordmary falfhoods and blind temerarious auda- 
 city of Mr. D. be not imputed to the whole Rebapthingp.ir- 
 fy, ( to wliofe Practice Gregor. Magn. paralleleth Rmda?\ 
 ing\ ; and that his crimes abate not your Chriftian Love 
 ancftendernefs to others, there being truly Godly, wife, 
 and peaceable perfons, worthy c: our Communion, and 
 willing of it, of that party as well as of others. Hearken 
 not tojjthem that would render the Party of Attapajfiifts 
 odious or intolcrabteno more than ro thofc Anabaptifls who 
 would perfwade thofe of their opinion to renounce Com- 
 munion with all others as tmbaptized. It is againft this 
 dividing fpiriton all fides that I-W rite and Preach. 
 
 The 
 
CO 
 
 Part L 
 
 My private Letters to Mr. Tombes proving, 
 the Church-member jhip of Infants in all 
 ages y vindicated from his unfatu factory 
 exceptions. 
 
 The Preface. 
 
 T 
 
 £* i. ^~" """SI HE occafion and time of thefe 
 Letters is long ago publi/hed by 
 Mr. Tombes himfelf in the third 
 Part of his Anti-?<zdobaftifm , 
 P a g e 353- and forward-, where 
 be printeth the faid Letters without my confent : 
 Had I found his Anfwers fatisfa&ory , I had 
 changed my judgement and retraced that and 
 other fuch writings long ago. But I thought fa 
 much oiherwife of them that I judged it not ne- 
 ceflary, nor worth my diverting from better em* 
 ployment to write an anfwer to them* 
 
 £♦2* And whatever the Angular judgement of that 
 
 B learned 
 
 / 
 
CO 
 
 learned and excellent Profeflbrof Theology men- 
 tioned in his Preface , was or is concerning the 
 arguments that I , and many before and fince have 
 iifed for Infant Baptifm, and notwithftanding his 
 opinion that it was introduced in the fecond Cen- 
 tury , &c. yet fo many wifer and better men than 
 I, think otherwife both of the caufe, and of Mr.T's 
 writings, that I hope the modeft will allow me the 
 honour of having very good company if I fhould 
 prove miftaken. 
 
 f* h N° ^ 0Der Chriftian will deny but that 
 Godly men of both opinions may be faved : And 
 then I think no fuch Chriftian that is acquainted 
 with the Hiftory of the Church, can choofe but 
 think that there are now in Heaven many thou- 
 sands, rf not hundred thoufands that were not 
 againft Infant Baptifm , for one that was againft 
 it : And while we differ de jure , yet without 
 great ignorance of the ftate of the world ,' we 
 rnuft needs agree that de fatto, the number in the 
 Church of Chrift in all Nations and Ages that have 
 been< againft Infant Baptifm hath been fo fmall y 
 as that they make up but a very little part of the 
 Church triumphant : which though I take for no 
 proof of the truth of our opinion, yet I judge it 
 a great reafon to make me and others very fear- 
 &I of turning rafhly and without cogent proof 
 to the other fide. I know the Churches have 
 ftill had their blemifhes ; but that they fhould all 
 univedally fo err in the fubjed of Baptifm and 
 Chriftianity it felf, is not to be believed till it be 
 i#ove& 
 
 f, 4. Though 
 
O) 
 
 £.4. Though Chrift be not the Author of any 
 fcf our errors, he is the healer of them,and he is the 
 Effector as well as the Director of his Churches 
 faiih and holinefs: And yet to fay that though 
 thoufands or hundred thoufands are in Heaven 
 that were for Infant Baptifra , for one that was 
 againft it, yet Chrift was againft even fech a con- 
 stitutive part of his Church ( as accounted J is not 
 10 be received without good proof. 
 
 f. 5. For my part I muft ftill fay, that after all 
 that I have read for the Anabaptifts , and much 
 more than fuch Catalogues as Mr. Denver s^ I do 
 not at prefent remember that I have read of any 
 one Chriftian that held the baptizing of Infancs 
 unlawful, in many and many hundred years after 
 Chrift . at leaft not any that denied not Original 
 fin .• Though indeed the Pelagians themfelves Jhac 
 did deny it much , yet denied not Infant 
 tifra. 
 
 £. 6. But of this enough heretofore : 1 lay not 
 my faith on the number of Confemers . but in a? 
 doubtful cafe I think the way that alrnoft ail went 
 that are in Heaven, and took it as the very entrance 
 of the door of life, is fafer ceteris faribpu thart 
 that which few ill Heaven did own : And though 
 on earth I have more approvers than Mr. 7*; 1 
 think mans approbation fo poor a comfort , && 
 that I am forry to read in his Preface and effe- 
 where how much he layeth upon it. Alas, were 
 it not more for the good of others than our felves^ 
 
how inconfiderable a matter were it, whether men l 
 value and honour, or defpife us, and what we are 
 thought or faid of by each other , when we are 
 all on the borders of eternity, where the honour 
 of this world is of no figniflcation ? 
 
 $. 7. In the anfwer which I mud give to 
 Mr. TombeSy fhould I tranferibe all his words, and 
 anfwer every impertinent paflage, I fhould need- 
 fefly weary the Reader and my felf : I will there- 
 fore fuppofe the Reader to have his Book at hand, 
 and to take his words as he hath given him them ^ 
 that I may not be blamed as concealing any of 
 them. And I (hall anfwer to nothing, but what 
 feemeth to me to need an anfwer : And for all 
 the reft I am content that the impartial Reader 
 fudge of them as he findeth them : For I write 
 not for fuch as need an anfwer to every word that 
 is written , how frivolous foever , againft plain 
 truth. 
 
 Mr. Tombes 
 
(5) 
 
 cj^r. Tombes hit fir jl Letter. 
 
 s I R y 
 
 N r Ot finding yet that Law or Ordinance 
 of Infants vifible Church-member- 
 fhip which you afTert in your book of 
 Baftifm to be unrepealed, I do requeft 
 you to fet down the particular Text 
 or Texts of Holy Scripture where you conceive 
 that Law or Ordinance is written, and to tranfmit 
 it to me by this bearer, that your allegations may 
 be confidered by him who is Yours as is meet , 
 
 &4pril 3 . 1655. John Tombes* 
 
 Richard Baxters Anfwer. 
 
 Sir, / mean to fee more faid againfi what I 
 have already written , before I will write any more 
 about Infant Baftifm , without a more prejftng 
 call than I yet difcern, I have difcharged my 
 Conference, and fiall leave you and yours to take 
 your courfe. And indeed 1 do not under fiand the 
 fenfe of your Letter , becaufe you fo joyn two 
 queflions in one , that I know not which of the 
 two it is that you would have me anfwer to* Whe- 
 
 B 3 ther 
 
(6) 
 
 ther there were any Ordinances or Law of Cod 
 that Infants Jhould be Church-members ? is one 
 cjueftion : Whether this be repealed f is another * 
 you joy n both into one. For the fir ft ; that Infants 
 Were Qourch-members, as you have not yet denied 
 that I know of, fo Will I not be fo uncharitable 
 as to imagine that you are now about it: And 
 much Ufi that you Jhould have the leaft doubt whe- 
 ther tt were by Cjods Ordination. 1 here are two 
 things confiderable in the matter. Fi'ffl>> the be- 
 nefit of Church-memberjhip , with aU the conse- 
 quent privi ledges. It is thework^of a grant or 
 promife to confer thefe y and not directly of a pre- 
 cept* Secondly , the duty of devoting and dedica- 
 ting the child to God, and entring it into the Co- 
 venant which confers the benefit ; and this is the 
 vcork^ of a Law or Precept to conftitute this duty. 
 I am pafi doubt that you doubt not of either of 
 thefe : For you cannot imagine , that any Infant 
 had the bleffmg without a grant or promife, (that's 
 impojfible ; ) nor that any Parents lay under a 
 duty without an obliging law, (for that is as im- 
 jpojjible. ) Takjng it therefore for granted that 
 you are refolved in both thefe , and fo yield that, 
 fuch a grant and precept there was , there re- 
 mains no quefiion but whether it be repealed : 
 which I have long expelled that you flwuld prove. 
 For citing the particular iexts in which the or- 
 dination is contained , though more may be faid 
 than is faid, yet I frail thmk^it needlef, till I fee 
 the ordination contained in thofe Texts which I 
 tyave already mentioned to you, proved to be re- 
 yerfed* Nor do I . know that it is of fo great ufe 
 
 to 
 
to ft and to cite the particular Texts , -while ym 
 confeft in general, that fuch a promise and precept 
 there is, by vertue of which, Infants were tillChrifis 
 time duly members of Chrifls Church (forChrifts 
 Church tt was ) even his universal vifible Church* 
 Still remember that I take the word £ law ~] not 
 ftri&ly for a precept only , but largely , as com- 
 prehending both promife and precept*, and I have 
 Already jhewed you both, and fo have others. 
 
 So nmch of your endeavour as hath any tenden- 
 €y to the advancement of holinefs, I am willing 
 to fecond you in, viz. that at the age you defire 
 people might folemnly profefs their acceptance of 
 Chrifiy and their refolution to be his : But I hope 
 Cod will find me better work, while I mufl ft ay 
 here f than to fpendmy time to prove that no In- 
 fants of believers are within Chrifts vifible 
 Church, that is, are no Infant Difciples, Infant 
 Chriftians , Infant Qourch- members. I know no 
 glory it will bring to Chrift, nor comfort to man 7 
 nor fee I now any appearance of truth in it. I 
 hlefs the Lord for the benefits of the Baptifmal Co- 
 venant that I enjoyed in infancy, and that I was 
 dedicated fo foon to God, and not left wholly in 
 the Kingdom and power of the Devil. They that 
 dejpife this mercy, or account it none, or not worth 
 the accepting, may go without it , and take that 
 which they get by their ingratitude* And I once 
 hoped, that much lefs than fuch an inundation of 
 direful confequents as onr eyes have feen, would 
 have done more for the bringing of you back. t9 
 flop the doleful breach that you have made. lam 
 fain to fiend my time now to endeavour the re- 
 
 B 4 cover) 
 
I o ) 
 covery of fome of your Opinion who are lately 
 turned Quakers , or at leafl the preventing of 
 others Apoflafe : which is indeed to prevent the 
 emptying of your Churches, Which I fuppofe will 
 be a more acceptable worl^ with you, than again 
 to write againfl rebaptiz^mg , or for Infant Bap- 
 tifm. Sir y I remain your imperfecl brother, know- 
 ing but in fart , yet loving the truth , 
 
 Rich. Baxter. 
 
 Mr, Tombes his fecond Letter, 
 
 Sir , I confefs Infants were by Gcds fad of 
 taking the whole people of the Jews for his peo* 
 pie, in that eftate of the Jewiih Pedagogy ( not 
 by any promife or precept ) vifible Church-mem- 
 bers, that is, of the Congregation of IfraeL I do 
 not confefs that there was any Law or Ordinance 
 determining it fhould be fo , but only a fad of 
 God , which is a tranfeunt thing , and I think it 
 were a foolifh undertaking for me to prove the 
 repeal of a fad. Wherefore ftill I prefs you that 
 you would (hew me where that Law, Ordinance, 
 Statute or Decree of God is that is repealable , 
 that is, which may in congruous fence be either 
 by a later ad: faid to be repealed, or elfe to be 
 cftablifhed as a law for ever. This I never found 
 in your books, nor do I conceive that law is im- 
 plied in any thing I grant • and therefore I yet pray 
 you to fet me down the particular Text or Texts 
 of Holy Scripture where that Law is. Which 
 peed not hinder you from oppofing the Quakers 
 
 " ( in 
 
( 9) 
 ( in which I have not and hope (hall not be want- 
 ing ) of whom I think that you are mifinformed 
 that they are Anabaptifts, I think there are very 
 ^ few of them that were ever baptifed , and have 
 good evidence that they have been formerly Seek- 
 ers, as you call them. And I think you do un- 
 juftly impute the direful confequences you fpeak 
 of to the denial of Infant Baptifm, and to the 
 practice of adult Baptifm , and that as your felf 
 are deceived fo you miflead others. I yet ex~ 
 pe& your Texts, knowing none in any of your 
 Books that mention that law of Infants vifible 
 Church-memberfhip which you afTert either ex- 
 plicitly or implicitly, and am yours as is meet, 
 
 Bewdly , Afrit 4. 1655. JohnTombes, 
 
 Richard Baxters fecond Letter, 
 
 Sir, If 'you will needs recall me to this ungrateful 
 Works let me requefi you to tell me fully , exablly 
 and flainly, what tranfient fall you mean^ which 
 you conceive without law or fromife did make 
 Church-members : that fo I may know where the 
 comfetition lieth. When I know your meanings I 
 intend, God willing^ to fend you a jfeedy anjwer 
 to your lafl. Tour fcllow^fervant y 
 
 April 16. 1655, Rich. Baxter. 
 
 Mr. Tombes 
 
\JMr. Tombes his third Letter, 
 
 Sir, The tranfeunt faft of God , whereby In- 
 fants were vifible Church-members, was plainly 
 cxpreft in my laft to you, to be the taking of the 
 whole people of the Jews for his people, which 
 is the expreflion of sJMofes, Dent. 4. 34. Exod. 
 6. 7. And by it I mean that which is exprelTed 
 Levit. 20.24. 26. when God faid, / have [eve ~ 
 red yon from other people , ihat yon jbould be mine. 
 The fame thing is exprefTed iKings%.$i* Ifai. 
 43 . 1. This I term £ fad: ] as conceiving it moft 
 comprehenfive of the many particular ads in many 
 generations, whereby he did accomplifh it. Fol- 
 lowing herein Stephen, Arts 7. 2. and Nehem. 9. 7. 
 I conceive it began when he called Abraham out 
 of Vr , Gen. 12. 1. to which fucceeded in their 
 times the enlarging of his family , removing of 
 Lot , Ijhmaely the fons of Keturah, Efan> diftin- 
 ftion by Circumcifion, the birth of JJaac, Jacob ', 
 his leading to Padan Aram , increafe there, re- 
 moval to Canaan, to eAZgypt, placing, preferving 
 there, and chiefly the bringing of them thence, to 
 which principally the Scripture refers this faft , 
 JExod. 19. 4. Lev it. 1 1. 45. Nehem. 1. 10. Hof. 
 11. 1. the bringing them into the bond of the 
 Covenant at Mount Sinai, giving them laws, fet- 
 tling their Priefthood, tabernacle, army, govern- 
 ment, inheritance. By which faft the Infants of 
 the Israelites were vifible Church-members as be. 
 ing part of the Congregation of Jfrael , and in 
 like manner though not with equal right ( for they 
 
 might 
 
I "J 
 
 fnight be fold away ) were the bought fervams 
 or captives, whether Infants or of age, though 
 their Parents were profeiTed Idolaters. And this 
 I faid was without promife or precept, meaning 
 fuch promife or precep: as you in your Letter fay 
 I confefs, and you defcribe, a promife conferring 
 to Infants the benefit of Church -member finp with 
 all the confequent priviledges, a precept conftitu- 
 ting the duty of devoting and dedicating the child 
 to God, ana entring into Covenant, which confer s 
 the benefit. For though I grant the promifes to 
 the natural pofterity of Aoraham, Gen. 17. 4,5, 
 6,7,8. and the Covenant made with lfrael at 
 Mount Sinai, and Dent . 29. wherein lfrael avouch- 
 ed God, and a precept of Circumcinon, and pre- 
 cepts of God by zJWofes of calling the people , 
 and requiring them to enter into Covenant , 
 Exod. 19* and Dent. 29. Yet no fuch particular 
 promife concerning Infants vifible Church-mem- 
 berfhip, or precept for Parents or others , con- 
 cerning the folemn admiflion of Infants as vifible 
 Church-members, befides Circumcifion, as in your 
 Book of Baptifm you afTert. Nor do I conceive 
 that Infants of lfrael were made vifible Church- 
 members by the promifes in the covenants or the 
 precepts forenamed, but by Gods tranfeunt fad: 
 which I have defcribed. Which I therefore terni 
 [ tranfeunt ~\ becaufe done in time , and fo not 
 eternal , and pad , and fo not in congruous fence 
 repealable as a law, ordinance, flatute, decree, 
 which determines fuch a thing fhall be for the fu- 
 ture, though capable of continuance in the fame, 
 or the like ads, or of interruption. Which con- 
 
 tinu- 
 
(i2; 
 
 tinuance or interruption is known by narration of 
 what Gud hath done, not by any legal revocation, 
 or renewing, or continuance of a promife or pre- 
 cept concerning that thing. Now as the Church- 
 memberfhip of the Jfraelites began as I conceive 
 with ^Abrahams call., and was compleated when 
 they were brought cut of <ts£gypt to God, Exod. 
 19.4. fo I conceive it ceafed when upon their re- 
 jection of Chrift as was fore-told Mattb. 21.43. 
 they were broken off from being Gods people , 
 which was compleated at the deftructicn of Jer$t~ 
 falem, when the temple was deftroyed, as Chrift 
 fore-told, Lukf 19. 43, 44. And inftead of the 
 Jewifh people by the preaching of the Gofpel con- 
 firmed by mighty figns, God gathered to himfelf 
 a Church of another frame in a fpiritual way , 
 according to the inftitution of Chrift, Matth. 28. 
 19,20. Mark*i6. 15, 16. in which he included 
 not Infants, the Jews themfelves were no part of 
 the Chriftian Church without repentance and 
 faith in Chrift profefTed at leaft. 
 
 Having now fully, exactly, and plainly told you 
 my meaning as you requeft, I do now expect your 
 fpeedy anfwer to my laft, and therein to fulfil my 
 requeft of fetting down the particular Texts of 
 holy Scripture wherein that law largely taken 
 comprehending promife and precept of Infants vi- 
 fible Church- membership, which you affert to be 
 unrepealed, is contained. If you fhall in your an- 
 fwer kt down wherein the bl effing, benefit, and 
 priviledges of Infants vifible Chuixh-memberfhip, 
 which you affert unrepealed, did confift-, I may 
 
 better 
 
U3) 
 
 better under/land you than I do : But I (hall prefs 
 you no further than you (haU be willing in this 
 thing. lam Yours as is meet, 
 
 Bewdley y April zi* 1655. JohnTombes. 
 
 Richard Baxters third Letter being long, is di- 
 vided by Mr. Tombes into feveral fe&ions , and 
 his Anfwers accordingly divided; which order I 
 muft therefore obferve in my reply. The words 
 of the Letter are. 
 
 SECT. I. 
 
 R» B* CJ I R , A probability of doing or receiving 
 O good, is to me a call to action* Seeing 
 no fuch probability -, / told yon at flrji my purpo~ 
 fes to forbear any further debates with you , till 
 you, had better anfwered what is faid. In your 
 next you feeme d to deal fo plainly, as if fomefmalt 
 probability of good did yet appear : But in your 
 third you fly off again and eat your own words , and 
 jumble things in much confujion, fo that I now re~ 
 turn again to my former thoughts. For you that 
 exprejly fay and unfay, and contradict your felf y 
 are not likely to be brought to a candid manage- 
 ment or fair ijfue of the Difpute. You I fure 
 thinks it no great matter to be driven to a felf" 
 contradiction ( which with others U to lofe the" 
 Caufe ) who fo eafily and exprefly run upon it your 
 
 "Mr.T's Anfwer, It was a call fuvEcient, &c. 
 
 Reply. 
 
(14) 
 
 keply. 1 muft be the difcerner of my own Call 
 or Reafons to write : time is precious : As for his 
 offence at Mn M. and Mr. firmin for charging 
 him with fophiftry, and at Mr. Ford for charging j 
 him with railing, and Mr. Gataker for doubting ic is 
 his difpoficion to braze his forehead •, and his own 
 angry words hereupon, they concern not our pre- 
 fent bufinefs* 
 
 SECT. II.- 
 
 R. B* XN your fecond you fay [ Icon/eft infants 
 J. were by Gods fa A of taking the whole 
 people of the Jews for his people , in that eftate 
 of the Jewifh Paedagogy, not by any proniife or 
 precept, then vifible Church-members, that is, of 
 the Congregation of Ifrael •, I do not confefs, that 
 there was any Law or Ordinance determining it 
 fhould be fo, but only a fad of God, which is a 
 tranfeunt thing , &c. ] In your third yon [ay , 
 £ For though I grant the promifes to the natural 
 pofterity of Abraham , Gen. 17.4,5,6,7,8. and 
 the Covenants made with Ifrael at mount Sinai , 
 and Dent . 29. wherein Ifrael avouched God, and 
 a precept of Circumcifion, and precepts of God 
 hy Mofesof calling the people^ and requiring of 
 them to enter into Covenant, Exod. 1 9. & Dent, 
 29. yet no fuch particular promife concerning in- 
 fants vifible Church-member/hip , or precept for 
 Parents or others concerning the folemn admiflion 
 of .Infants as vifible Church-members befides Cir- 
 eumcifion, as in your book of Baftifm you affert] 
 
 Btftri 
 
Before there was no [ Law or Ordinance deter- 
 mining it (hould be fo , but only a fact j now 
 there are Laws or precepts and promifes that it 
 jhould befojbut [not fuch as I affert in my book. ] 
 And if /Jhould Jhew yon never fo many, yon may 
 reply , they are not fitch as I affert in my book^ 
 and wafte the time in that trial^ when it is better 
 for me to fee fir ft what yon Jay to that book,: For 
 thfo is but to lead us about to trifling. 
 
 a Mr. Ts Anfwer. There is no fliadow of a 
 * ( contradiction, &c* 
 
 Reply. Let the impartial Reader jadge. 
 
 SECT. III. 
 
 R. B. *Tp make any clear Work, upon the things 
 X in queftion, we muft neceffarily Jpeal^ 
 to the que ft ions diftintlly, many of which yon too 
 much confound. The fir ft queftion in order fit to 
 be refohedisy [ whether Infants before Chrifts in- 
 carnation were Church -member s , or not? j yon 
 grant they were: and therefore this is p aft difpute 
 with us. The fecond queftion and the fir ft refol- 
 ded , is [ what Church it is that Infants were 
 members of f 3 This you give me occafion to take 
 in the way, becaufe you twice explain your mean- 
 ings when you confefs them Church-members , by 
 An [i.e. of the congregation of Ifrael* ] By 
 which you feem to imply two things : Firft , that 
 none but the Infants of the Congreation of Ifrael 
 were Church-members : Secondly ', that the infants 
 ?/ Ifrael were members of m Church hut what is 
 
 ton* 
 
Convertible with the congregation of Ifrael. ] Thi | 
 third quefiion is, what it is that gives the Ifrae- \ 
 lites that denomination of £ the Congregation of 
 Jfrael 3 of which Infants were members 1 For yon 
 jumble both together ', both caufes Civil, and Eccle- 
 fiaftical, and of both thofe that make to the being 
 and well-being. So that our enquiry mufi be , 
 ychether the (Congregation and the Commonwealth 
 be the fame thing in your fen fe . ? ~\ and what confii- 
 tuteth it formally ? For in this you fpeak in dark^ 
 ambiguities. The fourth queftion is , T Whether 
 there was any Law, Ordinance or Precept of Cod 
 concerning mans duty herein, or obliging him to 
 the Covenant acceptance and engagement, and fo 
 to member flip -, and any promife, grant or Cove- 
 nant, conferring the right of Church-memberfiip 
 and the confequent friviledges to Infants ? 3 To 
 this you fay both Tea and Nay , if I Can under- 
 fiand you, or at'Heafi as to much of the quefiion 
 concerning the being , and part of the effeel of 
 the precept and promife. Yet you conclude, that 
 you \_ do not conceive that Infants of Jfrael were 
 made vijible Church-members by the promife s in 
 the Covenants, or the precepts fore-named, but by 
 Cods tranfeunt fall. ~] I will not fufpetl that you 
 imagine any other promife doth it be fides that in the 
 Covenant, becaufe your tying the effeel to the tran- 
 feunt fail doth exclude 'them. Here we are cafi 
 upon thefe queftions next. The fifth quefiion, 
 £ Whether there be fuch precepts and promifes as 
 you grant, {or as I fi)all prove ) which yet make 
 not Infants Church-members ? \ The fixth quefii- 
 on, [_ Whether there be any tranfeunt fail of God, 
 
 wh;cht 
 
which without the efficiency of precept or fromife. 
 did make the Infants of Ifrael Church-members ? 3 
 The ftventh queftion, [ Whether thofe which you 
 have aligned be fnch fails . ? ] 'the eighth queftion, 
 £ Which are the Texts of Scripture that contain or -jjL 
 ex prefi the faid laws, precepts, or grants which I 
 maintain ? ~\ this you mfifvupon* The ninth que ft i- 
 on -> C Whether fuch laws , preceps or grants as I 
 frail prove, are capable of a repal or revocation ? ] 
 The tenth que ft ion, [ Whether they are actually re- 
 voked or repealed ? j 
 
 " Mr. T's Anfwer. 7 he eighth queftion is the 
 il only queftion needful to be refolved , &c. 
 
 Reply. If I do too much it is but your palling 
 it by, and it will not trouble you* 
 
 — — 
 
 SECT.IV. 
 
 R; B. TyEfore all thefe queftions are well hand* 
 _D led, we jhculd eaply be convinced that 
 it had been better either to have let all alone , of 
 tlfe, if we mufl needs have the other bout, at leafi 
 to have agreed on our terms, and the fating of 
 the queftions better before we had begun. And 
 I thinly that even that is not eafie to do. For when 
 I dejired your plain , exaft and full explication 
 , of one word £ tranfeunt fall: ~] and you tell me 
 you have plainly, fully and exaclly told me your 
 meaning : It falls out, either through the unhap- 
 py darknef of my own under ft anding, or yours, that 
 I know but little more of your mind than I did 
 before 7 and that you feem to me to have raifed 
 
 G wore 
 
(is; 
 
 wore doubts and darknefs than yon have refolved' 
 and diftipated, Tct being thus far drawn in , / 
 fhall briefly fay fomewhat to the feveral queftions, 
 not following your defires to anfwer one alone: 
 which cannot be done to any purpofe while the fore- 
 going are unrefvlvcd , becaufe it is the clearing 
 up of truth , and not the ferving of your pre fen t 
 ends in your writings now in hand that I muft 
 intend, 
 
 " Mr. Ts Anfwer. I affect no more bouts with 
 
 <c fhch a captious wrangler fo many doubts 
 
 " flem not to be from the darknefs of the un- 
 *' derftanding, but either from the lightnefs of the 
 "fancy, or the bent of the will, to find a way 
 "to blunt the Readers attention, &c. 
 
 Reply. This is not the Controverlie : Is your 
 judgement alike right of perfons as of Do&rines > 
 
 SECT. V. 
 
 K»B. 'Tp HE ftrft que ft ion being refolved that 
 JL Infants were, once Church-members , 
 to the refolving of the fecond queftion , / fhall 
 prove thefe two Propoftions. I . That it was not 
 only the "Infants of the Congregation of lfrael 
 that were Church-members . 2. The Infants of 
 lfrael were members of the univerfal vifible (fhurch, 
 and not only of that particular Congregation. The 
 fir ft I have proved already in my book. And \. 
 Ifeac was a Church-member, yet ?ione of the Con- 
 gregation of lfrael • it was not lfrael till Jacobs 
 days. If you fay that by tlie £ Congregation of 
 
 lfrael ]} 
 
ifrael"] you mean [the feed of Abraham which 
 jad the promt fe of Canaan] Tet z. I fay , that 
 Ifliimel and Abrahams feed by Keturah and Efau 
 had none of the promife y and yet were Church- 
 members in their infancy, [In IfaacjW/ thy feed 
 '?e called ] that is, that feed which had the pro- 
 mi fe of Canaan. And fo it was confined to Ja- 
 :ob, who got the bkffmg and the birthright , 
 which Efau lofl, and wot excluded, yet was of the 
 Church from his infancy. "The Son of the bond* 
 woman was not to be heir with the Son of the 
 free-woman, yet was Ifhmael an Infant member. 
 If you fay, that by [the Congregation of Ifrael ] 
 yon mean aR the natural feed of Abraham: I add y 
 3. The children of his bond-men born in his fami- 
 ly, or bonght with mony, were none of Abrahams 
 natural feed , and yet were Church-members in 
 their infancy. If yon go yet further , and fay y 
 that by [ the Congregation of Ifrael } yon mean 
 all that were at the abfolute dijpofe of Abraham 
 or his [ucceffors, and fo were his own : I add, 4* 
 The Infants of free Profelytes were none fitch , 
 and yet were Church-members. If you yet gofur~ 
 ther, and fay> that you mean by [ the Congrega- 
 tion of Ifrael ~\ any that came under the govern- 
 ment of Abraham or his fuccejfors : then I add y 
 5, That the Sichemkes, Gen. 34. were not to come 
 under Jacobs government , but to be his allies and 
 neighbours , being fo many more in number than 
 Jacob, that they concluded rather that his cattle, 
 and fubflance fhould be theirs 9 yet were they cir~ 
 cumcifed every male , and fo were made member £ 
 of the vifible prof effing Church. For it was not 
 
 C z tht 
 
the bare external fign that Jacob or his fens would 
 -per/wade them to , without the thing figmfed.: 
 For the reproach that they mentioned of giving 
 their daughter to the uncircumcifed , was not m 
 the defeli of the external abfeiffion \for fo Mofes 
 own fon , and all the Jfraelites in the wilder nefi 
 Jhould have been under the fame reproach, and all 
 the females continually : But it was in that they 
 Were not in Covenant with the fame God , and 
 did not profefi to worjhip the fame God in his 
 true way of worfhip as they did. And therefore 
 as Baptizing is not indeed and in Scripture fence 
 Baptizing , if it be not ufed for engagement to- 
 God, even into his name - 5 fo Circumcifion is not 
 indeed and in Scripture fence Circumcifion, unlefi 
 it be ufed as an engaging fign, and they be cir- 
 cumcifed to God. 
 
 " Mr. T's Anfwer. By [the Congregation of 
 u Jfrael 3 I mean the lame with the Hebrew peo- 
 
 cc pie or houfe of Abraham by an anticipa- 
 
 *f tion, <^c. 
 
 Reply, i. That not only the Infants of Abra- 
 hams houfe were Church-members fhall be pro- 
 ved. 
 
 2. Here he is forced to take in the Children 
 of Keturah, Jfiomael, and Efau 7 into [ the Con- 
 gregation of Ifrael ] • And fo to extend Infants ] 
 Church-memberiliip further than the Jews Com- 
 mon-wealth. For let the Reader judge, whether 
 the pofterity of Ijhmael, Efau and Keturah were 
 of that Republick, or Profelytes either, and not 
 ttfu&lly enemies. 
 
 \. H« 
 
(21) 
 
 J. He is forced to extend Infants Church- 
 memberfhip to whole Cities that would be but 
 their Allies, as the Sichemites were: For when 
 he faith £ They were one people ] by confent , 
 he could not fay that they were to be their fub- 
 je&s and fo members of their Kepublick. And 
 they may be [~ one people J by mixture arid con- 
 federacy, without fubjedion. And there is no in- 
 timation that the Sichemites were to part with 
 their former Governours and be fubjed to J a- 
 cob. And then if all the Kingdoms about would 
 but have been accordingly 'Jacobs confederates, 
 it feems Mr. T. muft yield that their Infants had 
 been vifible Church-members. 
 
 SECT. VI. 
 
 R. B. Tf w as then the duty of all the Nations 
 X round about ( if not of all the Nations 
 en earthy that could have information of the Jew- 
 ifh Religion ) to engage them f elves and their 
 children lo God by fircumcifion* That all that 
 would have any alliance and commerce with the 
 Jews muft do it, is commonly confejfed: that it 
 muft extend to Infants, the cafe of the Sichemites 
 ( though deceitfully drawn to it by fome of Jacobs 
 fins) doth foe w, and fo doth the Jewijh pratlice 
 which they were to imitate : that the fame engage- 
 ment to the fame God is the duty of all the 
 world, is commonly acknowledged, though Divines 
 we not agreed whether the diftant nations were 
 I obliged to fife Circumcifon the Jewifofign. The 
 
 C 3 beft 
 
(21) 
 
 fteft of the jews were zealous to make Vrofelytes, 
 and no doubt but the very law of nature did 
 teach them to do their befi for the falvation of 
 others. To tbink^fuch charitable and holy worlds 
 unlawful, is to think it evil to do the grcatcfl 
 good. And if they muft perfwade the neigh- 
 bour nations to come in to God by Covenant en- 
 gagement > they muft perfwade them to bring their 
 children with them , and to devote them to God 
 as well as themfelves. For the Jews knew no 
 other covenanting or engaging to God* As the 
 Sichemites mufi do, fo other nations muft do : For 
 what priviledge had the children of the Siche- 
 mites above the reft of the world ? 
 
 " Mr. T's Anfwer. The argument in form 
 " would be thus : If it were the duty of all the 
 f c nations round about to engage themfelves an4 
 IC their children to God by circumcifion, then it 
 ff was not only the Infants of the Congregation 
 f c of Jfrael that were Church-members, cjre. 
 
 Reply, i. You flould have (aid [_ that would 
 have been Church-members had they done that 
 duty ]. But you can beft ferve your own turn. 
 2. One Supream Power maketh one Republick 
 ( with the fubje&s ) j And many Soveraigns make 
 many Republicks ( as all grant ) : Therefore if all 
 the Nations about had engraffed themfelves into 
 the Congregation oHfrael but as the Sichemites did, 
 they had not made one Republick, as to humane 
 Soveraignty : I prefume to tell you my thoughts 
 of fuch a cafe ( and fo of the Sichemites ) : It 
 was the glory of Jfrael to be a Theocracy : God 
 Was their Soveragin • not only as he was of all 
 
 the 
 
I «5V 
 
 the world ( de jure and by overruling their hu- 
 mane Soveraign : ) but by fpecial Revelation doing 
 the work a Soveraign himfelf : He made them 
 Laws ( and not Mofes ) : He appointed them Cap- 
 tains under him by Revelation : He decided cafes 
 by Oracle : He gave them Judges that were Pro- 
 phets , and acted by his extraordinary fpirit. 
 Though aJMofes is called a King, he was but an 
 Official Magiftrate , Captain and Prophet : [ A 
 Prophet fhall the Lord your God raife up to you 
 like unto me, &c. ~] faith he : which had imme- 
 diate refped to the form of Government and man- 
 ner of fucceffion, ( as differing from the way of 
 Kings which the Jfraclites finfully preferred af- 
 terward , cafting off this fpecial Theocracy ) 
 though ultimately it intended Chriff. Now, this 
 being fo, the Sichemites or any other nations who 
 would have taken God for their Sovereign, and 
 come under this fpecial prophetical Theocracy, 
 (which Circumcifion engaged them to as refpe- 
 ding the Laws to which it bound them,) had 
 been fo far united to JfraeL But how far mighc 
 this have extended ? To the reft that he faith I 
 confent. If you will not hold to this you muft 
 fay that the Sichemites were to be of the fame 
 Communitie with Jfrael , and not of the fame 
 Republick, which fignifieth either ungoverned 
 Communities or various Republicks confede- 
 rating. 
 
 C 4 \ S EC T« 
 
I *f ) 
 
 ___ _ 
 
 SECT. VII. 
 
 R. B. TN Hellers time many of the people be- 
 X came Jews, Heft. 8. 17. ir/w jw were 
 wot under their government. <^4nd to be Jews is 
 to be of the 'jewijh frofejfion* And it is well 
 known that this was to be circumcifed, they and 
 their little ones ( as the Prpfelytes were ) and fo 
 to keep the Law of Mofes. 
 
 cc Mr. T's Anfwer. They were incorpos- 
 
 * c raced into the Jewiih people, &c. 
 
 Reply. This needeth no reply but what is given 
 to the former. 
 
 SECT. VIII. 
 
 R. B. HpH£ fcattered and captivated Jews 
 1 themselves were from under the Go- 
 vernment of Abraham sfuccejfor s y and yet were to 
 Circumcife their children as Church-members. 
 
 Cc Mr. T's Anfwtr is the fame, and the Reply 
 ? c the fame. 
 
 — ^ ! — r ~ — — — 
 
 SECT. IX. 
 
 Ro B. \T[T&en Jonas preached to Ninive, it 
 
 VV was all the race of man among 
 
 them, without exception, from the great eft to the 
 
 leafty that was to faji. <mA join in the humiliation I 
 
 Ergo* 
 
Ergo, all, even Infants as well as others , were to 
 far take of the remijfion. If you fay , the beafis 
 were to fafl too : J anfwer, as they were capable 
 in their kjnd of part of the curfe, fo were they 
 of fart of the benefit, but their capacity was not 
 as mans : They fajied to manifeft mans humilia- 
 tion. And if by the humiliation of the aged the 
 beafis Jped the better in their kind, no wonder if 
 Infants Jped the better in theirs , and according 
 to their capacities, and that was to have a remijfi- 
 on fuitable to their fin. , 
 
 " Mr. T's finfweu Neither aged nor infants 
 " were vifible Church-members, &c. 
 
 Reply. This only proveth by parity of Reafon, 
 their capacity of it , and that they would have 
 been fuch , if they had truely turned to God : 
 which yet I cannot fay that many of them did 
 not according to the terms of the Common Co- 
 venant of Grace made with Adam and Noe , 
 though they came not under the Covenant of pe- 
 culiarity : And if fo ( 2,$ Repentance is to be inter- 
 preted in the beft fenfe till the contrary be pro- 
 ved ) I leave it to the Reader , whether. Gods' 
 laying on the Infants their fhare ( as capable ) 
 in the humiliation , imply not fuch a fhare as 
 they are capable of in the benefit ? And the cafe 
 of the Jfraelites Infants ft eweth what they were 
 capable of, Mr. T's denial is no difproof. 
 
 SECT, 
 
\ "V / 
 
 SECT. X, 
 
 R.B. TT7//^ / have [aid of Sem and many 
 VV others , and their poflerity already^ 
 I foall not here again repeat : and more will be 
 faid anon to the following que ft ions. 
 
 "Mr.T's Anfwer is none, and needs no Re-, 
 
 SECT. XL 
 
 R. B. ~TT* HE fecond propofltion to be proved 
 JL is, that [ the Israelites children were 
 members of the univerfal vifible fourch of Qorifl 
 as well as of the Congregation of Ifraei] Bat this 
 you did heretofore acknowledge y and therefore 
 Jfuppofe will not now deny. I fuppofe it pafi can- 
 trover fie between t&* i. That Chrifl had then a 
 Church on earth. As Abraham faw Chrifts day 
 and rejoycedj and Mofes fuffered the reproach of 
 Chrifl y Heh 11.26. and the Prophets enquired of 
 the falvation by Qhrifi , and fe arched diligently y 
 and prophefied of the grace to come ^ and it was 
 the fpirtt of Chrifl which was in thofe Prophets 
 figntfying the time, and teftifying beforehand the 
 fufferings of Chrifl, and the glory that fliould fol- 
 low, 1 Per. 1. 10, 11. So were they part of the 
 Church of Chrifl , and members of the body of 
 Chrifl , and given for the edification of that body : 
 Though it was revealed to them that the higher 
 
 {ri- 
 
f 37J 
 
 priviledges cf the Church after the cowing of 
 Chnfty were not for them but for *#, I Pec. 1.12, 
 2. 1 fitppofe it agreed on alio between m , that 
 there was no true Church or Ecclefaftical wcrjhip- 
 ping focicty appointed by God in all the world 
 sc the f al^ but the Chmch of 'Chrift, and there- 
 fore either Infants were members of Chnfts 
 Church , or of no Church of Gods znftitution. 
 Mofes Church and Chrifts Church according to 
 Gods in ft it ut ion were not two , but one Church, 
 For Mofes was Chrifts Vjber , and his ceremo- 
 nies were an obfeurer Gojpel to lead men to Chrift.* 
 And though the foolifi) jews by mi f- under ft an d- 
 ing them made afeparation^ and -made Woks Di- 
 fciples to be fcparate from Chrifts Difctphs^ and 
 fo fct up the alone £ Jhadows cf things to cor/.e^ 
 yet the body is all cf Chrift J Col. 2. 17. and by 
 fo doing they violated Gods institution^ apd I'.i:- 
 churchi the tr fives, 3. I fuppoje it agreed aifo^ 
 that Chrifts Church is but one , and that even 
 thofe of all ages that are not at once vifiblc, yet 
 make up one body. 4. And that therefore who- 
 ever is a member of any particular Church is a, 
 member cf the univerfal. ( Though the Church 
 Was more eminently called Catholic^ when the 
 Wall of feparation was taken down.) But I remem- 
 ber I have proved this in my Book^-, parr. 1. chap. 
 20. and therefore fv.all fay no more now, 
 
 cc Mr. T's Anfwer. The two firft are granted. 
 " To the third, Though whoever is a member of 
 ci any particular Church is a member of the uni- 
 " verfal • yet it follows not, (which Mr, B. drives 
 6C at, and vainly talks of his proving) that every 
 
 u one 
 
<c one who was a member of the univerfal Church, 
 <c in that he was a member of the Jewi h Church- 
 <c particular, was a vifible member of every parti- 
 <c cular vifible Church of Chrift. 2. Nor that every 
 <c one that was a member of the univerfal Church , 
 c< in that he was a member of a vifible particular 
 cc Church of Chrift, was a vifible member of the 
 <c Jewifh particular Church, &c* 
 
 Reply, 1. None of this ever came into my 
 thoughts which he untruly frith I drive at, &c. 
 What fober man could imagine either of thefe 
 afTertions ? What pittiful abufe of ignorant Rea- 
 ders is this ? 2. And what a poor put off to the 
 point in hand ? That which I faid is but that all 
 particular vifible Churches and members, make 
 up one vifible univerfal Church , and therefore 
 every vifible member of any particular Church 
 is a member cf the univerfal ? He durft not deny 
 this, and yet a flander ferveth his turn. 
 
 SECT. XII. 
 
 R. B. (~yOnccmi'ng the matter of the third que- 
 \^J ftion, I ajfert that £ it was not only 
 of the Jews Common-Health that Infants were 
 members , but of the Church diftinci from it* ] 
 This is proved f efficiently in what is fatd before. 
 
 ic Mr.T'$u4/fwer. As yet I find it not proved 
 u that the Jewifh Church was diftind from the 
 iL Common-wealth , or that there was not any 
 iC member of the Church who was not of the 
 " Common-wealth. 
 
 Reply. 
 
(29) 
 
 Reply, i. It is only a formal 2nd not a materi- 
 al diftinftion that I medled with : The formal 
 reafonof a Church-member and a O'vil-memtxr 
 differ, at leaft after the choice of Kings i when 
 ihe Republick was conftituted by a humane head : 
 Of which I refer the Reader to Mr. Galufpic's 
 Aarons Rod ; If the Jews Common-wealth be 
 ipeciried as a Theocracy from God the Soveraign, 
 the Sichemites were of it, and other nations might. 
 2. But many fay that fome were of the Common- 
 wealth that were not of the Church, though not 
 contrarily : And be they diftind: or not , it futfi- 
 ceth me that Infants were of the Church, 
 
 SECT. XIH,XIV 3 XV,XVL 
 
 R. B. A JfOreover , 1. Infants were Church- 
 1 V JL members in Abrahams family before 
 Circumcifion^ and after when it was no Common- 
 Wealth. So they were in Ifaacs, Jacobs, &c» 
 
 2. The bawjhed, captivated , fcattered Jews 5 
 that ceafedtobe members of their Common-wealthy 
 yet ceafed not to be of their Church. 
 
 3 . The people of the Land 7 that became Jews 
 in Hefters time , joyned not themfdves to their 
 Common-wealth : Nor the Sichemites. 
 
 4. sJMany Profelytes never joyned themfelves 
 to their Common-wealth. 
 
 "Mr.T. affirmeth ihem all to have beenCom- 
 * c mon-wealths. 
 
 Anfwer. The word being ambiguous may in a 
 large fenfe be extended to a family, and to a 
 
 fcattered 
 
(3°) 
 
 (tattered people that have no Soveraign ^ but is 
 not fo ufuaily taken. 
 
 SECT. XVII. 
 
 ■ R. B k np HE Children of Abraham by Ketu- 
 JL rah, when they were removed from his 
 family were not unchurched j and yet were no mem- 
 bers of the jews Common-wealth. But I Jhall take 
 tip with what is faid for this already , underta- 
 king more largely to manifefi it^ when I perceive 
 it neceffary and ufcfid. 
 
 u Mr. T's Anfwer. Abrahams children by Ke- 
 €C turah when out of the Common-wealth of the 
 u Hebrews were unchurched . at leaft in refped 
 " of the Church of the Hebrews. 
 
 Reply, i. What a wide gap doth that [at 
 leaft \ make you, yet to fay, They were a Church 
 or no Church, as you pleafe? 2* Reader, ufe 
 Scripture but impartially, and in the fear of God, 
 and I will leave it to thy Conference to judge 
 whether it be credible, that when God had fore- 
 told that Abraham would command his children 
 and houfhold after him to keep the way of the 
 Lord, Gen. 18. 19. and when Ijlrmael, Ketnrahs 
 children , arid Efau , were circumcifed by Gods 
 command, and God had yet promi fed the Poli- 
 tical peculiarities fpecially to Ifaac , and Jacob , 
 yet God would have all the grandchildren of 
 Ifimael, Keturah, Efau to be uncircumcifed : and 
 all their pofleruy to ceafe that ufage, as foon as 
 they w r ere out of Abrahams houfe : when yec 
 
 Hiftory 
 
f 30 
 
 Hiftory affureth us that they long continued it : 
 Or whether God would have them circumcifed 
 and yet be no Church- members ? Believe as evi- 
 dence conftraineth thee. 
 
 S E C T. X V 1 1 1. 
 
 R. B. TpO the fourth queftion I affert that [_ i. 
 X There was a, Law or Precept of God ob- 
 liging the Parents to enter their children into Cove- 
 nant with God Joy accenting his favoured re-inga- 
 ging and devoting them to God andfo entring them 
 jolemnly Church-members. ] And £ 2. there was 
 a Covenant \ "promt fe or grant of God, by which 
 he offered the Church-memberjhip of fome Infants 
 and atlually conferred it , where his offer was ac- 
 cepted. J / fliould have mentioned this firfl^ and 
 therefore will begin with the -proof of this. By 
 thefc terms C&ve?iant y promife y grant , or deed of 
 gift y &c. we under fland that which is common to 
 all thefe , viz* \_ A fign of Gods will conferring 
 cr confirming a right to or in fome benefit J fucb 
 as we commonly call a Civil all of Collation as 
 di flinch from a mere Phyfical all of dijfofaL I 
 call it [ a fign of Gods will de jure J because 
 that is the general nature of all his legal moral 
 alls : they are all fignal determinations de debito, 
 of fome due. 2. 1 fay conferring or confirming 
 right to fome benefit J to difference it from pre- 
 cepts which only determine what Jhall be due from 
 us to God , and from threatnings , which deter* 
 mine what punijhment fiiall be due from God to us. 
 
 "Mr. 7; 
 
" Mr. T. If we prove by another grant 
 
 "or deed of gift Phyfical or Moral which is not 
 <c a promife , or by any Law which is not fuch a 
 " precept, he contradicts not my fpeech, &c. 
 
 Reply. Your words are [_I do not confers that 
 there was any Law or Ordinance determining that 
 it fiwuld be fo ( that Infants fiionld be membcrf 
 of the Jewifi Church ) but only * fail of God 
 which is a t ran fount thing , and I thinks it were 
 a foolijh undertaking to prove the repeal of a 
 fail. J Perufe his words Reader. 
 
 SECT. XIX,XX ; XXi. 
 
 R. B. T ~XAvin? thm explained the terms , / 
 .LjL prove the propofuion* If Infants 
 Church-memberjhip with the privilcdgcs' thereof 
 were a benefit conferred, which fame had right to 
 or in, then was there fome grant, covenant , or 
 promife, by which this right was conferred : But 
 the antecedent is mofi certain : Ergo , fo is the 
 con fe quern* I fuppofe you will not deny that it 
 was a benefit to be the covenanted people of God, 
 to have the Lord engaged to be their God, and 
 to take them for his people, to be brought fo near 
 him , and to be feparated from the common and 
 unclean , from the world, and from the firangers 
 to the Covenant of promife s, that live as without 
 God in the world, and without hope. 
 
 If it were asked what benefit had the Circum- 
 cifion ? I fuppofe yon would fay , much every 
 way. 
 
If Infant Church-memberjhip were no benefit , 
 ■hen they that had it> were not ( when they came 
 o age or their Parent i in the mean time ) obli- 
 ged to any thankfalnefs for it. But they were 
 obliged to be thankful for it. Ergo, it was a be- 
 uft. 
 
 c Mr. T. Denyeth not the benefit v but denyeih 
 ;c [that this is to be Vifible members formally 
 'or.connexively, for they may have all this be- 
 c nefit who are not .viable Church- members : 
 c vise fome believing Saints that are dumb. 
 
 Reply. Mark Reader, what an iflue our Con- 
 roverfies with thefe men come to ? [" Men may 
 )e the covenanted people of God, and have the 
 Lord engaged to be their God and to take them 
 : or his people, and be feparated. from the com- 
 non and unclean, from the world, from Grangers 
 ;o the Covenant, &c. and yet be no vifible 
 Church-members^ with them 1 Doth a. dumb man 
 [ignifie his confent to the Covenant by any figns 
 or not? If he do, that is vifible covenanting. If 
 not, how is he one of rhefe covenanting and fe- 
 parated people? And do you think that Mr. T. 
 knew not that I talk, to him of vifible covenant- 
 ing and feparation , and not only of a fecret un- 
 exprefTed heart-confenr : What will make a 
 Church-member then with fuch men ? 
 
 "He. next faith that [ To be the circumcifion is 
 11 not all one as to be vifible Church-members •, 
 cc Comelim and his houfe were vifible Church- 
 " members, yet not the circumcifion J. 
 
 Reply. Reader, doft thou not marvail to find 
 him fo plead for me againfl himfelf, or fpeak no- 
 
 D thing 
 
(34) 
 thing to the cafe? To be circumcifed then, or 
 baptized now , is not all one as to be vifible 
 Cburvh-mtmbers : But fure all the Circumcifed 
 were , and all the Baptized are, inverted in vifi- 
 ble memberfhip ? Is it not fo ? And if Cornelius 
 and more of the uncircumcifcd alio were mem- 
 bers, you fee it was not infeparable from Cir- 
 cumcilion. And whom is this againft, me or him ? 
 
 "Headdeth [nor were the benefits, Rom.$. 
 " i, 2. ( the oracles of God, ere.) conferred to 
 <c them as vifible Church-members : For then all 
 4C vifible Church-members had been partakers of 
 " them ]. 
 
 Reply. But it was to them as members of the 
 Jewiih vifible Church: And if you plead for the 
 extent of Lhe Church to others alfo, I thank you 
 for it. 
 
 When I fay £ Infant Church-mtmberjlnp was 
 a benefit ] " He faith [_ Vifible Church-member- 
 cc fhip fimply notes only a ftate, by which was 
 <c a benefir. ] 
 
 Reply. Only, k an exclufive term : Reader, by 
 this thou maift perceive the myftery of making 
 Church-members by a tranfeunt fall , without a 
 Law or promife. It is no benefit with thefe men, 
 but a ftate by which was a benefit. Either they 
 or I then know not at all what Church-member- 
 fhip is : And are not all our Volumes wifely 
 written to trouble the world , about that Subjelb 
 that we are not agreed what it is , and about a 
 term which we agree not of the fenfeof? I take 
 a vifible Church -member to be a vifible member 
 of Chrill as Head of the Church and of his 
 
 Church 
 
K5) J 
 Church as vifible ? To be a zJMember is to be a 
 Tart : It is therefore as the member of a Family, 
 School, Kingdom , a related part ! And is it no 
 benefit in it felf befides the confequents to be 
 vifibly united and related to Chrift and his bo- 
 dy ? to be relatively a member of the Houfliold 
 oil God ? Sure were it but for the exclufion of 
 the miferie of the contrary ftate , and for the 
 Honour of it, fuch a Relation to God the Father, 
 Son and Holy Ghoft > and the Church, is fome 
 little benefit : ( and great to me. ) 
 
 And whether he and Major Danvers and fuch 
 others fhould make fuch a vehement itir about it 
 as they do , if it be no benefit , let it be confi- 
 dered. 
 
 SECT. XXII. 
 
 R, B. ^Tp HE next thing in the antecedent to 
 X be proved is y that there was a right 
 conferred to this benefit^ and fame had a right in 
 it. And i . If any had the benefit •, then had they 
 right to or in that benefit : But fome had the be- 
 nefit , Ergo. The conference of the major is cer- 
 tain. I. Becaufe the very nature of the benefit 
 confifleth in a right to further benefits. 2. If 
 any had the benefit of Church-member firip, Cove- 
 nant -inter eft ^ &c. without right ; then they had 
 it with Cjods confent and approbation or without 
 it. Not with it : For he is juft^ and confenteth 
 not that any have that which he hath- not fome 
 right to or in : Not without it : for no man can 
 
 D 2 have 
 
have a hem jit from God again fi his will, or with A 
 o tit it. z. If no Infants had duly and right fiil-i 
 ly received this benefit ^ God would have fo me -I 
 where reprehended the ufnrpation and abufe of\ 
 his ordinances or benefits. But that he doth not 
 as to this cafe , Ergo. 3. God hath expreffed this 
 right in many Texts of Scripture^ of which more 
 afterward, 
 
 16 Mr. T. The Infants of the Jews were vifi- 
 cc fible Church-members, not by a Legal right to 
 " it> antecedent to their being fiichv'tf\b\z Church- 
 "members which they or any for them might 
 tl claim as due i Nor was it capable of being du- 
 u ly and rightfully received or ufurped : For it ' 
 €c was nothing but a flate of appearing to be part 
 ** of that people, who were in appearance from 
 " things fenfible, Gods people; and this they had 
 u by Gods fad of making them to be a part of 
 "that people vifibly, viz.* his forming them and 
 "bringing them into the world, and placing 
 
 " them 
 
 Reply. More myfrery ftill ! 1. Was there no an- 
 tecedent Law or Covenant of God, giving a jus 
 focietatis a Right cf memberfhip to ^Abrahams 
 feed as foon as they had a being initially, and 
 commanding them to be devoted to God in Co- 
 venant, and Circumcifed, that they by inveftiture 
 might have a plenary Right? Was there no fuch 
 thing ? O but [* this gave them not a right to it 
 before they had it. \ Is the poor Church to be 
 thus abufed , and holy things thus played with > 
 They could not be membvrs before they hud a 
 being • nor could lay claim to it : But could not 
 
 Gods 
 
(37) 
 Gods Law, Grant or Inftrumental Covenant be 
 made before they were born ? And could it not 
 be the Inftrument of conveying right to them as 
 foon as they were born? that is, as foon as they 
 were fubje&s capable ? And is not the caufe in 
 order of nature , though not of time before the 
 erTed ? Cannot the Law of the Land be the fun- 
 damental caufe of the Right of Infants to Ho- 
 nours and Eftates, though till they are in being 
 they are not capable fubje&s ? Is not the Action 
 nt agentis naturaU^antecedent to it as in yatiente ? 
 Is it only Gods tranfeunt faEl of making them 
 wen and thefe men, and placing them in England, 
 which maketh Infants to be members of the En- 
 glifh Nobility, or Gentry or Citizens or mem- 
 bers of this Kingdom ? No -, but it is the Laws 
 ' that do morally give the Jm dignitatis, vel fo- 
 \ details, though their action be not terminated in 
 any fubject till it exift. For every man born in 
 England is not born a Lord, or Efquire, or Ci- 
 tizen, no nor a free fubjecl, unlefs the Law fay 
 it ftiall be fo. If Foreigners or Rebels fhould have 
 children here, and the Law were that they fhall 
 te Aliens, they would be no members of the 
 Kingdom, If Mr. T. or Mr. 'JD's children have 
 nothing but Generation y and being born in Eng- 
 land to (hew for their Inheritance , their Title 
 will not hold. 
 
 2. And might not right have been falily plead- 
 
 ded or ufurped by a counterfeit Jew ? Or the 
 
 children of fuch ? Or the children of Apcfhtes > 
 
 who yet were born of Abrahams- feed, andinthac 
 
 . Land? Whatfoever they wqrejthat hteh&KjaitvS^i 
 
 D z fie'vere- 
 
feverely, I am fure Achans children, and the In- 
 fants of the Cities that were to be confumed for 
 Idolatry, loft their right to life and Church-mem- 
 berfhip at once by their Parents Cm : And God 
 might if he had pleafed, have continued the Life 
 of Apoftates children , without continuing their 
 Church-right ^ Or Apoftates might fand no doubt 
 multitudes did ) efcape the juftice of the Law 
 through the fault of Magiftrates or people, and 
 yet have no true Legal Right to Church-member- 
 fhip for themfelves or Infants ( born alter) : For 
 he that, hath loft his right to \\k y hath loft his 
 right ( or may do ) to the priviledges and benefits 
 cf it. 
 
 Cc He addeth £ yet I grant, they had a right 
 " in it, that is , that they had it by Gods dona- 
 tion. J 
 
 Reply. And was it not a Moral Donation then, 
 if it gave Right} You will be forced thustoccn* 
 fute your felt. 
 
 " Mr. T. It feems to me not true, that the na- 
 " ture of the benefit of Infants vilible member- 
 lt fhip coniifteth in a right to further benefits. 
 
 Reply. Yet he givech not a word to tell us why 
 he thinketh fo. If we are at this pafs about Re- 
 lations and Right in general , no marvail if In- 
 fant Baptifm go for Antichriftian : Doth not 
 the Relative flate of a Citiz.cn, or of the mem- 
 ber of any priviledged fociety, confift in his ftate 
 of Right to the Benefits , Priviledges and Com- 
 munion of the Society , and an obligation to the 
 duties of a member, to the end he may have the 
 benefits, and the Society the benefit of his mem, 
 
 berfhip 
 
(39) 
 berfhip and duty ? A conjunction of Right 
 ( iZxriz ) and obligation conftituteth all fuch Re- 
 lations. But what ihall we be agreed in that are 
 ignorant and differ here ? 
 
 u Next Mr. T. denieth the confequence, £ For 
 " a man may have a benefit without right. ]] 
 
 Reply, i. And yet juft now , Church-member- 
 flup in Ifrael was a thing that none could ufurp y 
 or have without right ? 2. But I faid [_ no man 
 can have a benefit from God againft his will or 
 without it : ] And therefore if God give fuch a 
 thing as Church-raemberfhip which confifteth in 
 
 * Right to further benefits, he that hath it by Gods 
 gift hath it rightfully : Natural effects fas a prey 
 to a thief ) may be faid to be given of God im- 
 properly, by Phyfical difpofal, to him that hath no 
 right : But right it felf cannot be given to him 
 :hat hath no right • nor any thing elfe, Relative 
 ;>r Natural, by Gods Moral or Covenant dona- 
 :ion. 
 
 u He [ conceiveth it to'be very erroneous [hat 
 :< vifible Church-memberfhip is given out of di- 
 ;t flribucive Juftice • for as Regeneration, fo alfo 
 :c vifible memberfhip are of bounty by God as 
 c Soveraign Lord, not of diftributive Juftice by 
 c God as Judge. 2. That all that any man hath or' 
 c God he hath of debt, contrary to Rom. 4.. 4. 
 
 • 3. That vifible Church-memberfhip is concei- 
 c ved as a thing offered, and to be duly and right- 
 c fully received 
 
 Reply. If Mr. T. and I (hall tire the Printer, 
 md wait Paper, and trouble the world, wiih rel- 
 ing them how many errors each of m hold, it will 
 
 D 4 be 
 
C4°) 
 
 be an unfavory task, and I doubt it would be a 
 much fhorter work for one of us, ( which ever 
 it is) to enumerate the ufeful truths we hold. 
 What I hold , be it right or wrong , I will tell | 
 the Reader as to this matter. I hold that Gods 
 Kingdom is to be confidered in its Conflitution 
 and Adminifiration : The firft hath, i . The effi- 
 cient, 2. The Constitutive, 3. The final Caufes : 
 And in the large fenfe it containeth, 1 . Subjects on- 
 ly by obligation^ ( fuch as Rebels are ) 2. Sub- 
 jects by confent , ( or voluntary ). The Efficient 
 caufe of the former is only Gods 1. Making 
 them men , and Redeemed men quoad frtctum^ 
 and commanding their fubjetlion or consent. To . 
 the effecting of the fccond is beiides tbele required 
 their Actual Confent ( Parents confenting for their 
 Infants ) } without which they are but Rebels, and 
 have no right to the benefits of the Society. 
 
 God being a King de jure before his Govern- 
 ment is Confented to , maketh a Law to man to 
 command them to confent and be his voluntary fub- 
 je&s: To thofe that confent (as the condition) 
 he promifeth the intereft and blefiings of his Co- 
 venant, viz. Ghrift and Life . andthreatneth the 
 privation of thofe benefits, and forer punifhment 
 to refining rebels : He is Lawgiver and will be 
 Judge of Nan-confenters •, calkdyVnbelievcrs and 
 fefufers of Chrift and Salvation: When men do 
 confent they are under his further Adminiftring 
 Laws. The faid efficient caufes are Gods Acti- 
 ons, 1. As Omnipotent Owner, 2. As Bene- 
 factor, 3. nAs Sapiential Rector. 7. According 
 !o the firft, he giveih us our Being and prefer- 
 
 veth 
 
C4t) 
 
 vtth it, and in him we Live, and Move, and Are, 
 2. As our Benefatlor antecedent to his Admi- - 
 mflration, he gave the world a Redeemer abfo- 
 lutely, and reprieved the world and us, and gi- 
 veth us all common Antecedent Mercies. 3. As the 
 Re&or de jure of men not yet confenting, he ma- 
 keth the Law of Grace abfolutely and antecedent- 
 ly to any condition ( of making it) on our part. 
 This Law hath the preceptive part, commanding 
 confent ( faith and repentance ). 2. The Donative 
 or promt fory part, giving us Chrift in Relation , 
 and right to his prefent benefits , if we confent ; 
 which is the condition. 3 .And the penalty aforefaid. 
 
 The Adminiftration of the Kingdom de jure, is 
 the efficient of the confent ing Kingdom-.The Admi- 
 niftration (or A&ual Government j of the Con- 
 fenting Kingdom , is by Legi flat ion , Judgement 
 and Execution, And the Legiflation is , 1. For 
 the conftitution of the particular members that 
 fhall from time to time be added : 2. And the 
 Governing of them all. 
 
 Now if God have made a Law that men fhall 
 be received members of Chrift and his Church if 
 they confent ( or Repent and BelieveJ and former- 
 ly to the Jfraelites, if they be Confenters (or 
 their feed, who confent by them ) then it is an 
 ad of diflributive juftice of God as Judge , to 
 givethefe benefits to Confenters: And to contra- 
 diftinguifh an att of bounty unlefs he fay £ me er 
 bounty ~\ is intolerable. For God governeth us 
 Paternally , as a Regent -benefactor : He never gave 
 reward to a Creature, Man or Angel, which was 
 not a Gift as to the valne of the things and a Re- 
 ward, 
 
( 42; 
 
 ward only as to the or do confer endi & ratio rel 
 cipiendi : It is madnefs to think that we can me.; 
 rit from God commutatively. Arid it's little 
 better to think, that bounty and difiributive juftice 
 may not confift •, yea that there can be any right 
 quoad ordinem diftribuendi from that juftice , 
 which is not quoad rem donatam from bounty. 
 It is fad therefore that the world muft fee, that 
 looking all how to make good an efpoufed caufe, 
 ihould tempt fo Ancient and Learned a Divine 
 to fubvert the Gofpei and all Chriftianity ; For 
 what doch he lefs ? If he talk only of members 
 by obligation , every living man is a member : This 
 he meaneth not. If he talk only of Confent ing 
 voluntary Aiembers , to fay that God command- 
 eth none to be fuch y is to fay that he command- 
 eth none to be Chriftians y to Repent, Believe or 
 Confent : To (ay that he hath made no promife or 
 Donative Aft in the Law of Grace, that if yon 
 confent (repent and believe ) you foall have uni- 
 on with Qjrift and his Church ( or be members ) 
 is to deny the very fumm of all the Gofpei, 
 and Baprifm it felf. To fay that God doth not 
 as Judge execute his own Law and promife , gi- 
 ving* this union to Confentcrs y and denying it to 
 Refufers^ is to fay that he will not as a judge ab- 
 folve Believers or condemn Unbelievers. O Rea- 
 der , hate faction and partial difpures that can 
 make men overthrow all Chriftianity, not know- 
 ing what they do. 
 
 2. And his denying that vifible Churcl^mem- 
 berfnp is a thing offered , and rightly to be ac- 
 cepted, is the fame, even to deny that Chrift in- 
 
 v it eth 
 
viteth any Infidel to become a Chriftian, or ever 
 called or commanded Heathens to believe : or fent 
 his Minifters to compel them to come in, that his 
 houfe may be filled. 
 
 But his (lander that I fay all that man hath 
 from God is of debt, is forged groundlefly. I fay 
 God giveth fome benefits antecedently and abfo- 
 lutely, and fome confecfuently on condition , by a 
 Law : And none of them all are of debt as a 
 workman deferveth his wages with commutative 
 jufiice. 
 
 It is his grofs error that vifible Church-mem- 
 berfhip of Infants among the Jews was not a thing 
 offered on condition of Parents faith , and to be 
 accented . or refufed -, but a flate refulting from 
 Gods f aft. Hefeigneth a Church to be formal- 
 ly quid Phyficum fure I He that would not con- 
 fent to the Covenant was by Afa to be put to 
 death : And was not Circumcifion a covenanting ad? 
 And did they not thereby profefs to take God 
 for their God } or would God elfe have taken 
 them for his people ? And would not renouncing 
 God have cut them off? And would their feed 
 then have had any right for being theirs ? Indeed 
 it is difputable how far fome Jnceftors, or other 
 Proprietors might be a medium of right to fuch 
 Apoftates feed : but <e* theirs, there is no difpute. 
 
 SECT. 
 
(44 ) 
 
 SECT. XXIII. 
 
 R. B. T Am next to prove the confequence ', that 
 X [_ this right was conferred by fome grant , 
 promife , er Covenant of God. 3 -<4W ?/?# /> ^f 
 f^/?e 06 to prove that the world was made by Gods 
 power and efficiency or will ^ or to prove that God is 
 the owner of all things, and no man can receive 
 them but by his gift, 1 . If there be no other 
 way pojjible for right to be conveyed from God to 
 tu, but only by his grant, promife, or Covenant, 
 ( which we call donation , and is a moral civil 
 atlion , ) then it is by this means that it is con- 
 veyed. But there is no other pojfible way of fuch 
 conveyance: Ergo, we have no right till God give 
 us right, His will ftgnifed createth our right. 
 No man can have right to that which is wholly 
 and abfolutely another s, but by his confent or will. 
 This will is no way known, but by fome figns of 
 tt. The fe figns of fuch a will for conveyance of 
 right to a benefit, arc a civil moral action, called 
 a donation or gift fimply. Jf the fign be in wri- 
 ting, we commonly call it a deed of gift. Jf it 
 be by word of mouth, conferring a prefent right y 
 we call it a verbal grant or gift. If it confer 
 only a future right , we call it a promife , and 
 fometimes a Covenant^ and fometimes the word 
 Covenant fignifcth both , that act which gives a 
 prefent right, and promifeth a continuance of it. 
 Bight being a moral or civil thing , can be no 
 way conveyed but by a morfd or civil action. A 
 
^45 ) 
 
 gift that was never given, is a contradiction. So 
 that this fart of our controverfie is as eafic as 
 whether two and two be four. 
 
 " Mr, T. Vifible Church-memberfhip is not a 
 " Right , but a ftate of Being -, as to be ftrong, 
 " healthy, rich , &c. which are not given by a 
 u civil moral adion , but by Providence of God 
 "ading Phyfically as the Soveraign difpofer of 
 
 " all. I deny therefore that there is fuch 
 
 "a promife - 
 
 Re-ply. Reader, it is not long of me that this 
 Learned Ancient Divine knoweth not what a 
 Church- member is, or elfe what is the difference 
 between Erhicks, or Politicks, and Phyficks. But 
 it is our fhame that a Preacher in England (hould 
 be found fo ignorant. God as the Fountain of 
 nature, and Omnipotent Lord of all, is indeed the 
 firft Caufe of Being and Motion as fuch : As a 
 free Benefactor-he is the firft Caufe of all our 
 Good as fuch • And as a Sapiential Red: or, and 
 Benefactor conjunctly ( that is , by Paternal go- 
 vernment ) he is the firft caufe of Right, 
 
 Being and Motion are the effeds of Phyfical 
 efficiency : Jus vel Debitum is the very formal 
 effect or object of Moral Efficiency by a Redor, 
 and the formal objed of Ethicks. To be a Church- 
 member , is to have a fated Relation , confift- 
 ing in Right to the Benefits and obligation to 
 the duty , as was faid before. He denieth-this to 
 be any Right, and to have any fuch Civil-moral 
 caufe as Right hath, but to be quid Fhyficum as 
 Healthy flrength. Riches, #nd an anfwerable Thy- 
 fcal Oiute. Let the fhame of this ignorance re- 
 form 
 
form the common error 01 ocnoois tnat teach not 
 their children betimes the principles of Ethicks , 
 Politicks, or Governing Order: It is a fhame 
 that at 1 6. years old any fhould be fo ignorant 
 as thefe words import. I muft fpeak it, or I com- 
 ply with the powers of darknefs, that fo fhame- 
 fully oppofe the truth. 
 
 SECT. XXIV.XXV. 
 
 R. B. 2. /""> O D hath exfrefly called that ail a 
 vj Covenant or fromife by which he 
 conveyeth this right : which we jhall more fully, 
 mamfeft anon when we come to it. 
 
 The fecond Proportion to be proved , is , that 
 T there was a Law or Precept of God obliging the 
 Parents to enter their children into Covenant and 
 Church-member firip, by accepting of his offer, and 
 re-engaging them s to God. ~\ And this is as obvi- 
 em and cafe as the former. But firfi I fiall in 
 a word here alfo explain the terms. The word 
 £ Law ] is fometimes taken more largely, and un- 
 fitly, m comprehending the very immanent alls or 
 the nature of God, confidered without any fign to 
 reprefent it to the creature. So many call Gods na- 
 ture or purpofes the Eternal Law : which indeed 
 is no law, nor can be fitly fo called. 2. It is ta- 
 ken properly for £ an authoritative determination 
 de debito conftimendo vel confirmando. ] And fo 
 it comprehendeth all that may fitly be called a 
 law. Some define it y £ [inTum majeftatis obligans 
 aut ad obediendam aut ad poenam.] But this leaves 
 
 out 
 
( 47) 
 
 cut the premiant fart, and fome others : So that of 
 Grocius doth, Eft regula actionum moralium ob- 
 ligans ad id quod rectum eft. I acquiefce in the 
 fir ft, or rather in this, which is more full and ex- 
 at% -, [_ A law is a ftgn of the Retlors will confti- 
 tuting or confirming right or duenefi. J That it 
 be a ftgn of the Rettors wiU de debito conftituen- 
 do vel confirmando, is the general nature of all 
 laws. Some quarrel at the word \_fign ] becaufe 
 it is logical and not political: As if Politicians 
 jhould not jpeak^ logically as well as other men I 
 There is a twofold due : I. What is due from us 
 to God ( or any Rettor ; ) and this is ftgmfied in 
 the pruept and prohibition, ( or in the precept de 
 agendo & non agendo.) 2. What fiall be due 
 torn-, and this is ftgnifiedby promifes, or the pre- 
 miant part of the law, and by laws for distribu- 
 tion and determination of proprieties, usill bene- 
 fits are given w by God in a double relation, both 
 as Reclor and Benefatlor : or as Benefactor Re- 
 gens ^ or as Re&or benefaciens : though among 
 men that ft and not in fuch a fubordination to one 
 another as we do to God, they may be received 
 from a meer benefactor without any regent inte- 
 reft therein. The fir ft laws do ever conftitute the 
 debitum or right : afterward there may be renew? 
 ed laws and precepts to urge men to obey the for- 
 mer , or to do the fame thing : and the end of 
 thefe is either fu! Her to acquaint the fubjetl with 
 the former, or to revive the memory of them , cr 
 to excite to the obedience of them : Andthcfe do not 
 properly conftitute duty, becaufe it was conftitu- 
 ted before - 5 but the nature and power of the ab~i 
 
 is 
 
af j fta fame with that which doth conftitute it, and 
 therefore doth confirm the conftitution, and again 
 cblige us to what we were obliged to before, for 
 obligations to one and the fame duty may be mul- 
 tiplied, 3 . Some take the word £ law ~\ in fo re- 
 trained a fence as to exclude verbal or particu- 
 lar precepts , ejpecially diretled but to one • or a 
 few men \ and will only call that a law which is 
 written, or at leafl a well known cuftom obliging 
 a whole fociety in a fiated way, Thefe be the 
 mo ft eminent fort of laws : but to fay that the reft 
 are no laws, is vain and groundlef , againft the 
 true general definition of a Law-, and juftly reject- 
 ed by the wiffi Politicians, That which we are 
 now to enquire after, is a precept, or the command- 
 ing part of a law, which is [_ afign of Gods will 
 obliging us to duty, ] of which figns there are ma- 
 terially fever al forts, as i, by a voice, that's evi- 
 dently of God : 2, by writing : "$,by vifible works 
 or effecls : 4. by fecret impreffes, as by infpiratt-' 
 en, which is a law only to him that hath them, 
 
 " Mr.T. I afTert, 1. There is no fuch offer , 
 u promife or Covenant : 2. That though there are 
 <c precepts for Parents to pray for their Children, 
 " to breed them up — yet they are not bound 
 "to believe this, that upon their own faith God 
 "will rake their Infant Children to be his, and 
 u will be a God to them , nor to accept of this 
 cc pretended offer. 3. That though Parents may 
 
 "enter into Covenant for their Children 
 
 <c as Deut. 29. 12. they do not by this make them 
 * c partakers of the Covenant or promife that God 
 " will be their God. 
 
 Reply. 
 
(49) 
 
 Reply. What a deal of the* Gofpel and the 
 Churches mercys do thefe men deny ? i. The very 
 nature of our own Holy Covenant is, that in it we 
 giv e up to Cod our [elves and all that is ours accord- 
 ing to the capacity of that alL And as our Riches 
 are devoted hereby as capable utenfils j fo our In- 
 fants as capable of Infant Relation , Obligation 
 and Right. What is it that a J (anil i fed manuxuHi 
 nor devote to God that is His ? If you except Li- 
 berty, Health, Life, you are hypocrites : And can 
 you except Children ? It's true ; this is but fo far 
 as they are our own, and we fay no more : "when 
 they have a will to choofe for themfelves , they 
 muft do ir. 2. I have fully proved Scripture com- 
 mands for Parents to offer their Children to God, 
 and that fignifiech his will to accept what hecom- 
 mandeth them to offer. And his promifes to fhew 
 mercy to them as theirs are plain and many, which 
 12 muft not tire the Reader with repeating. 
 
 Mr. T. addeth, That if there were fuch a fro- 
 mife and duty of accenting the pretended offer and 
 re-engaging , yet this neither did then nor doth 
 now make Infants vifible Church-members, 
 
 Reply, lender, are not the Anabaptifts duftile 
 men where they like, as well as intra&able where 
 they diflike, that they will follow fuch a Leader; 
 as this? Promife and Duty of accepting and re-en- 
 \gaging aggravareth the fin of Rebels that reject 
 it • but if thefe performed, even vifible mutual co- 
 I tenanting j make not Church-members vifible^ what 
 doth > You fee what he hath brought the ancient 
 and later Church-memberfhip , Circumcifion and 
 Baptifm to ? I think to nothing : As formal Poii- 
 
 E tiEciari 
 
f5o) 
 
 tifician Church^tyrants when they have mortified] 
 fome ordinance , and turned it into an Image , 
 make an engine of it to trouble the Church, and 
 filencethe Preachers and ferious pra&ifers of the 
 Gofpel with. Thcfe men make nothing of Church- 
 memberfhip, and then reftlefly trouble the Church- 
 about it. 
 
 SECT. XXVI. 
 
 ft. B. T T jiving thus opened the terms [_ Law 
 XX and Precept, ] J prove the Proporti- 
 on thus* I. If it was the duty of the Ifraelites 
 to accept Cods offered mercy for their Children, , 
 to engage and devote them to him in Covenant , 
 then there was a Law or Precept which made this 
 their duty, and obliged them to it. But if was a 
 duty : Ergo , there was fuch 4 Law or Precept, 
 for the antecedent, I . If it were not a duty> then it 
 "was either a fin, or a neutral indifferent altion : But 
 it was not a fin, (for, i . It was againfi no Law^ 
 2. It is not reprehended . ) nor was it indifferent^ 
 for it was of a moral nature, and ergo , either good 
 or evil) yea fin or duty : For properly permittere 
 is no ab% of Law, (though many fay it is,) but 
 a fujpenfion of an all : and fo licitum is not mo- 
 raliter bonum, but only non malum ; and ergo is 
 not properly within the verge of morality, z. If 
 there be a penalty ( and a mo ft terrible penalty) 
 annexed for the non-performance, then it was a 
 duty : But fuch a penalty was annexed ( as frail 
 Anon be farticnkrlj fhewed) even to be cut off from 
 
 hi? 
 
(50 
 
 his people, to be put to death, &(\ If it oblige id 
 poena m, it did fir ft oblige ad obediemiarti : For no 
 Law obligeth ad poenam * but for dtfobe die nee , 
 tvbicb prefuppofeth an obligation to obedience \\ 
 3. // it were not the Israelites duty to enter their 
 Children into Gods Covenant and (fhurch, then it 
 Would have been none of their fin to have omitted 
 or refufedfo to do : But it would have been their 
 great and hainom fin to have omitted or refufed 
 it » Ergo. Now to the conference of the major* 
 There is no duty but what is made by fome Law or 
 Treccpt as its proper efficient caufe or foundation : 
 Ergo, if it be a duty , ther^was certainly fome 
 Law or Precept that made itf^ff, zAmong men we 
 fay^ that a benefit obligeth to gratitude ^ though 
 there were no Law .* But the meaning is, if there 
 were no humane law, and that is becaufe the Law 
 of God in nature requireth man to be jufl and, 
 thankful. If there were no law of God natural 
 Or pofitive that did confiitute it, or oblige w to it, 
 there could be no duty* 1. There, is no duty but 
 what is made fitch by Gods fignified will y ergo; 
 no duty but what is made , finch by a Law or Pre- 
 tept. for a Trecept is the fign of Gods will ob- 
 liging to duty. 2,» Where there is no Law there is 
 no tranfgrejfion, Rorn. 4. 15* ergo ^ where there 
 u no law there is no duty •, for thefe are Contra- 
 ries: it is, a duty not totranfgrefi the Law, and d 
 irahjgrejfion not to perform the duty which it re- 
 ijuireth of hs* There is no apparent ground of ex- 
 cept ion j but in cafe of Covenants* Whether d mart, 
 tnay not oblig e him f elf to a duty tneerly by his con- 
 sent ? J mfwer^ i. He may oblige himfelf tb art 
 
atf, which he mitft perform, or elfe prove unfaith- 
 ful and dijhoneft : but his own obligation m*ks s it 
 not ftnllly a duty : ergo, when God makes a Co- 
 venant With man, he is as it were obliged in point 
 of fidelity, but not of duty. 2. He that obligeth 
 bimfelf to an all by promife^ doth cccafion an ob- 
 ligation to duty from God, becaufe God hath obli- 
 ged men to keep their promt fes. 3 . So far as a 
 man may be f aid to be his own Ruler, fo far may he 
 be [aid to oblige himfelf to duty , ( that is .duty to 
 himfelf, though the atb be for the benefit of ano- 
 ther ^ ) but then he may at fitly be fad to make a 
 Law to himfelf, or command himfelf : fo that ft ill 
 the duty (fitch as it k ) hath an anfwerable com- 
 mand. So that I may well conclude, that there is 
 a law-, becaufe there is a duty, For nothing but a 
 law could caufe that duty, nor make that omiffion 
 cf it a fin. Where there is no law, fin is not im- 
 fitted j Rom. 5. 13. But the omiffion of entring 
 Infants into Covenant with- God before Chrifts in- 
 carnation would have been a fin imputed ^ ergo , 
 there was a law commanding it, 2, If it was a 
 duty to dedicate Infants to God y or enter them ir,- 
 to Covenant with him, then either by Gods will, or 
 without it: certainly not without it, J f by Gods 
 will, then cither by his will revealed, or unrcveaU 
 ed. His unrevealed will cannot oblige •, for there 
 wants promulgation, which is neceffary to obliga- 
 tion : And no man can be bound to know Gods un- 
 revealed will, unlcfi remotely , as it may be long 
 of himfelf that it is not to him revealed. If it be 
 Gods revealed will that muft thus oblige, then there 
 was fome ftgn by. which it was revealed. And 
 
 if 
 
C53) 
 
 if there were a fign revealing Cods will obliging 
 its to duty, then there was a law , for this ps the 
 very nature of the preceptive part of a law , 
 (■ which ts the principal part, ) jo that yon may m 
 well [ay, that yon are a reafonable creature, but 
 not a wan, as fay that men were obliged to duty by 
 Gods revealed will, but yet not by a Law or Pre- 
 cept. 3. We Jhall anon produce the Law or Pre- 
 cept, and put it out of doubt that there was fnch 
 a thing. In the mean time I mufi confefi, J do 
 not remember that ever I was put to dijpute a point 
 that carrieth more of its own evidence to Jhame 
 the gain-fayer* And if you can gather Dfciples 
 even among the godly , by pcrfwading tht m that 
 there were duties without Precepts or L^ws, and 
 benefits without donations , covenants or prcmife 
 confirming them, then defpair of nothing for the 
 time to come: Ton may perfwade them that there 
 is a Son without a Father^ or any relation with- 
 out its foundation, or effccl without its caufe, and 
 never doubt but the fame men will believe you , 
 while you have the fame interefl in them , and 
 ufe the fame artifce in putting off your con- 
 ceit!. 
 
 Mr. f. would firft perfwade the Reader that I mean 
 r.othing but Circumcifior 3 
 
 Reply, Long ago I told you thar, 1. The Fe- 
 males were not circumcifed, 2, Nor the Males for 
 forty years in the wildernefs : And yet were all 
 Church-members by being Gods Covenanted peo- 
 ple. And fe was //r^/ before Circumcifion. 
 
 His terms of £ the hiffmg of a Coofe, and the 
 fnarling of a Cur ] and other fuch , I account 
 
 E 3 lighter 
 
(54) _ _ 
 
 his injuries to the j 
 
 I 
 
 lighter than the leafi of his injuries to the 
 truth. 
 
 SECT. XX VI I. 
 
 R. B, r Tp HE fifth Quefiion requireth me to lay 
 X. down this afftrtion , that \_ there is ria 
 Law or Precept of God which doth not oblige to 
 duty • and no actual fromife or donation , which 
 doth not confer the benefit. ~\ This I aver on oc- 
 cafion of your lafl Letter , where in contradiction 
 to the former, you confefi F the promifes to the na- 
 tural pofterity of Abraham , Gen. in. and the 
 Covenants made with Jfr'ael at Mount SiiaL and 
 Dent. 29. and a precept of Circumciiion , and 
 precepts of God by tftlofts, of calling the people, 
 mid requiring them to enter into Covenant, Bxodl 
 19. Dent. 29, ] Tet yon [ do not conceive that the 
 Irrfants of Ifrael were made viiibie Church-mem- 
 bers by the promifes in the Covenants, or the pre- 
 cepts forenamed. ] If fo , then either yon ima- 
 gine that among all thofe precepts and promifes 
 there was yet no promife or Covenant that gave 
 them the benefit of £burch-memberfinp, or precept 
 concerning- their entrance into that ficte • or elfe 
 yon imagthe that fuch promifes were made., but did, 
 not actually confer the benefit , and fuch precepts 
 -were made , but did not atlaaily oblige. Tour 
 words are fo ambiguous in this^ that they fgnifie 
 nothing of your mind to any that Vjiows it not fumg 
 other way. For when you fay £ there is no fuch 
 particular promife concerning tofafcts viilblq 
 
 Church- 
 
i 
 
 c 55; 
 
 Church-roemberfhip , or precept , &c. befides 
 Circumcifion, as in my Book of Baptifm I afTcrc, 3 
 who knows whether that exception of \_ Circum- 
 cifion J be a conceffion of fuch a precept or pro- 
 nnfe in the cafe of Circumcifion? or if nctjvhat fenfe 
 it hath f and what yon imagine that precept or 
 promife to be which I affert ? and before the fenfe 
 of your one fy liable \_fuch~] is difc erne dby trying 
 it by a whole volume , / doubt yon will make what 
 you lift of it. However if you fimdd mean, that 
 fuch precepts there are as have for their fubjeB 
 [_ the avouching God to be their God^ the entring 
 f#t6 Covenant Circumcifion ~\ of Infants, but not 
 heir Church-member fiip ; then, 1. I have proved 
 the contrary to the negative before*^ 2. os4nd 
 more jhall do anon ^ 3. And it's a palpable con~ 
 tradiciion to the precedent affirmative. But if 
 you mean that Church -memberfiip of Infants as 
 well as others is the fubjeB or part of the fubjeB 
 of thofe premifes or precepts, and yet that In- 
 fants were not made or confirmed thereby • it is 
 the contrary that 1 am ajferting , and 1 have no 
 further need to prove^.than by jhswing the con- 
 tradiction of your opinion to it felf. For an aBu- 
 al Covenant or promife that doth not giv: right 
 to the benefit promifed ( according te its tenor 
 and terms , ) is like a caufe that hath no effeB , 
 a Father that did never generate , and it is all 
 ! one as to fay , a gift or Covenant which is no gift 
 l or Covenant , feeing the name is denied , when 
 the thing named and defined is granted. So a 
 Precept or Law to enter Infants folemnly into 
 Church-member fiif , which yet >.bligetb none fo to 
 
 E 4. tnuv 
 
tnter them, is as grofi a contradiction as to fay, I 
 the Sun hath not heat or light, and yet *j truly a 
 Sun, 
 
 _ Mr. T. here confefcth , 2. That the Jews were Gods 
 vifible Church not bauly by Gods promife to them to 
 be their God, but by their prom if? to God : Gods call of 
 them made them his Church, and their fromife to Gcdw'nh 
 
 other acts made them viftbly fo 
 
 Reply. Reader, is not all here unfaid again by 
 this conceflion ? Unlets he will fay that ihjs Call,- 
 and Covenant, and Promife made them all a viftble 
 Church, and yet none of thefe, but their birth and 
 flace made them members? As if any thing made j 
 the Whole Church which made none of the Parts 
 as fuch. 
 
 ■I 
 
 SECT. XXVII J. 
 
 R. B. Y Come nex\ 1 to the fixth Q^eftion, Whether 
 JL indeed there be any tranftunt fact, which. 
 Without the c an fat ion of any promife or precept , 
 did make the lfraclire> Infants Church-methbers. 
 This you affirm ( if you would be under food • ) 
 whether this your ground of Infant sChurch-mem- 
 berfhip or mine be righter, I hope will be no hard 
 matter for another man ( of common capacity) to 
 difcem< By a |[ tranfeunt fall ] thus fet as con- 
 tradiftincl to a law, precept or promife, either you 
 mean the att of legiflation and promife making, or 
 fame other meerly phypcal a&* If the former, it 
 ts too ridiculms to be ufed in a feriosu bufinefi: 
 For yen fhould not pnt things in competition ex- 
 eluding the ene, where they both mufl neceffartly 
 
 concur x 
 
concur j the one /landing in a fubordination to the 
 other. Was there ever a Law or Covenant made 
 in the world any other way than by a tranfeunt 
 f.ilh f Sure all legiflxtion is by fame fignif cation 
 of the Soveraigns will. And the waking of that 
 fign is a tranfeunt fall. If it be by voice, ts 
 Mt that tranfeunt ? If by writing, is not the aEb 
 tranfeunt ? If by creation it flf, the all is tran- 
 feunt though the effdb be permanent. And cer- 
 tainly if legi flat ion cr fromifing be your tranfe- 
 unt fact, you do very abfurdly put it in oppcfnwn. 
 to a law (cr promt fe ) it being the making of fuch 
 a law. And the legiflation doth no way oblige 
 the fubjett, but by the law fo made : nor doth the 
 making of a promt fe, grant or covenant , confer 
 right to the bene ft which is the fubjet} of it , any 
 otherwife than as it ts the making of that grant 
 which jball fo confer it. As the making of a knife 
 doth not cut, but the knife made : and fo of other 
 tnfiruments, S& that if the law oblige not , or 
 the grant confer not , certainly the legiflation or 
 promtfe-mak^ng cannot do it, I cannot therefore 
 imagine that this is your fenfe, without charging 
 yon with too great abfurdrty. As if you fhould 
 fay, It is not the will of the t eft at or, i. e. his te- 
 fiament, that cntitlcth the legatary to the legacy , 
 but it is the tranfeunt fall of the teflatcr in ma- 
 king that will: or it is not the Soveraigns commif- 
 fion that authorise th a Judge, fouldicr, &c. but it 
 is the tranfeunt fatb of writing or making that 
 committor?. It is not the fign that fignifieth , but 
 the tranfeunt faW of making that fign. Were net 
 this ft contemptible arguing t To charge yon with 
 
 this. 
 
US) 
 
 this, were to make you tantum non unreasonable. 
 And yet I know not what to fay to you, that is, 
 hiw to under ft and you. For if you mean a n.eer 
 fhyjical tranftunt fact, which is no fuch leg: flatt- 
 en or promt fe-makjng y then it is far more abfurd 
 than the former, Jcor if it be not afign of Gods 
 will obliging to duty, or conferring benefit, then 
 can it not fo oblige to" duty , nor confer benefits. 
 It is no other tranftunt fall but legi flat ion that 
 can oblige a fubjeel to duty, nor any other tran- 
 ftunt fatl but promt fe , or other donation , that 
 can convey right to a benefit y or oblige the promi- 
 fer. A moral or civil effcel mufl be produced by 
 a moral or civil attion , and not by a meer phy- 
 fical acli&n • which is unfit to produce fuch an ali- 
 en effeft, and can go no hightr than its own hind. 
 What fen fe therefore I fimild put on your words, 
 without makjng them appear unre a finable , even 
 much below the rates of ordinary rational peoples 
 difcourfe, I cannot tcK. For to fay, it is not a 
 law but legi flat ion > is all one as to fay, it is not 
 the fimdamenmm > but the laying of that founda- 
 tion that calif eth the relation , or from which it 
 doth refult. And to fay it is an alien phyfical 
 #cl, which hath no fuch thing as right for its 
 fubjetl or terminus , ts to confound phyficks and 
 morals, and to (peak the groffefi abfurdities -, as to 
 fay that the tranfeunt fatl of eating, drinking , 
 going, buildings &c. do adoft fuch an one to be 
 your heir* I ma ft needs thinl^therefore, till you 
 have better cleared your f If, that you have here 
 quit your f elf as til , and forfjken and deliver- 
 c4 up your Caufe, as palpably as. ever I knew wan 
 
 do^ 
 
(59) 
 
 'do, without an exprefi ' confejfwn that it is naught, 
 \Vhen men mufl be taught by this obtufe fubtilty 
 to prove that Infants Qmrch-m ember flrip needed 
 no revocation, forfooth £ becaufe their Church- 
 memberjljip was not caufed by a la\y> precept, pro- 
 mi fe oy covenant^ but by a tr an [cunt fact J than 
 which as you leave it, the world hath fcarce heard a 
 more incoherent dream, Hut I pray you remem- 
 ber in your reply that you being the' affirm er of 
 this, mu ft prove it. Which I (liall expect y when 
 you can prove that you can generate a man byfpit- 
 ing or blowing your nofe, or by plowing and /ow- 
 ing can produce Kings and Emperors, 
 
 Mr. T. Here Mr. T. is at the old tranfeunt fad 
 again : Let the Reader make his beft of it : I ac- 
 count it not worth the reciting ; nor his title of 
 Canine Scoptical Rhetorick^vegardabk. 
 
 SECT. XXIX, to XXXIX. 
 
 R. B. X N confideration of the feventh Queftion, 
 1 / Jhall confider the nature and effect of 
 the tranfeunt fate which you here defcrtbe. And 
 firfi of the reafon of that name. Tou fay that you 
 call it £ tranfeunt "] [ becaufe done in time and 
 fo not eternal, and pafi and fo not in congruous 
 fenfe repealeable as a law, ordinance, ftatute, de- 
 cree which determines fuch a thing fliall be for 
 the future. ] Anl do you thinly this the common 
 fenfe of the word ? or a fit reafon of your appli- 
 cation of it to the thing in hand f 
 
 I thinly 
 
(6o) 
 
 I thinks your intzlkVihn and vn lit ion are imwa~ 
 pent alls, and yet not eternal. 
 
 We ttfe to contradiftinguifh tran faint acts from 
 immjnenty and that becaufe iheydo traniire in fub- 
 jedumextraneum. 
 
 But it feems you take them here as diftincl from 
 permanent. 
 
 But ufe your fen fe as long as we under ft and it. 
 
 If it be only [_pa(l^\ actions which you call 
 f tranfeunt ] it feems your long fall which was 
 jo many hundred year's in doings was no tranfe- 
 unt fair till the end of all thefe years ; and fo did 
 not ( by your own dotlrine ) make any Church- 
 members till the end of thofe years. 
 
 But , Sir j the Que ft ion is not-, whether it were a 
 tranfeunt fait that laid the foundation by legi flatt- 
 en or promife -making > y but whither the effect were 
 tranfeunt, or the all as it is in pari en te : Whether thx 
 Ltw were tranfeunt which was made by a tranfeunt 
 faEl l and whether tl?e word all ion of that law were 
 permanent or tranfeunt? it being mo ft certainly fuch 
 a moral all that muft produce a title , or confli- 
 tute a duty. Gods writing the ten (fommande- 
 rnents in ftonc was a faci joon paft, but the law 
 Was not foon pa ft, nor the moral ail of that law, 
 viz. obligation. There are verbal laws, that have 
 no real permanent fign : and yet the law may be 
 permanent, and the obligation permanent, becaufc 
 the fign may have a permanency in efle cognito , 
 and fo the fignifying vertue may remain by the 
 help of memory y though the word did vanifl) in the 
 freaking. 
 
 When 
 
(Cl) 
 
 When you come to point out this tranfeunt fall 
 individually , yon Jay [_ it is Cods taking the whole 
 people of the jews for his people \ ] which yon term 
 Vfacl | as conceiving it mofl comprehcnfwe of the 
 many particular alls in many generations whereby 
 he did accompli jh it. } I . / did not well under fland 
 before that [] a fall ] did fo vaftly differ from 
 an [ Ail, ~\ as to contain the alls ( rather than the 
 falls ) of many generations. 
 
 This is a long fall according to your we afar c 9 
 even from Abrahams call out of Ur: but how long 
 it feems yon are not well agreed with your falf. 
 for in the firfi part of your Letter yon enumerate 
 to the other alts that compofe this fait £ the 
 bringing them into the bond of the (/oven ant at 
 tJMcunt Sinai , giving them laws , Jet ling their 
 Priefihood, Tabernacle, Army ^Governments Inhe- 
 ritance : ] But before yon tnd y yon change your 
 wind , and (ay [~ the Church -memberfirip of the 
 Ifraelites began as 1 conceive with Abrahams c^//, 
 and was compleated when they were brought out of 
 jEgypt to God, Exod. 19. 4. 2 But fare that was 
 long before the fetling their inheritance. Tour 
 fall according to your lafi account was about 437. 
 years in doing ; but according to your firfi opinio 
 on, it was about 470. years long. 
 
 If it were one individual fall of about qrjo* 
 years long that made Infants Church-members , 
 then they could not be Church-members till that 
 fall was paftj For the effell is not before the caufe y 
 or caufality of the efficient . the relation cannot 
 be before the fundamenturn be laid: and it feems 
 this long fall wa/ the laying of the fundamenturn : 
 
 But 
 
iU) 
 
 But the confequent is certainly falfe ^ for Infant^ 
 were Church-members before the end or compleating 
 of your long fail : For they were Church-members 
 ( you I grant ) when Ifhmael andlhzc were ctr- 
 cumcifed. Ergo , it was not this long fail that 
 made them Church-members. 
 
 If yuu mean that it was not the whole, but fome 
 'fart of this long faU that actually made Infants 
 Church-members , then yon would have affigned 
 that part y when that was the thing defired, and 
 which yon pretended exactly to perform ; or at 
 Itafi you would not have told m it comprehended 
 all the fe alls* 
 
 And if each particular all did make Infants 
 Church-member s y or lay a fufjicient ground of it ;, 
 then itfeems that it was done before the inflitntion 
 ofCircumcifion. For Gods calling Abraham out of 
 llr was before it. So that the Children born in 
 his houfe mufl be Church-members upon that ; and 
 a fujpeient ground laid for his own to have been 
 fuchy if he had then had a natural iffue : And it 
 feems then that Ifhmael was born a Church-mem- 
 ber many years before Circumcifioni 
 
 If this be your meanings I pray you be fo jufl 
 nnd impartial as to accept of the proof which I flail 
 give you of Infants Church-m ember fliip before 
 Abrahams days , if I wake it appear to be as 
 firong as this call of Abraham from llr. 
 » If you flwuld mean that fome one of thefe com- 
 prehended alls flwuld of it felf make any Infants 
 Church-members , then it mufl be any one ; for you 
 710 mote ajfign it to one of them than to another ', 
 ( only fay £ chiefly the bringing them from JE^ 
 
 gypt ? J 
 
(63) 
 
 gypt : 2 But fitrely fome of thefe alls particularly 
 cannot do it, as the leading to Fadan Aram, the re- 
 moval to Canaan, to j£gypt, placing, preserving 
 there, fetling their Army, &c* Did any one of 
 thcfe make Infants to become Chirrch-members ? 
 
 Nay , fuppcfe yon mean that all thefe atls mufi 
 concur to make them members, (and fo that they were 
 no members till many hundred years after the in- 
 fiitution of Circumafion, J yet cculd net your Do- 
 Brine hold good : For fome of thefe atls are of an 
 alien nature , and no more apt to caufe infant 
 Church-memberfliip, than a Bull to generate a Bird. 
 What aptitude hath the fetling of an Army to be 
 any part of the caufation of Infants Church-mem* 
 berfiup? None, I thinly-, at leafl if it be fuck an 
 sArmy as ours : For furely the fetling of ourscau- 
 fed no fuch thing, as you well know* What apti- 
 tude hath the leading to Pad an Aram, or removal 
 to i£gypt , to make Infants Church-members <* 
 Nay, how ftrange is it , that the removing 
 of Church-members > and fuch as had been In- 
 fant Church-members, as lfhmael, Keturahs chil- 
 dren, Efau , mufi caufe Infant Church-member- 
 flrip ? Sure it was no caufe of their own. Ketu- 
 rahs children were Church-members in infancy : 
 I enquire of yon by what all they were made fuch ? 
 Tou fay \_ by Gods fail of taking the whole people of 
 the Jews for his people~\ whereof the all of removing 
 Keturahs children was a part. Very good. It 
 feems then that removing from the Congregation 
 of Ifrael a people of the Jews, is a takwg of the 
 removed to be of that people : or elfe it u not on- 
 ly the taking that people , but alfo the removal 
 
 from 
 
from that people that maketh Church-members , 
 even the removed as well as the takfn, both which 
 are alike abfurd* 
 
 And I pray you tell me yet a little better ; how 
 an alb can wake a man a £hurch-member that was 
 one long before that was done ? Ton cannot here fay ', 
 that it was before in efft morali, and had a mo- 
 ral caufation. How then could your chief eft atl, 
 the bringing out of ./Egypt , make thofe Infants 
 Church-members that were born in ^Egypt , and 
 were Church-members before f Or how -could it be 
 any part of the caufe? Did the bringing out of 
 j£gypt concur to make Mofes a Church-member 
 when he was in the basket on the waters f And 
 when yon anfwer this , you may do well to go 
 a little further, and tell me, how fnch an all: con- 
 curreth to make him an Infant Church-member 
 that was dead an hundred or two hundred years 
 before that atl was d,ne. tor example, how did 
 the fet ling of the IfraelitcS Army, or Inheritance, 
 or the Covenant on Mount Sinai, make Ifhcnad , 
 or Efau, or lfaac, or Jacob Church-members ? 
 
 I defire you alfo to tell me by the next , what 
 be the nerves and ligaments that tie all theft 
 n£ts 0/430. years at It aft together, fo as to make 
 them one fall ? And whether I may nut as ground- 
 edly make a fa% fufpeient for this purpojt of the 
 alls of an hundred or two hundred years only? 
 And whether you may not as well make all the 
 alls from Abrahams call till Chrift to be onefaU^ 
 and ajfign it to this office} 
 
 Tou fay thxt you call this fa& [ tranfeunt ] 
 becanfe it's [ paft, J ( and fo till it's [ faft ] it 
 
 feems 
 
■I 
 
 perns Ifaac and Jacob that were dead before ', are 
 no Chruch -members ; ~] 1 would then jam know 
 whether it be this fame tranfeunt fad, or fomt 
 other , that makes Infants Church-members five 
 hundred years after it is pafi ? If it be this fame , 
 then how comes a meer tranfeunt lad to work^ ef- 
 fectually fo many hundred years after it is pafi ? 
 unlefi it made a Law or Covenant which doth 
 the deed f If it be a new tranfeunt fad that mufi 
 make Infants four ch -members after the compleat- 
 ing of this ( the fetling their inheritances •, ) then 
 I pray you let me know, whether it be one fad e x- 
 ercifed on the whole nation in grofi, or mufl it be 
 a fad upon every Infant member individually f If 
 on the nation, remember t% tell us what it was j 
 and do not only tell its the caufe of the member- 
 jhip of former Infants; And feeing it mufl be 
 fuch as the member fhip of every Infant tillChrifis 
 time at leafi mufi be caufedby^ I pray you remem- 
 ber to make your work^ fquare and full , and be 
 fure to affign ns no other kind of fad, than what 
 you will prove to have been fo frequently repeat- 
 ed in every age, and fo fully extenfive to every 
 Infant among the Jews, as that it have no gaps, bup 
 may make all members that werefo in each age. And 
 remember, that it is no law, precept , promife or 
 covenant that you mufi affign for the caufe •, for that 
 is it you are engaged againfi : but a confiantjuc- 
 cejfion of tranfeunt fads extending to each indi- 
 vidual member, O what work, have you made 
 yourfelf? and what a fort of new political Do- 
 Urine fhall we have from you, when thefe things 
 are accompli find according to the frame you have 
 
 F begun % 
 
__ ( 66 ) 
 
 begun? Such as I believe the Sun never J aw , nor 
 the wife ft Lawyer in England ever read he~ 
 fore ? Which makes me the left marvel that fo ma- 
 ny of your opinion are fo much again ft the Lawyers j 
 for I dare fay they will be but few of them for 
 you, if thefe be your grounds, or at leaft not for 
 thefe your grounds* 
 
 Re fly. To all this I find nothing (aid by Mr. T. 
 that I think worttiy the Readers trouble to reply 
 to : Let him read it and fee. . His charge of 
 l^foolijh exclamations , canity, &c] I pafs by. 
 
 SECT. XXXIX, to XLIV. 
 
 R. B. "D^* aU this yet is but a light velitation s 
 JD The principal thing that I would en- 
 quire into, is, what your great comprehenfve fafi 
 v in the true nature of it, which you call \_ Gods 
 taking the whole people of the Jews to be his peo- 
 ple. J Doth the word [^ taking^ fgnifie a meer 
 fhyfwal taking orfatt ; or a moral, fuch as among 
 men we call, a civil aBion ? If it be a meer phy- 
 fical taking, then, i. It cannot produce a moral 
 ejfetly fuch as that in que ft ion is. 2. And then 
 it muft have an anfwerable ebjett, which muft be 
 individual exiftent per [on s. 3 . And then you can- 
 not call it one fatv, but many thoufand: even as 
 n: any as there were perfons taken into the Jews 
 in above four hundred years. 4. And then what 
 was the phyftcalall which is called Gods taking t 
 was it fuch a taking as the Angel ufed to Lot, 
 tint carried him cut of Sodom. -, or as the Apo- 
 
 cry~ 
 
'(6 7 ) 
 
 cryphai Author mentions of Habakkuk , that ifcdk 
 taken by the hair of the head, and carried by the 
 Angel into another Country , to bring Daniel a 
 mefi of Pottage ? Jf God mufl by a phyficalappre- 
 hen fun take hold of them that he makes Church- 
 members j we jhall be at a lof for our proof of 
 their Church-memberjhip. But I cannot imagine 
 that this is your fenfe. But what is it then I Is 
 it a phyftcal atlion though a moral caufation of 
 fame phyfical effeil ? That it cannot be : For it 
 is a political or moral cjfeB that "we enquire af- 
 ter* It necejfarily remains therefore that this be 
 a political moral taking that you here Jpeak of* 
 And if fo, then the tranfeunt faEl you jpeak °f 
 muft needs * be a civil or political action* And 
 what that can be, which is no Law , Promife or 
 Covenant in this cafe , / pray you be flow fome 
 more diligence to inform us, and not put us off 
 with the raw name of a tranfeunt fall oppofed to 
 thefe. Certainly, if it be a civil or legal aftion^ 
 the produll or effett of it is jus or debitum , fome 
 due or right : And that is either, I . A ducnefs 
 of fomewhat from us, ( which is either fomewhat 
 to be done, or fomewhat to be given • ) 2. Or a 
 duenefs of fomething to us, which is either of good 
 or evil : If good, it is either by contrali or dona- 
 tion ( whether by a Tefiament pr&miant Law, or 
 the like : ) if evil , it is either by fome pnenal 
 Law , or voluntary agreement ' Now which of 
 theje is it that your tranfeunt fad: produceth $ To 
 he a member of the Church, is to be a member of 
 a fociety taking God in Chrifl to be their God^ 
 and taken by him for his fpecial people* The aft 
 
 F z which 
 
which maizes each member ; is cf the y fame nature 
 with that which makes the focuty. The relation 
 then e ffenti ally com aineth, I. Aright to the great 
 benefits of Gods foveraignty over men , C hnfts 
 headjhip ? and that favour , protection , provifiun 
 and other blejfmgs , which are due from fitch a 
 powerful and gracious Soveraign to fuch Subjecls, 
 and from fuch a Head to his tJMembers t As al- 
 fo a right to my flation in the Body, and to the 
 infeparMe benefits thereof. 2. It contameth my 
 debt of obedience to God in Chrifi, acknowledged 
 and promifed atlually or virtually, really or repu- 
 tatively. Now for the firfi, how can God be re- 
 lated unto me as my God, or Chrift as my Savi- 
 viour, and I to him as one that have fuch right 
 to him and his bltffings , by any other way than 
 his own free gift ? This gift mufl be fame fig- 
 nification of his will: For his fecret will is not a 
 gift, but a purpofe of giving. This way of gi- 
 ving therefore is by a civil or moral atlion , 
 which is a fignifyivg of the Donors Will ; and 
 can be by no way , but either pure donation^ con- 
 trait , ttfianent , or law. In our cafe it muft 
 needs partake of the nature of all thefe. It is 
 rot from one in any equality, nor capable of any 
 obliging compenfition or retribution from us. Be- 
 ing therefore from an abfolute dif-engaged Bene- 
 fattor^ it mufl needs be by pure donation ,. or it 
 cannot be ours. Tit as he is p leafed as it were 
 to (blige him f elf by promife, or by his word, and 
 alfo to call m tt a voluntary acceptance, and en- 
 fakement to certain fidelity, gratitude and duty y 
 t fid [& is {he fiipulator^ and we the promtfers in 
 
 the 
 
the latter part of the action : it is therefore jufily 
 c-allcd a contrail er Covenant , though indeed the 
 Word f Covenant ~\ frequently fignifieth Gods oven 
 promife alone. As it proceedeth from the death 
 of the tefiator ( in natural woraUreputativc be- 
 ing, ) fo it is called a tcftament. And as it is 
 an ad of a ruling Benefattor, giving this bene ft 
 t$ the governed, to promote the ends of govern- 
 ment , and obliging to duty thereby , fo it par- 
 taketh of (he nature of a law. The co?nmonefb 
 Scripture name for this aft, is Gods Covenant or 
 Promife, and fome times his gift • which all figni- 
 fie the fame thing here. It follows therefore ? 
 that either by Gods [ taking lfrael to be his peo- 
 ple ~\ you mean fome civil political aliion , as a 
 Covenant, Promife , or the like collation of the 
 benefit, ( and then you affert the thing whkh yon 
 deny , ) or elfe you know not what you mean , 
 nor can make another know it , without the dif- 
 covery of the groffeft abfurdity* And at for the 
 ot^er thing which is contained in Church-mem- 
 b-erfiripj the prof e fed duty of man to God, it is 
 mofl certain, I. That Gods Law obligeth us to 
 that duty: 2. And obligeth all according to their 
 capacities to confent to the obligation > and fo to 
 re -engage them fe Ives : 3. That this atlttal con- 
 fent profeffed doth therefore double the obligation. 
 And thus by a mutual tontraft, Covenant or con- 
 fent ( whereef our part is fir ft required by a 
 law j ) it the relation of Church-memberfhip con- 
 tracted. Now to lay by and deny all this , and , 
 give us the general naked name of £ taking for 
 Gods people , j is meerly delufory, feeing that 
 
 F 3 Z**ki»gl 
 
£_ taking 3 means this which you exclude , or it 
 weans nothing that is true and reafonable. And 
 therefore tell m better what it means* 
 
 ^As for the Texts yon cite , Deut. 4. 34.^7- 
 Lwit. 20. 24, 26. 1 King. 8. 53. Ifai. 43. 1. In 
 Deut. 4. ;\j mentioned not the moral att of God 
 by which he made them his people , or took^ them 
 for his own , and founded the relation : bat the 
 natural action s%whereby he refcued them from the 
 jt'gyptian bondage and took^ them to himfelf or 
 for his life-, fervice, and honour out of that land. 
 But I thwk^fure they were his people, and all their 
 Infants were Church -members before that taking 
 by vcrtuc of a former Covenant-taking, 
 
 u4s to Levir. 20. God did perform a twofold 
 Work, of fc par at ion for Ifrael.* 1, By his Cove- 
 nant and their entring Covenant with him. 2. By 
 local fcparation of their bodies from others. It 
 was t\}e firfi that made them his people , and- 
 Church-members , and not the lafl : the lafi was 
 wily a favourable dealing with them as his be- 
 loved* Th,e fame I fay to the other two Texts. 
 Sure you cannot thinly*, that corporal feparaiion 
 makes a Church-member, What if an <^£gypti- 
 a 1 that had no part in the Covenant had pafl out 
 with the Ifraelies, and got with % them through the 
 Red Sea , do' y^u thinks he had been therefore a 
 Church-member ? Suppofe God had made no pro- 
 mife or covenant with Abraham or his feed, but 
 only taken them out of ' Chaldea into Canaan, 
 and thence into jEgypt, and thence intj the Wil- 
 der nef , and thence into Canaan again : Do yon 
 thinks this much had made them Chitrch-mem- 
 
 hers $ 
 
^ Z 1 J 
 bers ? Then if the Turks conquer Greece , or the 
 Tartarians conquer China , they are become 
 Church-members , becaufe this feems as great a 
 temporal profperity at leafi. And I think it is 
 f J>afi doubt, that Lot wot a Church-member m the 
 midfl of Sodom, and the Israelites in ^Egyptfo- 
 fore they were brought out , as truly as after. 
 
 As to Gen. 12. j. Ads 7. 2. Nehem. 9. 7, 
 which you alfo cite , ajs there is not one of them 
 that gives the leafi intimation that Infants 
 Qourch-memberfiip then began, fo I fin all further 
 enquire anon^ whether they contain any Covenant 
 or promife. 
 
 So Exod. 19. 4, 5. hath no word that gives the 
 leafi intimation that God by that aU of taking 
 them out of jEgypt , did make Ifrael a Church 9 
 or the Infants or any others, members of it : But* 
 only that by fulfilling a former promt fe in the delive- 
 rance of a people formerly his own, he layethfur~ 
 ther obligations to duty on them by redoubling his 
 mercies. The fame I fay of Levic. 11. 45. Neh# 
 i t iq. / will not believe yet, but that you believe 
 your felf, that the Ifraelites and their Infants 
 were as truly Church -members before, as after 
 their deliverance out of vEgypt. And me-thinhj 
 the Texts you cite might put it out of doubt. 
 What if God fay, Ho£ 11. 1. \_ When Ifrael was 
 a child I loved him , and called my Son out of 
 iEgypt. 3 Is it eafie hence to prove that calling 
 him out of -/Egypt did make him his Son that was 
 none before : or to prove that Ifrael was Gods 
 Son before he called him out of ./Egypt ? If ym 
 Jhould maintain the former * I might txptli that 
 
 £ * >*1 
 
172 ) 
 
 you fhould fay the like of Chrifl himfelf, to whom 
 the Evangel: fl applieth this text •, and fo you may 
 prove as fairly , that Chrifl was none of Gods Son 
 till he was called out of j£gypt, but was wade his 
 Son by that call. Certainly the Text termeth him 
 tjods Son that was called, as being fo before that 
 calh By this time I am well content that any 
 waking man do compare your dotlrine ant mine , 
 and try whether it be a tranfeunt fatt, or a Law 
 nnd Covenant , that made Infants and all others 
 (faff ch -members : and if they do not admire that 
 ever a learned man Jljould harbour fetch a conceit 
 as yours, and that ever a godly man fliould build 
 fuch a weight on it , and go fo far on fuch a 
 ground, yea and that ever ordinary godly people 
 fhould be fo blinded with fuch palpable nonfenfs 
 or abfurditieSy then let them fill follow yon in the 
 darkj^ for- 1 expeil not that reafo'n fhould recover 
 them. 
 
 Reply. To all this I find nothing faid that 
 needethany further reply. 
 
 SECT. XLIV, XLV. 
 
 R.B. T Come now to the eiqhth Queftion, that is 
 1 tojpeak^ to the point which you propound- 
 ed. To ft urge me to cite to you the particular 
 Texts that contain this Law, Ordinance^ Precept 
 or Covenant. To which lanfwer thw. I .There 
 Are two forts of Laws y one which fir ft make * 
 duty \ the other, which, f H pp°fi *t fo made , and. 
 
 do 
 
f73) ; . 
 
 do only call for obedience^ and excite thereto , or 
 frefcribe fornewhat as a means in order thereunto* 
 If I could flrtw you no written lavo or promife 
 as firfl confirming the duty, or granting the pri- 
 viledge of Church-member jhip , it were not the 
 leafl difparagement to my caufe 7 as long as 1 cmt 
 fiiew you thofe following Laws which prefuppofe 
 this* Tou know the Church of God did live about 
 2000. years without any written law that we 
 know of : Where then was Gods will manife fleet 
 ahout fuch things as this , but in tradition and 
 nature ? If Mofes then at the end of this 2C00. 
 years did find this tradition , and find all the In- 
 fants of Church-members in poffeffion cf this be- 
 nefit ^ then^what need he make a new Law about 
 it t Or why fljould God promife it as a new 
 thing . ? / confefi if 1 jhould find by any new law 
 or promife that it did begin but in Mofes days , 
 I Jhould thinks it fome abatement of the ftrength 
 of my caufe ( though yet I think, there would, 
 enough remain* ) 2. There are (yet higher ) two 
 forts of laws : the one for the con fit ut ion of the 
 £omm*n-wealth it felf , the other for the admt- 
 nifiration or government of it when it is fo con- 
 firmed* The formjer are called by fome, Funda- 
 mental Laws, as laying the frame and form of 
 the Common-wealth j and the quality of the mate- 
 rials, &c. / thinks indeed, that as conftitutive of 
 the form of the Common-wealth , thefe are fcarce 
 properly called Laws ^ though as they look^ for- 
 Vpardj obliging to duty, and prohibiting alterati- 
 on, they may. But if they be not laws, they are 
 fornewhat higher , and lay the ground of all laws 
 
 and 
 
V.74) 
 and obedience, and fo are laws eminenter & vir* 
 rualtLtr, though not ail natty and formally :■ And 
 in our cafe , as this conjlitution did fubjell us to 
 Cody making it our duty ever after to obey him ; 
 fo doth it oblige us to acknowledge that fubjetli- 
 
 ». . And the very conjlitution of the Church is 
 all of high beneficence y and performed by the 
 fundamental grant or Covenant. Now if this Co- 
 venant and conjlitution could not exprejly be fhew- 
 ed in writing, it were no diminution of the au- 
 thority of it , feeing among men Fundamentals 
 are feldom written - 5 and when they are , it is 
 only as Laws obliging the fubjeci to maintain and, 
 adhere to the firjl conjlitution. As long there- 
 fore as we can prove that it is Gods will that 
 fuccejjlvely Infants fwuld be Church-member s y it 
 no whit invalidates the caufe' if -we could not 
 fliew the original conjlitution in writing. Tet 
 fomewhat we Jliall attempt. 3. We have full proof 
 of Infants Church-member flnp by Laws and Co- 
 venants concerning it , ever ftnee the time that 
 there was a written word of God : and that is 
 fufficient , if we could fetch it no higher. Ha- 
 ving premifed thts , / come nearer to the Que- 
 ftion. 
 
 The firfl inflltution of Infants Church-mem- 
 ber foip de jure upon fippofition of their ex i fence y 
 was in Gods fir ft conjlitution of the Re pub lick of 
 the worldy when he became mans Governour, and 
 determined of his fubjeils , and members of the 
 Common-wealth : Which Republic!^ being facred , 
 and devoted to Gods worfhip and fervice , was 
 truly a (fhnrch of which God w<u head* This 
 
 wad 
 
(75) 
 
 W>u performed by the firft Law and Covenant 
 made either in or upon wans creation. That fitch 
 a Covenant or prormfe of felicity was made by 
 God to innocent man, almpfl all Divines tgree : 
 But becaufe it is rather implied than exprefjed in 
 Mofes brief Htftory, fume few cavillers do there- 
 fore contradict in. But , i. The threatmng of 
 death for fin, feews to imply a promife of life if 
 he finned not, 2. zAnd the New Teftament af- 
 fordeth m divers' pajf ages that yet plainlier prove 
 it, which to you 1 nee A not recite, 'But whether 
 thus promife of life were natural ( as the threat- 
 ning of death was , ) or only pofitive and more 
 arbitrary , Divines are net agreed among them* 
 felves, Thofe that fay it was free and pofitive ; 
 give this reafon, That God could not naturally be ob- 
 liged to blefi or felicitate the mo'fl innocent cr 
 perftel' creature , nor any creature merit of God, 
 Thofe that think, it natural as the threatning was, 
 fay, it's true that God could not be properly ob- 
 liged, becaufe he is under no Law , no more is 
 he obliged to pump, but only man obliged tofitf- 
 fer if he infiifl it : "And its true that mm can- 
 not fir icily merit of God, But yet, fay they, as 
 man may have a natural aptitude for fuch feli- 
 city, fo God hath a natural prcpenfuy to do good 
 according to the capacity of the fubjctl , and his 
 works do oblige him (improperly) in point of fi- 
 delity and immutability as well as his word. So 
 that their reafons are thefe following, j. Becaufe 
 God is as naturally prone to do good to the good, 
 us to do evil to the evil, that is, to reward as to 
 funijlmeut 7 as his name proclaimed to Mofes , 
 
 Excd 
 
C?0 
 
 Exod. 34. Jbews, 2, Becaufe £od makjng man 
 capable of a higher felicity, and principltng him 
 with inclinations thereto, and giving him defires, 
 love, and other affections for that bleffed end, even 
 the everlaftmg fruition of God, therefore they fay, 
 God did in this frame of his nature give him ground 
 ta expect fuch a felicity - 9 if he finned not. For 
 elfe all thefe inclinations and affetlions fioouid have 
 beta- in vain : But God made not fo noble a crea- 
 ture with vain inclinations and affetlions to aft 
 fallacioufly and falfly, Alfo Gods works Would 
 not be harmonic al: So that as Gods prom ife is but 
 a figfi of his will obliging him improperly in point 
 of fidelity and immut ability y fo^ fay they, the na- 
 ture of man was a fign of Gods will fo far enga* 
 ging him : So that as he could not let fin go un- 
 p unified without fome breach in the harmony of 
 his fapiential frame of adminiftratim , no more 
 could he deny to per fell: man the objctl of thofe de- 
 fires which he formed in him. So that although 
 he might have made man fuch a creature as 
 fiituld not neceffarily be- punifiied for evil , or re- 
 warded for good, that is, he* might have made him 
 not a man •, yet having fo made him, it is necef- 
 fary that he be governed as a man in regard of 
 felicity as well as penalty, 3. Our Philofophcrs 
 and Divines do commonly prove the immortality of 
 the foul from its natural inclinations to God and 
 eternal felicity. And if the immortality may be 
 fo proved from its nature , then alfo its felicity 
 in cafe of righteoufnefi, 1 interpofe not my J elf 
 as a Judge in this controverfie of Divines, but 1 
 have mentioned it to the end vphich Jjhall now ex- 
 
 F'P* 
 
(11) 
 
 frtfs. i. It is mo ft certain, whether the reward 
 or promt fe be natural or pofttive y that fuch a ft ate 
 of Jeliaty man was either in or in the way to , or 
 in fart and the way to more. And it is mo ft cer- 
 tain, that man was made holy , devoted to Cod y 
 and ft for his fervice, and that in this eftate ac- 
 cording to the Law of his creation, he was to 
 increafe and multiply : It is mo ft certain therqjte> 
 that according to the fir ft law of nature, Infant* 
 jhould have bun Church-members. 2. But if their 
 opinion hold, that make the reward grounded on 
 the law of nature , and not on a meer poptive 
 law, ( and you fee the reafons are not contempti- 
 ble, ) then the argument would be yet more ad- 
 vantagious. 3. But however it be of the title to 
 glory or eternity , it is mo ft certain, that accord- 
 ing to the very law of nature Infants were to have 
 been Church-members if man had flood. The fir ft 
 Text therefore that I cite for Infants Church- 
 member fhip, as expr effing its original de jure, is 
 Gen. 1.26, 27,28. [ So God created man in his 
 
 own Image ■ — And God blefled them , and 
 
 God faid unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and 
 t replenifh the eanh. ] Here you fee by the law of 
 ^nature Infants were to have been born in Cjods 
 Image and in innvcency , and fo Church-mem- 
 bers. And note , that the firft bleffing that Cod 
 pronounceth on mankind, is , that they propagate 
 Children in their own eftate y to be as the Pa- 
 rents were, even in Gods Image. 
 
 Mr. T. 1. It ch i 5 prove their Church-mcmberftiip , i c 
 proves not their viuble Cluirch-mcmbcnhip.. 
 
 Reply* 
 
Reply. Mark Reader, that Gods Law zndblef- 
 fing for the propagation of Adams feed in his 
 Image, would not have made them when born to 
 be vifible Church-members , though members ? 
 What not fo notorious a La\v y and Covenant, and 
 BenediBion ( No wonder if all Chriftians Infants 
 mud be fhut out , if Innocent Adams muft have 
 Uajfhut out? 
 
 ^Kdds, [_ 2. if it prove a Law or Ordinance, yet not 
 fuck a Law or Ordinance as is in qveflion •-, vMch is not a 
 Lxw or Ordinance de jure, but dc eventu, ti\tt fo it [hall- 
 
 be they bwA to. be actually vijible Church-members be- 
 
 fori admiffioii according to Mr. Y>s dictates. \ 
 
 Reply. Alas, poor Readers, that muft be thus 
 wearied 1 I know nothing that this Law or Cove- 
 nant giveth but a* Right to real benefits that muft 
 have anfwerable caufes ; I know no Right given 
 but it is eventually given , nor received but it's 
 eventually received. Aimiffion is an ambiguous 
 word : ,My dictates as he cajls them, are i . That 
 Gods Law obligeth perfons to devote themselves 
 and their Infants to God, by confenting to his. Co- 
 venant, for themfelves and them: 2. And to do 
 this if they have opportunity in the folemn Ba- 
 ptifmai Covenanting Ordinance: 3. And in his 
 Covenant or Law of Grace he promifeth to accept 
 them, and fignifieth his confent to trie mutual Co- 
 venant : which is antecedently to their confent , 
 but a conditional confent or Covenant, but confe- 
 ejuently allual. 4. That accordingly natural in- 
 tereft only is not the Reafon why a Believers Child 
 is a Church-member , meerly becaufe he is his : 
 Bat God having given him power and obligation 
 alfo to dijpofe of his own Child for the ends of his 
 
 Creation . 
 
Creation and Redemption, he is a Church-member 
 initially upon heart -confent^ and by Inveftiture 
 upon Sacramental confent : which I think you 
 mean by Admiffion. 
 
 3. Saith Mr. f. J/7f did prove fuck a Law or Ordinance, 
 yet it proves it not fucb a promife and precept as Mr. B. af. 
 fneth. 
 
 Reply. Muft fuch dealing as this go for an an- 
 fwer? What's the difference? 
 
 Mr. T. taddeth, 4. if it did: , yet it only proveth it of the 
 Church by nature, — 
 
 Reply. You are hard put to it. I do by this 
 firft inftance /hew you where and when the Or- 
 dinance, Law or Grant of Infant Church-member- 
 flip was firfi made* And I leave it to any impar- 
 tial Chriftian whether I prove knot certain, that 
 ' God in Nature making man in his own Image 
 with an \_Increafe and Multiply^ fignifie not 
 that Infants (hould have been Holy to him , if 
 Adam had not finned: and fo have been mem- 
 hers of the Innocent (hurch or Kingdom of God. 
 Alas, many go fo much further , as to a/Tert as 
 truth, that had Adam flood ( nay but in that one 
 temptation • yea fay fome, had he but once -loved 
 God ) all his pofterity had not been only born 
 Holy, but confirmed as the Angels: I cannot prove 
 that : but I can prove that they had been born ho- 
 ly had not Adam finned, and fo had been vifible 
 members* And if fo that God did' found In- 
 fant memberfhip in Nature, let awakened reafon 
 think, whether Parents yet have not as much in- 
 terefi in children, and children in Parents, and 
 then whether God have ever reverfl this natural 
 
 order ? 
 
Mer ? Tea whether he hath not all along con* 
 firmed it f It feemeth out of doubt to me. 
 
 I know that Parents and Children now are 
 corrupt : but withal upon the promife of a Re- 
 deemer , [] an univerfal conditional pardon and 
 gift of life in a Covenant of Grace took, place ] 
 Let them deny it that can, and dare. And it in- 
 timateth no change of Gods will as to Infants 
 conjunct intereft with their Parents. 
 
 He faith that [ the Church by Grace is only by 
 Election and Calling , not birth. ~\ I would defire 
 him if he can, to tell me, whether both Cain and 
 zslbel were not vifible Qiurch-members in Adams 
 family ? And whether none but the Eletl are vi- 
 fible members t And whether God call not them 
 that are vifible members to that fiate . ? 
 
 He faith f // this Law be in force all are born without 
 fin.~\ 
 
 Reply. The Covenant of Innocency is not in 
 force -, but yet I may tell you what it was while 
 it was in force ; and that Infants vifible Church- 
 memberfhip was founded in Nature and that Law 
 at firft : And therefore though our Innocency be 
 loft, Parents are Parents liill • And if God change 
 not his order therein , are as capable of conferr- 
 ing to Grace for their Children, as they were of 
 being innocent for them- 
 
 SECT; 
 
r Si ) 
 
 SECT.XL VI, 
 
 tit B* f ~T*He next Inftitution of Infants Church- 
 X member jhip, was at the ftr ft proclama- 
 tion of grace to fallen man , or in the fir ft pro- 
 tntfe of redemption to /inner $ y in Gem 3. 15* 
 j~ And I will put enmity between thee and the 
 woman, and between thy feed and her k^d i k 
 fhail bruife thy head > and thou fhalc bruife his 
 heel. ] / will prove that this fundamental Cove- 
 nant of grace or promife doth declare it to be the 
 Will of God that Infants jhoiild he Church-mem- 
 bers 1 ^yind to this end, let us fir ft confider what 
 the words exprejly contain, and then what light 
 nay be fetcht from other Texts to illuftrate themi 
 It btmg a known rule, that an Expojitor muft not 
 turn umverfals into fingulars or particulars, not 
 reftrain and limit the Scripture generals , where 
 the word it felf or the nature of the fubjetl doth 
 not limit them, I may well conclude that thefe 
 things following are comprehended in this funda^ 
 mental promife. I* That the Devil having plat- 
 ed the enemy to mankind , and brought them in- 
 to this fin and mi fry, God would not leave them 
 remedilefs , nor to that total voluntary fubjeBiort 
 to him as he might ha e done : But in grace or 
 undeferved mercy would engage them in a war 
 again ft bim y in which they that conquered Jhouid 
 bruife his head* 2* That in this war the Lord 
 Jefm Chrift, the principal feed^ is promifed to be 
 9ur General j whofe perfect nature jhouUl contain, 
 
($2) 
 
 and his perfett life exprefi a per fell enmity again ft 
 Satan , and who fiiould make a perfect conqucft 
 over him. 3. The Lord Jefits is promifed to do 
 this work^ as the womans feed, ancifo as conceived 
 of her j and born by her, and fo as an Infant fir ft, 
 before he comes to ripe ne ft of age. So that here 
 an Infant of the woman is promifed to be the Gene- 
 ral of this Army, and Head of the Church. This 
 is mo ft evident : By which God doth fanthfie the 
 humane birth, and the Infant ft ate, and ufture m 
 that he doth not exclude now that age from the 
 redeemed Church , which ht admitted into the 
 Church by the laws of creation. For the fir ft 
 promife is of an Infant born of the woman to be the 
 Head of the Church, and growing up to maturi' 
 ty, to do the works vfa Head. Had God excluded 
 the Infant ft ate from the viftble Church he would 
 not have made the Head fir ft an Infant. Where 
 note, 1. That Chrift is the great exemplar of his 
 Church 'j. and in things which he was capable of ' , 
 he did that fir ft in his own body, which he would 
 after do in theirs. 2. That the Head is a Mem- 
 ber, even the principal ^JM ember, one of the two 
 -parts which conftitutethe wMe. As the parsim- 
 perans and pars fubdita do con ft it ute each Com- 
 mon-wealth. So that if an Infant mufl be a mem- 
 ber eminently fo called , then Infants are 
 not excluded from member Jhip , but are hereby 
 clearly warranted to be members of a lower na- 
 ture ,~ x If an Infant may be Soveraign, ne doubt he 
 may be a Sub;ett. If an Infant may be the chief 
 Prophet of the Church , then no doubt but Infants 
 may be .Difciples. If yon ftill harp on the old 
 
 firing, 
 
\ °> J 
 
 firing, and fay ', They are no Difc if les that learn 
 not -, yon may m well fay, tie is no Prcphet that 
 teacheth not. And if yon will openly deny Chnftin 
 Infancy to have been the Prophet of the fourch, 
 I will undertake to prove the faljlood and vilentfi 
 of thAt opinion , at foon & I kj'ow yon own %U 
 The promife then of an Infant Head, doth de- 
 clare Gods mind that he will have Infants mem*~ 
 btrs, beiaufcthe head is the principal member* 
 
 Mr. T. The thing to be proved is a Law cr Ordinance 
 of God unrepealed, 
 
 Reply. Tbe thing I am to do , is to £hew you 
 when and how God inftituted Infants Chttrch 
 (late •, Arid than he never had a Church on earth 
 that excluded them : And particularly to (hew you 
 that they are included in the firfl edition of the 
 Covenant of Grace made to Adam, which is 
 perfe&ed in a fecond edition , but not repealed a 
 This I think I have done. 
 
 Mr. T. addeth that It will nor hold from Chnfts Head- 
 fhip in Infancy, &:. i. It is not declared in. Scripture;, 
 and (6 a meer pliancy : 2. Then an Infant in the womb 
 ■Quid be a vifible member, becaiifethen Chrift wa§ Head 
 Of the Church : 3. Then an old man mould not be a mem- 
 ber ; for Chrift was not an old man. 
 
 Reply. 1 . Irenxm thought it would hold who gi~ 
 veth this reafon of it ; And I leave the Reader to 
 confider whether the words cited prove it not* 
 Sure I am, it greatly fatisfieth my judgement, 
 that God hereby declared his will to include In- 
 fants in his Church vifibly* For the Head is a 
 Member, even the nobleft : Therefore one Infant 
 is confeffed by you to be a vifible member of the 
 Church ; And if me, it will be incumbent on you 
 
 G a w 
 
to prove the reft uncapable or excluded. When 
 I read that Chrift came not into the world at the 
 ftature that Adam did, but chofe to be an Infant, 
 and to be perfecuted in Infancy^ and to have In- 
 fants murdered for his fakj frft , and to invite 
 and nfe them as he did, it is not the rowlingover 
 of your wearifom dry denials and confident abfur- 
 dities, that will perfwade me that Chrift fluittcth 
 out all Infants. And I am fure that the lnftance 
 confuteth your common exceptions agiinft Infants - 9 
 As that they are not Difaples becaufe they learn 
 not, which yet they may be in the fame fenfe as 
 Chrift was their *J7M after in infancy when he 
 Taught not: And that their Infancy did not inca- 
 pacitate them to be in Covenant with God, to be 
 Chriftians , to be Church-members , &c. Chriit 
 fhewed, in that in Infancy he bore all the Counter- 
 relations , and was in the Covenant of God as Me- 
 diator : and that ( as far as we can judge ) only by 
 a virtual and not actual confent ( in his Infancy 
 and humane narure ) to the Covenant of media- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. r. faith, [ Then an infant in the irombmay be a Church* 
 fnembtr ] 
 
 Reply. Yes, in the fame fenfe as Chrift in the 
 womb was the Churches head : not by the folemn 
 Inveftiture of Baptifm, but by Confent : For be- 
 lieving Parents do dedicate their children to God 
 intentionally when they are in the womb : But a 
 man would think that you your felf fhould ac- 
 knowledge thar this dedication and fo the viabi- 
 lity of memberihip, hath its gradations to per- 
 fection : Are not yottrprofelytesvffile members in 
 
 em 
 
CS 5 ) 
 
 one degree^ when they openly profcfs Chrifl Unity 
 fas Conflantine did ) and in a further degree when 
 baptifed ? The intereft of your opinion puts frivo- 
 lous reafons into your mind which a child might 
 fee through. 
 
 Mr. T, addeth, [ Thin an old man fJjould not be c* mem* 
 ber. ") 
 
 Reply. Could you think now that you did not 
 cheat your poor Reader, if partiality had not {hut 
 one of your eyes ? It will follow, from iht a$rma~ 
 trie, that fucha ftate of life which Chrift under- 
 took is lawful, fuch words which he fpoke, fuch 
 deeds which he did are lawful, becaufe he rf*<sftheiri 
 ( being not proper to the Mediator : ) Eur will it 
 thence follow from the negative^ that no calling, no 
 thoughts , no words, no deeds are lawful which 
 Chrift ufed not ? A Tingle man that hath no Wife 
 or Children may be proved capable of Church- 
 memberfhip, becaufe Chrift that was fuch was the 
 chief Church-member,that is, the head : But will it 
 follow that a married man therefore may be none ? 
 Chrifts example will prove that a child of God 
 may feem forfaken, may be crucified as a Male- 
 factor : but not that no other are Gods chil- 
 dren. 
 
 1 Mr. T. I deny 1tot that Chrift in infancy vj.rshiad of the 
 Chitrehj nor that be was the prophet of the church in infnncy^ 
 mdirftanding it of lus being the Prophet habitually and by de- 
 finition, nor that he in fome refp'ecl, to wit, of Rule and pro- 
 te.Ho>!> was the head of the vifeble church, even of that part 
 which k not eleil : yet I deny that in refpecl of that union 
 which ma\>es any members of his body, in the Scripture ac- 
 Oftions which is by his fpirit, he is the head of that part 
 tf (hi vipbti Church which is not elecl. 
 
 G 3 Rifiy. 
 
(86) 
 
 Reply, i. And will not the Reader be fatisfTed 
 with tjiefe conceflions ? Mark Reader, that he 
 granteth that Chrift an Infant was the Churchesf 
 head, and thus Jar as he mentioneth of the Church' 
 vifible, and tha:he was the Prophet of the Church, 
 becaufe he was [o habitually and by deftgnation : 
 Why, even fo it is that we liv an Infant may be 
 a Alember, a Difciple, a Chrift ian habitually and 
 by deftgnation, ( though I would uk a fitter word 
 here than habitually: ) If this much be a reafon 
 for the denomination in one, why not in the other ? 
 Yield Sir, or be not angry with Mr.~Gat*k*r m 
 
 2. And then what brought in your denial of 
 fpintaal iremberfnp to the non-deft f Would you 
 have made your Reader belitve that it was any 
 thing to the queftion > And when will you prove 
 that neither i Crr. 12. nor any other Scripture 
 calleth thofe members that have but fuch com- 
 mon gifts of the fpirit, as tongues, miracles, pro- 
 phecies &c. rejected Matth. 7. 23. And that 
 Chrift never talkt in John 15, of branches- in 
 him riot bearing f nut , and font cut off % from 
 him and withered* I am Pure it was a whole 
 Church vitible that had carnal contentious wrang- 
 lers again ft: the Apoftles in it, and men that were 
 drunk at- the Lords fupper , &c, of whom PmhI 
 faith iCor. 12. 15, 18, 20, 22,23, 26, 27. that 
 they were the Body of 'Chrift and members in par- 
 ticudar, and common gifts are mentioned as their 
 Character. 
 
 Mr. T. Tuattbi hfrmaw birth and btfM fhttt /> facii- 
 fod ( by Chiifts) >: not true: -lor tbto'it wowid hi holy to 
 *"> — — 
 
t *7 ; 
 
 Reply. I deny your confequence. There are 
 
 federal caufes concur to the fame f and: i fie at ion : 
 Chrifts Birth and Infancy are but a remote pre- 
 faratory caufe, of powerful falsification, which 
 is ever to wdizidual perfons ; as alJ things are 
 pure to the pure , and when they are capable Tub- 
 jeds , by natural exiftence and Parents confent , 
 then from all the caufes together remits the holinefs 
 of that ftate : As Chrifls death ?nd merits fandi- 
 fie us, but not immediately nor alone. Eut Di- 
 vines ufe to take this word [ fanttifying~] in an 
 initial preparatory fenfe, as it fignifieth the making 
 of fuch a thing or fate fit for holy ufe : As Tem- 
 ples aitd llcenfils are faid to be fandified , when 
 dtflgned to be ufed ho lily ( before the ufe. J But 
 muft they therefore be fo ufed by all ? No, but 
 by the Priefls and Worjhippers ? So they ufe to fay, 
 that Death and the Grave are fanciified by Chrifi \: 
 How ? Not to all, or any of the ungodly : But the 
 curfe is taken off \ and they are hallowed for the 
 holy advantage of the faithful. So is it as to his 
 'Bjrth and Infancy. 
 
 Mr. T. Nor do \ conceive any truth but grofi feljhood in that 
 fpeech [ Had God excluded the Infant ftate from the vi- 
 able Church, he would not have made the Head fir ft art 
 Infant ] For this doth fuppofe this the only end or ' 'chief 
 end and more in Gcds eye than the fxving of fin- 
 
 vers 
 
 • Reply. I prove that grof falftood to be true , 
 thus: 
 
 ^That fate or age which God vifibly included 
 
 and attu ally .made the chief vifibleChurch-member 
 
 in, he did not exclude from the viftble Church : 
 
 But the Infant ftate God vifibly included , and 
 
 G 4 attua&y 
 
(88) 
 
 actually m$de the chief vifwle Church -member in-t 
 Therefore the Infant flate God did not exclude 
 from the vtfible Qwrch. 
 
 The reafon of the Major is becaufe to include 
 and exclude are contraries. The Minor he con- 
 felTeth. If he fay that it may be included and ex- 
 cluded in feveral perfons, I anfwer, I here fpoke 
 but of the State or Age of Infancy as fuch , to 
 prove that qua talis an Infant is not excluded: 
 For if qua talis , then it will hold ad omnes uni- 
 verfally, and then (fhrifl had been excluded : And 
 therefore the Age is not excluded as fuch } if in- 
 fluded in one : For it mufl be a total exclusion * 
 And therefore if he will prove our Infants exclu- 
 ded^ it muft not be qua talcs as Infants , but for 
 fome other reafon, (when he c n rind it ^) and fo 
 the Age or fiate is not excluded. 
 
 2. But what man elfe could have gathered, thaf 
 then this mufl be the only or chief end , and more 
 in Gods eye than the failing of a firmer ? Is there 
 any more included in the aflerrion flian barely that 
 [] God would not have m^de an Infant the chief 
 rnember if h'e would have excluded Infants as In- 
 fant* ?~] Who culd hence have found out that' 
 God hath various degrees of intention ? And we 
 muft difput^ which Is chiefly in his eye ; and 
 that this was only or chiefly in his eye more than 
 faving finners. Let them difpute what is chiefly 
 in Gods eye, that can better diftinguifh of thofe 
 volitions which are all but his flmple effence^ buc 
 Jet them do \t on better reafons than thefe. 
 
 Mr. T. I &en)y that cfoty as m» in ifjyiry w.v th». Tre- 
 foil cf iK5 Church vij;bl^ J and in actli cxercito : Lcr Mr. v. 
 
yphcn hi will affault, there will appear in his contradiction 
 vilenefl and manifold fri s boods. 
 
 Reply, That one little [and~\ was cunningly 
 put in to bring you ofr\ by taking vifibility and 
 exercife conjunctly : But are your followers fo cri- 
 tical as to difcern the knack? i. Neither do we 
 fay that Infants are learners in atlu exercito - 
 and fo what is this to the matter ? 2. But Reader 
 J can prove to thee if thou be impartial , though 
 not to Mr. T. that it is neither vile nor falfe that 
 Cbrifl in Infancy was the Prophet of his Church 
 viftbly, ( though not in atlu exercito : ) 
 
 That which was declared by Angels from Hea- 
 ven , and by revelation to ^l/Iary , Zacch.iry , 
 Anna, Symeon^nd by Prophecie by them to others, 
 is to be called vtfiblc : But that Chrift was the 
 "Head and Prophet of the Church , ( habitually 
 and by defignationz$M.r.T, calls it) was thus de- 
 clared Ergo - — 
 
 Mr. T. And fir his inference , if an Infant may be the 
 chief prophet of the Church, then no doubt but Infants n?ay 
 
 Difzifks, 1 grant both: a»d yet deny tha* chri'l TVOiv^. 
 i.-Jio'y, in a$u exercito, in his infancy in bis humane 
 Mae the Propl^t of his churth, or that any infants are atlu- 
 afij htfctples vifibly, till they hear the m Go] pel and prof efi the 
 faith: y r or am I ahamed to aver that he is no Prophet that 
 "prcpheftith net, that they are no D/fciples that leant not. 
 
 Reply. Reader thou art not the perfon that I 
 write for , if thou perceive not here his caufeno- 
 torioufly given up, and yet a noife of words ufed 
 fhamefully to hide what he is forced to confefs. 
 
 I. He granteth both that an Infant may be 
 ( and was ) the chief Prophet of the Church , and 
 Infavts may be Difciples, 2, This is it that we 
 
 difjwtc 
 
(9o) 
 
 ^Jpute for which he exprefly granteth. 3. He 
 denyeth the faid Relation titles as in a'du cxerci- 
 to^ and fo do we -, that is, thai Chrift then pro- 
 phefied , and Infants learn or believe. 4. He 
 talks confidently in this denial , as if he would 
 have fools believe that this were the difference, and 
 we held the contrary. 5. But he is fain to jug- 
 gle in the word [ audibly 'J joyned to [_vifibly2 
 for a paltry fubterfuge, that if we prove Chrift 
 vifibly the Prophet, we may not prove him audi- 
 bly fo. 6. Yet it is fuch a [ wfibility J as 
 £ maketb one known ~] that he had in hand 5 and 
 before denied the [_vi fib ility : 3 as here - 9 but it you 
 prove that Chrift was vtfibly the Prophet , lie 
 can fay [_ but not audibly^ If you prove that he 
 was audibly f?, in that Angels and Prophets ait- 
 dtbly declared it, he can fay £ but not in attu e\cr- 
 cito 3 and by his own Vrophefyin? - 5 which none 
 denieth. 7. And yet in the end he exprefly with- 
 out diftinciion denieth him to be any Prophet that 
 Prophefieth not , or them any Difciples that learn 
 not, when he had in terminis granted the contra- 
 ry before , and muft needs therefore grant and 
 deny by diftinftion. In fumm, our caufe is ex- 
 preily granted us (and exprefly denied ) we plead 
 for no other kind of rnemberfhip to Infants, but fuch 
 as Chrift had, nor for any other fort of vifibility, 
 than the vifibility of their being the feed of per- 
 fons confenting to Gods Covenant, and Gods ex- 
 preffed will in his word, that they ftiould be of- 
 fered to him by confenting Parents, and that he 
 will accept them, and did conditionally fir ft con- 
 
 ftnt. 
 
 SECT. 
 
(91) 
 
 SECT. XLVII, XLVIIJ. 
 
 R. B. A 5 the war is here proclaimed , and the 
 X\. General or chief (fomn.ander conflt- 
 tutedy fo next here u a natural enmity put into 
 the whole feed of the won. an , or humane race , 
 again jl the whole feed of the Strpent that then 
 wot, or the Diabolic al nature,- This is plain both 
 mthe Text, and in the experience of the fulfilling of 
 it. As in the inftrumental ferpent, it is the whole 
 ferpent me nature, that hath an enmity to the hu- 
 mane nature, and the whole humane nature to the 
 ferpentine nature •, they being vtnemevu to us, and 
 we abhorring them as v enema us , and as fuch as 
 cur lives are in danger of : fo is it the whole hu- 
 mane nature that u at enmity to the Diabolical 
 nature. Vide Mufcul. Calvin. Luther, in locum. 
 All men have naturally as great an abhorrence of 
 the Devil , as of a ferpent , they apprehend him 
 to be their enemy, they abhor the very name and 
 remembrance of him : Jf they do but dream of him, 
 it tern few them, they are afraid of feeing him 
 in any apparition. Jf they know any temptation 
 to be from him, f& far they dijlike it and abhor 
 it , though for the thing prefented they may che- 
 rijh it. This is not (fecial favtng grace, but this 
 is a great advantage to the work of fpecial grace, 
 and to our more effectual re fifing of temptations y 
 and entertaining the help that is offered us again fl 
 them, when our very natures have an enmity to 
 the diabolical nature : we now look^ on him as hd- 
 
 vino- 
 
ving the power of death, as Gods executioner and 
 onr de fir oyer and malicious adversary. ^And if 
 there be any Witch or other wicked perfon that 
 hath contracted fitch familiarity and amity with 
 him, as that thus natural enmity vs thereby over- 
 come y that proveth not that it was not naturally 
 there , but that they by greater wickedneft are 
 grown fo far .unnatural. 5. As this enmity is 
 eft obliged in the nature of mankind again ft the di- 
 abolical nature , fo is there a further enmity le- 
 gally proclaimed againft the diabolical pravity , 
 malignity and works* Vide Paraeum in locum. 
 God will put an enmity by his laws ( both natu- 
 ral and pofitive ) making it the duty of mankind 
 to take Satan for their enemy ; to refift , and, ufe 
 him as an enemy ', and fight againft him and abhor 
 his workj-> andfo to lift them f elves under the Gene- 
 ral that fight eth againft him, to take his colours, 
 and to be of his Army : And this being fpoken of 
 the common world of mankind, and net only of 
 the eleU {for it is- not they only that are obliged 
 to this hoftility and warfare ) btlongeth to each 
 one according to their capacities : and therefore 
 Infants being at the Parents dijpofe , it is they 
 that are to lift them in this Army againft the ene- 
 wy of mankind y of which more anon. 6. A third 
 and higher enmity is yet here comprehended , and 
 that is an habitual or dijpofitive enmity againft 
 the diabolical malignity , pravity and works, 
 which may be called £ natural 3 a* it is the bent 
 or by 04 of our new nature. This God giveth on- 
 ly to his choferfy and not to all. And tt contain- 
 ed not only their confent to lift thwfclvcs in his 
 
 army 
 
(93) 
 
 rtrwy again ft Satan , but jpecially and properly * 
 hatred to him as the Frince of imrighttoufnefs , 
 and a cordial refolution to fight againft him and 
 his works untverfally, to the death , with a com* 
 placency in Cod and his fervice and fouldiers. 
 Here take a ftmt profpelt #f the myfterioits bleffed 
 Trinity, As God is one in three , and in his enti- 
 ty hath unity , verity and goodneftk, and in his 
 bleffed nature hath pofTe, fcire, velle, power, wif- 
 dam and love, fo as frem thefe is he related both 
 to his created and redeemed rational creatures, as 
 abfolute proprietary^ as foveraign ruler , and a* 
 moft gracious benefactor : As Lord of our nature 
 he hath put the forefaid enmity between the hu* 
 mane nature and the Diabolical : As foveraign 
 Ruler , he hath by legifUtion impofed on us a fur* 
 ther enmity as our duty , that we fhould be lifted 
 in his army , profefs open hoftility againft Sa- 
 tan , and fight againft him to the death. As Be- 
 nefailor^ he giveth jpecial grace to do this y to his 
 chofen. As he is Lord ofalLfo the fir ft is done on the 
 natures of all: Ashe is Rctlor of all, but not by the 
 fame Laws ( as to pofuives ) fo he obligeth all to this 
 hoftility, but not all as he doth thofe that hear the 
 Gojpel : zs4s he. is Benefactor' he doth with his 
 own as he lift , and makes a difference. If any 
 fay that it is the fame enmity that is here faid to 
 be put in all , and therefore the fame perfons in 
 which it is put. I anfwer , i . There is no proof 
 of either. A general command or promife to a 
 community, may ftgnifie a difference of duties or 
 gifts to that community , though that difference be 
 m% exprejjed; For the nature of the fubjetT: may 
 
 prove 
 
(94; 
 
 prove it, And^ 2. Experience of the fulfilling 
 of this promt flc or covenant 3 proves the difference 
 before mentioned. ' And it is wetlkriown, i.That 
 Mofes u fo concife in the Hifiory of thefe mat- 
 ters, 2, And that the myftcrie of grace was to 
 be opened by degrees , and fo but darkly at the 
 firfi , that it u no wonder if we find the whole 
 flumm of the- Cojptl hire coucht up in fo narrow 
 a room, and if each particular be not largely laid 
 open before our eyes. 7. That we may certainly 
 know that this promt fe fieaks not only of the en- 
 mity that Chrifl him felf fiuuld have to Satan , 
 and doth not engage a General without an army, 
 God doth here ex pre fly mention the woman her 
 felf, faymg [~ I will put enmity between thee and 
 the woman 3 fo that as fie flood in athreefoldre- 
 Jpetl ; fine is here her felf pofitffed with this three- 
 fold enmity. 1. As flu is the root of humane 
 nature, fromwhence all mankind muft fprtng, fie is 
 poffeft with the natural enmity to the diabolical 
 nature , and this to he naturally conveyed or pro- 
 pagated, 2, As foe was the rojrt of the great 
 Republick^of the world, or that rational fociety 
 which God as Relior would fapi em tally govern , 
 and her felf with her husband ( who no doubt was 
 alfo included in the promt fe ) were the whole then 
 exiflent race of mankind, fo did Jhe receive a le- 
 gal enmity of obligation, which Jhe was traditio- 
 - nally to deliver down to all her po fieri ty , being 
 her felf hereby obliged to lift her felf and all her 
 Infant progeny in the Redeemers army, again ft 
 the proclaimed enemy , and to teach her pfifterity 
 to do the likj : For thus obligatory precepts mxft 
 
 be 
 
C55J 
 
 ie fraught down. 3." As fie was one of the cbs* 
 
 J\n favourites of God j (he received the habitual en- 
 mity of fantltfication : And this u not in her 
 powrr to propagate^ though fie may ufe fome means 
 that arc appointed thereto } and whether a promifc 
 of any fuch thing be made to her feed an the ufe 
 of fuck means , I will not now ft and to difcuf. 
 8. It is not all that are pofftffed with the natu- 
 ral enmity again]} the Devil him J elf that are the 
 Church of Corf} : for this is but a common pre- 
 parative which is in all : Nor ts it all that Are 
 obliged to the further c. Kiiy apainfi the works of 
 Satan : But all that on that obligation are duely 
 lifted in Chrtfts army againfi Satan ( by the obli- 
 ged per fan ) are vifble members : and all that are 
 by f anil 1 feat ion at an hearty enmity ( habitual or 
 atlual ) with the Kingdom of Satan , are mem- 
 bers of the Church called myftical or invifiblt. 
 This J put as granted. 9. Thofethat violate this 
 fundamental obligation, and to their natural pra- 
 vtty fltall add a fighting again/} Chrifi and his 
 Kingdom for Satan and his Kingdom, are be- 
 come themfelves the feed of the Serpent. And 
 though they had the natural enmity with the reft 
 ef mankind in general againfi Satan , yet have 
 they therewithal the 'habitual enmity againfi 
 Chrifi. This much I fuppofe as out of controver- 
 fie. But whether alfo the fir ft original corrupted 
 nature it felf ( before any fin again ft recovering 
 grace ) did contain an habitual enmity againfi 
 the Kingdom of the Redeemer f Or whether the 
 fins of later Parents may propagate this as an ad- 
 ditional corruption in our nature, I will not now 
 
 ftand 
 
(96) 
 
 ftand to difcuft. Only as to our prtfent bufinefl * 
 it is certain that the general natural enmity to 
 Satan, may conftfl With an habitual friendship to 
 his ways and caufe» And though at men they 
 may have the firfi common advantage of nature , 
 and as fubjetls de jure may be under the common 
 obligation , yea , and as lifted in Chrifts army 
 may have many of its priviledges^ yet for the 
 enmity of di(pofuion to Chrift, they may be under 
 a greater curfe, 10. As it is certain, that it 
 is not only Chrift himfelf that is here made the 
 objetb of this promife , and is here called [ the 
 feed of the woman,] (as is before proved, and 
 may be more, and is commonly granted-, ) fo it is 
 to be noted, that thofe others in whom this enmi- 
 ty is put , are called here [_ the feed of the wo- 
 man, ] and not the feed of Chrift ( though the 
 chief of them are his feed* ) And fo though the 
 fromife is made to none but the womans jeed , 
 And no exception put in again ft Infants , or any 
 age of all her feed; TiU you can prove that In- 
 fants are none of her feed , we muft take this 
 fundamental promife to extend to Infants , and 
 that very plainly, without ufmg any violence with 
 the Text. 
 
 1 1. Some learned men- do ufe no contemptible ar- 
 guments to prove further, That the fanttifying en- 
 mity is here promifad to the feed of the woman 
 as her feed ( I mean thofe ' that go the way of 
 J>r. Ward , aJMr. Bedford , &c. ) that is , 
 that as the two former forts of enmity are put 
 into all the feed of the woman ( as is explain- 
 ed J fo the jpiritual holy enmity promifed to her* 
 
 feed 
 
(97) 
 
 fttd as fhe is a believer. 12. And fome learned 
 men do accordingly conclude , that the impiety of 
 Parents may do much to hinder their children 
 from that bleffwg more than by original fin 
 they were hindred , and therefore thetr faith 
 may further them. Of which though much may 
 be faid , / flsaU fay no more , beeaufe I will not 
 (land on things fo n uch que f toned, 
 
 M.T. This tedious difcourfe of Mr. B. is indeed fer- 
 pentive 
 
 Reply. They that need a -Reply to any thing 
 here {aid, fhall have none from me. 
 
 SECT. XLIX. 
 
 R. B. T Come next to frove from other parts of 
 X Scripture , That the fundamental pro- 
 mi fe of Grace is thus to be interpreted as inclu- 
 ding Infants, i. If the fame Covenant of grace 
 when it is more fully and clearly opened , do ex- 
 frejly comprehend Infants as to be Church-mem- 
 ber s^ then is this fundamental promife fo to be un- 
 der food {or then doth this alfo comprehend them. ) 
 But the antecedent is certain , therefore fo is the 
 confequent. The antecedent I prove from the 
 Covenant of grace made to Abraham the Father 
 of the faithful , which comprehended Infants for 
 Church -member s : The Covenant made with Abra- 
 ham comprehending Infants , was the fame with 
 tlris in Gen. 3. but in fome things clear lier open- 
 ed. Which is proved thus : Both thefe were the 
 Covenant of grace and free juftification by faith 
 
 H in 
 
in the Redeemer, therefore they were the fame 
 for there is but one fach. If Abraham hud fome 
 jpecial promifes additional to the mam Covenant y 
 that makes not the Covenant of free juftification 
 by faith to be divers. That this in Gen. 3. is 
 the promife or Covenant of grace and free jufii 
 feat ion is not denied , that I know of. That the 
 fromife to Abraham was the fame , is evident 
 from Rom. 4. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. 1. It is there 
 exprejly manifeft, that the Covenant whereof Cir- 
 cumcifion was to Abraham the feal, was the Cove- 
 nant of free jnftifi cation by faith •, Circumcifion 
 it ft if being a feat of the righteoufnefi of faith 
 which Abraham had , yet being uncircitmcifed , 
 that he might be the father of believers , &c 
 2. Tea the fromife that he [Jwuld be heir of the 
 world was not made to Abraham or to his feed 
 through the Law y but through the rightcoufnefs of 
 faith. Now it is certain that this Covenant feal 
 ed by Circumcifion and made to Abraham and his 
 feed, did comprehend Infants. The confequence of 
 the major then is evident, that the fame promife 
 exprcjfed more concifely, is to be expounded by the 
 fame exprejfed more jully ; And it is acknowledged 
 that the Gofpcl light aicd grace was to be mamfefi 
 by certain degrees, 
 
 Mr. T. That the fundamental IYomife of Grace, Gw.^. 
 j«. dutli include Infants, was never denied by me , and 
 therefore" Mr. ;;. doth but wafte paper and abufe me and 
 his Readers by going about to prove it. 
 
 Reply, If we be really of one mind, it is pitty 
 we fhould make men think we differ: Mark this 
 concrjfion Reader, £ The fundamental promife of 
 
 (J race 
 
(99) 
 
 Grace doth include Infants. 1 The Grace of that 
 promife is our Vnion Relative to Chrift and his 
 Church , and the benefits internal and external 
 belonging to Chrifts members. Do you believe 
 that our union with the vifible Church as fuch , 
 and participation in its priviledges, is none of 
 that Grace ? 
 
 Mr. T. This I deny, that it includes all Infants^ or all In- 
 fants of Believers j and. that any infant is made a vifible 
 church-member by that promife as the next caufe or fole effi- 
 cient. ] 
 
 'Reply* It will come to fomething anon: i. That 
 all Infants are made Church-members by it , did 
 any of us ever affirm ? Though if the Parents dif- 
 fent had nothindred, and their confent had made 
 them and their Infants capable Recipients, it 
 would have been all. 
 
 2. The Covenant or Law of Grace giveth vi~ 
 fible Church-membership conditionally to all that 
 hear it. Deny this, and you know not what you 
 do. I firft ask you, Doth not the Law of Grace 
 ( or Promife ) give both myftical and vifible 
 Church-memberfhip to all that hear it that are at 
 age and have the ufe of Reafon ? ( I fpeak not of 
 memberfhip in a particular Church which fome 
 may want opportunity to enjoy, but in the uni- 
 verfal. ) Deny this, and you deny Chrifts Go- 
 fpel. Doth he not fay , He that helieveth and is 
 baptized fhall be faved: whoever helieveth fliall 
 
 not perish whoever will, let him take the 
 
 water of life freely : He that cometh to me I 
 Will in no wife cafl oat : Go into the high -ways 
 and hedges^ ajnd compel them to come in, dec. Ie 
 
 H z Gcds 
 
( ico) 
 
 Gods Law, Covenant, Promife or Donation 
 (^ call it which you had rather) do contain a con- 
 ditional Gift of Chrift, pardon and life to all the 
 adult, ( which it befeemeth none but an Infide^ 
 to deny , J ask thy Conference, Reader, whether 
 this bltflcd Covenant give no fuch conditional 
 right to any Infant in the world ? Are they all 
 excluded ? And why ? Are they worfe than their Pa- 
 rents? If it give any Right to Infants conditionally zs 
 it doth to Parents^ muft be on a condition to be per- 
 formed by the Parents ,or fuch as are fo far entmftcd. 
 Mr. TVs talking of £ the next canfe, and the fole 
 Efficient ] feem to me the words of a man that 
 knew not what to fav, but was refolved that he 
 would not yield : Sir, do yoti grant that the pro- 
 mife maketh Infants vifible Church-members , as 
 any caitfe, next or remote^ fole or cooperating f 
 If not, why cheat you your fimple followers by 
 this talk ? If you do^ we are agreed, and why con- 
 tend you ? If Logical notions are our difference, 
 fay fo ; I titink as it is a Beneficial Relation^ the 
 Parents conftnt a ttion, and the childs being 
 
 Theirs, are the djjpofitio r/;attrU, called by fome 
 
 fa Receftiva vel difpofitiva : and that Gods 
 donation is the fole efficient in which his dona- 
 tive word ( call it what you will J is the Instru- 
 ment : This is plain Logick. But you that pro- 
 fefs that your Church-memberfhip is it felf no 
 benefit (and fo owe God no thanks for it, and 
 yet make fuch a ftir about it ) cannot indeed 
 hold, that Gods love or mercy, or Chrifts me- 
 rit?, or the Covenant or Promife are givers of 
 
 i young or old : I : or they give nothing bur 
 
 benefits,. 
 
Cioi) 
 
 benefits. Be not angry to have your abfurdities 
 openedjbut before you die be fober and reform them. 
 
 He addeth f I grant that the Covenant to Abraham was 
 the Covenant of Evangelical Grace , though mixt, and that it 
 did include infants-, and that they were Church-members, to • 
 
 wit, of the hviftble Church of the Elecl And tk.it 
 
 Abrahams Infants in his houfe were vifible Church-member s> 
 but not by virtue of the Covenant barely as Evangelical, but 
 by the tranfemit fact : and if in any rejpett by virtue of the 
 ■antj it was by it as containing hau-hold or civil 
 promifes, rather than Evangelical. 
 
 Reply. About 23 and 24 years of age I was 
 my felf in doubt of Infant Buxifm : But had I 
 read fuch a Writer as this againfi it, I think he 
 would have eafily refolved me for it. 1. The 
 Covenant to Abrahams family was a Covenant of 
 Evangelical Grace y he faith, ( And furely fo was 
 that to zs4dam, and Noe before. ) And it inclu- 
 ded Infants , but only as. Elect In the Church in- 
 vifible. But the conditional Promife or Cove- 
 nant is confeft to include the Non-elec! at age: 
 And ,what ! None of them in Infancy ? Reader , 
 How can this be called a Covenant, for God only 
 to fay \_I will fave all fr.ch Infants as I elccl J 
 and yet offer Salvation to none of them in tie 
 world on any condition, nor give a title to any 
 perfon that can be known by themfelves or others ? 
 They confound the Decree of Gcd with his Co- 
 venant. If God had made no other Law, Pro- 
 iiife or Covenant, with the adult, But V I will 
 r ave whom I will five ~] who would have taken 
 :his for a Law or Covenant? And what right bv 
 hope doth this give to Chriftians for their Chi!- 
 Ircn more than' Pagans ? 
 
 H 3 And 
 
( 102) 
 
 And, Reader, if God have given no condition 
 or character antecedent, as a differencing reafon 
 or qualification of thofe that he will fave from 
 thofe that he will not , but only told us that he 
 will fave whom he lift, this maketh Infants no fub- 
 jeils of his Kingdom, under no Law , and fo lia- 
 ble to no judgement, nor to ftand in judgement 
 with the reft of the world , but only to be ufed 
 as beafts or (tones, by E)ivine natural motion as 
 he will. And then , how can you fay that any 
 Infants fhall be damned, or not faved ? Or that 
 it (hall be one of a million at leaft that fhall 
 not ? For if there be no Law that giveth Right 
 to Pardon and Salvation to any one Infant in the 
 world, and yet many are fved, it will follow, 
 I. That God is fas the prophane fay ) better 
 than his word , and will fave many to whom he 
 never gave right to it by promife. 2. And will 
 not the ungodly put in for the like hopes ? If be- 
 fides thofe that Gods Laws condemn or juftifie , 
 God will fave many in a neutral (late, why may 
 he not, faith the ungodly, fave me alfo ? for In- 
 fants once deferved punifhment by original fin: 
 And if God pardon them without any reafon in 
 themfelves, he may do fo by me. 3. Or at leaft 
 he may fave all- the Infants in the world for 
 ought you know, that die in Infancy. 
 
 And do all thepromifes to the feed of the faith- 
 ful, in the fecond Commandment, and Exod. 34, 
 7. and many another Text, mean no fuch thing as 
 they fpeak, as if to be the kcd of the faithful were; 
 no condition^ but only [ / will five ny cktt ? J 
 
 And 
 
0°3) 
 " And why might not this Covenant ["_ J vpillfave 
 my Elelh J be made with £**», or Cham, or Ju- 
 das 7 as well as with Abraham ? 
 
 2. He forth , Abrahams Infants were vifible church-mem-. 
 hers, but not by the Covenant barely as Evangelical. ] 
 
 Reply, What a bare put off is that 5 of a man 
 that muft fay fomething ? Is it at all by the Cove- 
 nant as Evangelical ? If yea, we have our defire. 
 If not, what meaneth [barely~\ but the nakednefe 
 of your ill cairfe ? 
 
 3. Then corntth next [ And if in any refpeci by vir- 
 tue of the Covenant ( which it feemeth he yet knoweth 
 not after all this talk, or will not know 3 it was by it as 
 containing houfiolcl or civil pomifs , rather than Evangeli- 
 cal. ~\ 
 
 Reply. See, Reader, fome more of the myfterie : 
 Infants were Church-members in Abrahams 
 houfe, but Church-memberfhip fignified but hou- 
 jhold and civil promifes : Do you now perceive 
 what the Jews Infant Church-memberfhip was ? 
 The Socinians perhaps will fay the like of the 
 Jews Covenant to the adult. 
 
 But we may yet miftake him , For £ rather ] 
 is not a negative : It is [_ Rather than Evangeli- 
 cal J which is but a preference^ not a denial, O 
 for plain honefty in things divine I 
 
 H 4 SECT. 
 
(ic 4 ) 
 
 SECT. L. 
 
 R. B. 2. ""T"* Hat the fir ft fundamental promife is 
 JL thus to be interpreted^ 1 further 
 prove by Gods con ft ant admmiftration in the 
 performance of it. Concerning which I do, make 
 this challenge to yon ( with modefty and fubmijfi- 
 on,) to prove if you, can y that there was ever one 
 Church -member that had Infants born to him 
 while he wm in that eft ate, from the beginning 
 of the world to this day, whofe Infants aifo were 
 not Church-members . ? Except only the Anaba- 
 ftifts, who refufe or deny the mercy , and fo re- 
 fufe to dedicate their Infants in Baptifm unto 
 Chrift, And whether their Infants be Church- 
 member s, / will not determine affirmatively or ne- 
 gatively at this time. I do again urge you to it, 
 that you may not forget it • to prove to me, that 
 ever there was one Infant of a Church-member 
 in the world, fince the creation to this day , that 
 Was not a Church-member, ( except the Anaba-* 
 ptifts that refufe the mercy or deny it.) 
 
 Reply, Mr* TV's Anfweris a refuting to anfwer, 
 fave a crofs challenge ( oft anfwered) and the 
 inftance of Timothy : To which 1 lay, that if Ti- 
 mothy's Father being a Greek countermanded his 
 communion with the Jews , he could not be 3 
 member of their policie or particular Church. 
 ( Though if he only delayed as zJlfofes did to 
 circumcife his Son, that Son might be a member 
 as the children in the wildernefs were.) But his 
 
 Mothers 
 
Mothers right alone might make him a perfon in 
 Covenant with God as a vifible member of the 
 Church-univerfa!. 
 
 S E C T. L I. 
 
 R, D. YYEfore I proceed to any more Texts of 
 JD Scripture , / will a little enquire in- 
 to the Ugh or Law of Nature it [elf ', and fee 
 what that faith to the point in hand. And firft 
 we jhall confider of the duty of dedicating Infants 
 to God in Chrift , and next of Cods acceptance of 
 them , and entertaining them into that eft ate. 
 And the fr ft is mo ft evidently contained m the 
 Law of nature it felf ( at leaft upon fuppofmon 
 that there be any hopes of Gods entertaining 
 them ; ) which I prove thvu. I. The law of Na- 
 ture btndeth as to give to every one his own due : 
 But Infants are Gods own due - 3 Ergo , the law 
 of Nature bindeth Parents to give them up to 
 God. &y £ giving ~\ here I mean not an aliena- 
 tion of propriety, to make that to he Gods that was 
 not fo before ^ but an acknowledgement of his 
 right, with a free refignation and dedication of 
 t> e Infant to God, at his own -, for his ufe andfer- 
 vice r when he is capable thereof \ If you fay, In- 
 fants being not capable of doing fervice , jhould 
 not be devoted to it till they can do it ^ I an- 
 fwer , they are capable at prefent of a legal obli- 
 gation to future duty , and alfo of the relation 
 which follow eth that obligation, together with the 
 honour of a Church-membtr(a4 the child of a Noble 
 
 man 
 
■o°o 
 
 wan is of his Honours and title to his Inherit 
 tance ) and many other mercies of the Covenant, 
 And though Qorift according to his humanity 
 was not capable of doing the work of a tJWedt- 
 ator or head of the Church in his Infancy^ yet for 
 all that he muft be head of the Church then y and 
 not ( according to this arguing ) flay till he were 
 capable of doing thofe works* Andfois it with 
 his members. 
 
 Reply. Here is fo little faid that needs but this 
 remarke, that Mr. T. knoweih not how tbjdeny the 
 duty of dedication handfomly , which being Ac- 
 cepted of God is to Church-memberfhip as pri- 
 vate Marriage to publick, where publication is 
 wanting : But he denieth that Parents may dedi- 
 cate them by TSapttfm : But if they may and muft 
 do it privately by heart confent , it will follow 
 that they muft do it publickly in the inftituted 
 way. As for my bold attempt in proving fo much 
 by the Law of Nature, if he cannot confute it, 
 let him not ftrive and fin againft nature. 
 
 S E C T. L 1 1. 
 
 R. B. 2."TP He law of nature bindeth all Parents 
 JL to do their be ft to fecure Gods right > 
 and their Childrens good, and to prevent their 
 fin and mifcry : But to engage them betimes to 
 God by fuch a dedication , doth tend to fecure 
 Gods right, and their Childrens good y and Po pre- 
 vent their fin and mifery : For they are under a 
 double obligation , whtch they may be minded of be- 
 
 times, 
 
f id?) 
 
 timSy and which may hold them the more fir on g^ 
 ly to their duty , and difadvantage the tempter 
 that would draw them off from God. 
 
 Mr. T. Really Infant Eaptifm is a difadvantage, i. In 
 that it is the cccafion whereby they take themfclves to 
 be Chriflians afore they know what Chriftianity is, and fo 
 are kept in preemption, &c. 2. They are kept from the 
 true baptifm, &c. 
 
 Reply. This nearly concerneth our caufe : I 
 once inclined to thefe thoughts my felf : But I am 
 fatisfied, 1. That Infant Covenanting and Baptifm 
 is no hindrance in Nature or Reafon from per- 
 fonal feriom Covenanting with God at age. We 
 tell our Children and all the adult, that their In- 
 fant Covenanting by Parents, will ferve them but 
 till they have Reafon and Will of their own to 
 choofe for themfelves ; And t-hat without as fe- 
 rious a faith and confent of their own then as if 
 they had never been baptized, they cannot be fa- 
 ved : What hurt then as to this doth their In- 
 fant intereft do them ? 
 
 2. Yea doubtlefs it is a great help: For, 1. To 
 be in the way of Gods Ordinance and Benediction 
 is much. 2. And ( knowing you deny that ) I 
 add , to be confeious of an early engagement y 
 may do much to awe the minds of Children ; 
 yea and to caufe them to love that Chrift which 
 hath received them , and that Society to which 
 rhey belong, 
 
 3. If Children till Baptized have any thoughts of 
 dying, according to you, they muft have little 
 hopes of mercy : And God accounteth not the 
 fpirit of bondage beft , no not for Children. 
 They cannon well be educated in the Love of 
 
 God, 
 
God, who muft believe that they are damned if 
 they die, and that God hath not given them any 
 promife of life. 
 
 4. Experience of many Moors ( fervants ) 
 among us and in our Plantations, ( befides ancient 
 hiftory) aflureth us, that delaying Baptifm till age 
 rendeth to make people delay repentance, and think 
 I am but as I was, and if I fin longer all will be 
 pardoned at baptifm, and I muft after live ftri&lier, 
 and therefore ( as Conftantine and many more ) 
 they will be baptized Chriftians when there it no 
 remedy. 
 
 5. And experience aflfureth us that it were the 
 way to work out Chriftianity and reftore Infide- 
 lity in any Nation : For had not Chrift early 
 po/Teftion , and were not Nations difcipled and 
 baptized, Chriftians were like to bealmoft as thin 
 as Puritans now : and the multitude being Infidels 
 from a crofs intereft ( fuch as divifions caufe ) 
 would be ready on all occafions (as they did in 
 Japan and Momcongo ) to root them our. 
 
 I take this to be a very concerning confidera- 
 tion, whether in reaion Infant Baptifm be like to 
 do more good or harm. The not calling men tofe- 
 rious Covenanting at age doth unfpeakableharm : 
 To have a few good words about Confirmation in 
 the Liturgie, and fuch as Do&.- Hammonds wri- 
 tings of it, will not fave ignorant ungodly fouls, 
 nor the fouls of the Paftors that betray them : I 
 have faid my thoughts of this long ago in a Trea- 
 tife of Confirmation. 
 
 But I muft profefs that it feemeth to me, that 
 if Chrift had left it to our wills, it is much liker 
 
 to 
 
flop ) 
 
 to tend to the good of fouls , and the propaga- 
 ting Chriftianity, and the ftrength of the Church, 
 for to have both the obligation and comfort of our 
 Infant Covenant and Church (late, and at ferious 
 a Covenanting alfo at age, when we pafs into the 
 Church fiate of the Adult, than to be without the 
 former , and left to the expectation of adult ba- 
 prifm alone. 
 
 SECT. LIII, toLVIIL 
 
 R. B. 'Tp/Zf law of nature bindeth Parents in 
 JL love to their children to enter them 
 into the wofi honourable and profitable fociety, if 
 they have but leave fo to do: But here Parents 
 have leave to enter them into the Church , which 
 is the mofi honourable and profitable fociety. Er- 
 go. That they have leave, is proved, I. Godne* 
 ver forbad any man in the world to do this fin- 
 cerely, ( the wicked and unbelievers cannot do it 
 fine ere ly ; ) and a not forbidding is to be interpre- 
 ted as leave in cafe of fuch participation of be- 
 nefits : As all laws of men in doubtful cafes are 
 to be interpreted rjf ZheiKvcur, in the mofi favou- 
 rable fenfe. So hath Chrifi taught us to inter- 
 pret hisi own : When they fpeak of duty to God , 
 they mufi be interpreted in the flritlefi fenfe: 
 When they Jpeak^of benefits to man, they mufi be 
 interpreted in the* mofi favourable fenfe that they 
 will bear, 
 
 2. It is the more evident , that a not forbid- 
 ding in. fuch cafes is to be taken for leave , be- 
 
 , caufs 
 
caufe God hath put the principle of felj "-pre few a- 
 tion, and defiring our oven welfare, and the wel- 
 fare of our Children fo deeply in humane nature s 
 that he can no more lay it by than he can ceafe 
 to be a reafonable creature. And therefore he 
 may lawfully aliuate or exercife this natural ne- 
 cejjliry principle of feeking his own or childrens 
 real happinefi , where-ever God doth not reftrain 
 or prohibit him. We need no pofitive command 
 to feek, cur own or childrens happinefi, but what 
 is in the law of nature it felf \ and to ufe this 
 where God forbiddeth not, if good be then to be 
 found, cannot be unlawful. 
 
 3. It is evident from what is f aid before (and 
 elfewhere ) that it is more than a filcnt leave 
 cf Infants Church-memberfirip that God hath 
 vouchfafed ns. For in the forementioned funda- 
 mental promife , explained more fully in after 
 times, God fignified his will that fo it Jhould be* 
 It cannot be denied, but there is fome hope at leafi 
 given to them in the fir ft promife , and that in 
 the general promife to the feed of the woman they 
 are not excluded, there be no excluding term. 
 Upon fo much encouragement and hope then it is 
 the duty of Parents by the law of nature to enter 
 their Infants into the Covenant, and into that So- 
 ciety that partake of thefe hopes , and to lift them 
 into the Army of Chrift. 
 
 4. It is the duty of Parents by the Law of Na~ 
 ture , to accept of any allowed or offered benefit 
 for their children. But the relation of a member 
 of Chrifis Church or Army , is an allowed or of- 
 fered benefit to thvm } Ergo, &c. For the Major, 
 
 thefe 
 
fill) 
 
 thefe principles iri the law of nature do contain it. 
 
 1. That the Infant is not fui juris, but is at his 
 Parents dijpofe in all things that are for his good. 
 That the Parents have power to oblige their chil- 
 dren to any future duty or fuffering , that is cer- 
 tainly to their own good : and fo may enter them 
 tnto Covenants accordingly : And fo far the will 
 of the Father is as it were the will of the child. 
 
 2. That it is unnaturally finful for a Parent to 
 refufe to do fuch a things when it is to the great 
 benefit of his own child* As if a Prince would 
 offer Honour s> and Lordjhips , and Immunities to 
 him and his heirs : if he will not accept this for his 
 heirs, but only for him f elf, it is unnatural. Tea y 
 if he will not oblige his heirs to fome fmall and 
 reafonablc conditions for the enjoying fuch benefits. 
 For the Minor, that this relation is an allowed or 
 offered benefit to Infants is manifefted already, 
 and more fljall be. 
 
 And this leads me up to the fecond point , which 
 I propounded to confider of ^ whether by the light 
 or law of nature we can prove that Infants 
 jJwuld have the benefit of being Church-members, 
 fuppofmg itjirfl known by fnper natural revelati- 
 on, that Parents are of that fociety, and how ge- 
 neral the promife is , and how gracious God is. 
 And i. It is certain to m by nature that Infants 
 are capable of this benefit , if Cjod deny it not , 
 but will give it them as well its the aged. 2. It is 
 certain that they are aftually members ef all the 
 Common-wealths in the world (perfedre fed im- 
 perfecta membra ) being fecured from violence 
 by the laws, and capable of honours and right to in- 
 heritances.. 
 
heritances, and of being real fubjetts under obli- 
 gations to future duties 7 if they furvive. jind 
 this jhews that they are alfo capable of being 
 Church-members > and that nature revealeth to m, 
 that the Infants cafe much followeth the cafe of 
 the Parents, tfpecially in benefits. 3. Nature hath 
 atlually taught mojt people on earth , fo far as I 
 can tear*; to repute their Infants in the fame Re- 
 ligious fociety with themfelves, a* well as in the 
 fame civil Jjciety. 4. Vnder the Covenant of 
 workj ( commonly fo called) or the per fell rigo- 
 rous law that God made with man in his pure 
 nature -, the Infants fhould have been in the 
 Church, and a people holy to God , if the Parents 
 had fo continued themfelves. And confider , 
 I. That holme f and rightcoufnef were then the 
 fame things as now^ and that in the eflabltflnng 
 of the way of propagation, God was no more obli- 
 ged to order it fo, that the children of righteous 
 Parents fhould have been born with all the pcr- 
 fetlions of their Parents and enjoyed the fame 
 privdedges , than he was obliged in making the 
 Covenant of Grace to grant that Infants jhould 
 be of the fame fociety with their Parents , and 
 have theHmmunities of that fociety. 2. We have 
 no reafon when the defign of redemption is the 
 magnifying of love and grace , to thinly that love 
 and grace are fo much lef under the Go/pel to the 
 members of Chrifi , than under the Law to the 
 members or feed of Adam , as that then all the 
 feed fl)ould have partaked with the fame bleffings 
 with the righteous Parents, and now they jhall all be 
 turned out of the fociety , whereof the Parents were 
 
 mem* 
 
Members. $. God gives us himfelf the rcafons of 
 his gracious dealing with the children of the jufl 
 from his gracious nature , proclaiming even par- 
 doning mercy to flow thence, Exod. 34. and in 
 the ftcond Commandment. 6. God doth yet flew 
 us that in many great and weighty rejpetls he 
 dealeth well or ill with children for their Parents 
 fakes: 'as many Texts- of Scripture Jhew (and I 
 have lately proved at large in one of our private 
 difputes j thut the fins of nearer parents are im- 
 puted as part of our original or natural guilt* ) 
 So much of that, 
 
 . Reply. Mr. T. f^ith nothing to all, that I think 
 the Reader needeih a reply tc. 
 
 SECT. LVIII. 
 
 R. B. "\TEt before I cite any more particular 
 X Texts , / will add this one argument 
 from the tenour of the Covenant of grace, as ex- 
 prefjed in many Texts of Scripture, According 
 to the tenour of the Covenant of grace, <God 'Will 
 not refufe to be their God ani take them for his 
 people, that are ( in a natural or law fenfe ) wil- 
 ling to be his people , and to take him for their 
 God. But the Infants of believing Parents are 
 \thus willing, Ergo. Ttoe Major is unqaeftionabls. 
 The Minor isprovedfrow the very law of nature be- 
 fore expreffed. Infants cannot be atlually witling 
 themfelves in natural fenfe, Ergo, the reafen and 
 Will of another mufl be theirs in law fenfe, and that is 
 of the Parents, who have the full dijfofe of t\. 
 
 I and 
 
\ * A °t J 
 
 and are warranted by the law of nature to choofe 
 for them (for their good ) till they come to nfc 
 of reafon themfelvcs. The Parents therefore by 
 the light and law of nature chovfing the better 
 fart for their children-, and offering and devoting 
 them to God) by the obligation of his own natu- 
 ral law , he cannot in confifiency with the free 
 grace revealed in the G off el, refufe thofe that are 
 Jo offered. And thofe that thus come to him 
 in the way that nature it felf prefcribeth , he 
 Will in no wife caff out, Joh. . . And he will 
 be offended with thofe that would keep them from 
 hir,? y that are offered by thofe that have the power 
 to do it 7 though they cannot offer themfclves. For 
 legally this act' is taken for their own. Thin I 
 have fljewed you fome of the fundamental title 
 that Infants of Believers have to Church-mem- 
 berflup, and our obligation to dedicate them to God, 
 Reply. Mr. T. Faith [~ that fome alts of the Pa- 
 rents are legally taken for the childs is not deni- 
 ed,'] But here he denieth it, and I leave his de- 
 nial with my copious proof in my Treaiifeof In- 
 fant-baptifm to the Reader*. 
 
 SECT. LIX. 
 
 R, B. *^ r Ou muff now in reafon expect, that in- 
 X fants Chuich-memberjlnp being thru 
 eftablifoed, partly m the Uw of nature, and part- 
 ly in the fundamental promifc, what is after this 
 fpffken of it fmlld not be any new eflablijhment y 
 but confirmations and intimations of what was be- 
 
 H 
 
 
fbre done, rather giving m the ffodf that fuch & 
 law and promife there is that did Jo eftabltjh *> 3 
 than being fuch firft eftablijhing laws or promifes 
 themfelves. <s4nd from hence I may well add 
 this further argument. If there be certain proof 
 'in Scripture of Infants Church- memberjhip , but 
 none except this before alledged that makes any 
 mention of the beginning of it , but all ffeaking 
 of it 04 no new thing , then we have great reafoti 
 upon the forementioncd evidence, to affign this be- 
 ginning which from Gen. 3. we have expreft, 
 But the former is true, ergo, the later* Ton con- 
 fefi that Infants were Church-members once. Ton 
 only conceive it began when Abraham was called 
 out of Ur. Tour conceit hath not a word to fup- 
 port it in the Text, The right to fuch a blef- 
 fing was then new to Abrahams feed, when Abra- 
 ham firft believed : But when it began to belong 
 to Infants of Believers in general, no Text ex- 
 cept this before cited- doth mention. Nor doth 
 that promife to Abraham intimate any inception 
 then as to the Church -member $rip of Infants, but 
 only an application of a priviledge to hyn that in 
 the general was no new thing. 
 
 Reply. To this Mr. T. ftilf aflfirmeth that Infants 
 Church-memberfhip was proper to the Hebrews 
 only. Reader, though they had their peculiari- 
 ties, is it credible that the Infants of that one 
 fmall country only fhould be fo differently dealt 
 with by C7od, from all the world e!fe, even He- 
 noch's, Noe's , Sem's and all from 'Adam to the 
 end of the world , that thefe Infants only fhould 
 bt Church-members and no others? what un- 
 
 \z Jtikdy 
 
( no ) 
 
 likely things (yea againft evidence) can fomc 
 believe ? 
 
 SECT. LX,LXI, LXII. 
 
 R. B. TVT O IV for the Texts that further inti- 
 _L\I male fuch a foregoing eftablijhmenti 
 I. There feems to be feme believing intimation of 
 this in Adams naming his wife the mother of the 
 living : For it is to be noted what Bijhop "Cliher 
 faith i Annal. vol. i. p. 2. Unde turn priraum 
 ( poft femenpromifliim^ mulieri Evas nomenama- 
 rico eft impofirum , Gen. 3 . 20. quod mater efTet 
 omnium viventium non naturalem tantum vitam, 
 fed illud quoque quod eft per fidem in femen ip- 
 fius, Mefiiam promiflum : quomodo & poft earn 
 Sara fidelium mater eft habita. iPct.^6. Gal. 
 4. 3 1 . J He put this name on her after the promife, 
 becaufe fie was u> be the mother of all the living, 
 not only that live the life of nature , but that 
 which is by faith in the sJWcffiah her feed. So 
 that as fie was the root of pur nature , we are 
 her natural feed • and as fie was a believer , and 
 we the feed of her a believer , fo is fie the mo- 
 ther of a holy feed, and we that are her feed are 
 holy, as a people vifibly dedicated to God. 
 
 2. When Cain was bom, his mother .called him 
 f p{f e !f lorl 1 bscaufe (lie had obtained a man of 
 the Lord, that is, faith Ainfvvorth, !_ with his fa- 
 vour, md of his good will, J and fo a Son of pro* 
 wife, and of the Church. And therefore it is to 
 be noted , that when Cain had finned by killing 
 
 his 
 
C"7) 
 
 his brother, God did curfe him , and cafl him oiu 
 of his prefence, Gen. 4. 14, 16. So that he was 
 excommunicate and feparated from the Church of 
 God, faith Ainfivorth, \_that is, from the pla.ce of 
 Gods word and worfiup which in likelihood was 
 held by Adam the father , who being a Prophet , 
 bad taught his children how to facrifice andferve 
 the Lord, So on the contrary, to come into Gods 
 prefence or before him, 1 Chron. 16. 29. is ex- 
 plained in Pfal. 96. 8. to' be the cowing into his 
 Courts. ~\ Very many learned men give the fame 
 ixpofxtion of it. Now if Cain were now excom- 
 municate , then was he before of the Church : nay . 
 't is certain by his Sacrificing , and other proof , 
 however this Text be interpreted : But no man 
 :an give the leaf; reafon from Scripture to make 
 t fo probable that he entred into the Church at any 
 nher time 7 as we give of his entrance at his nat- 
 ivity. 
 
 When Eve bare Seth, fl)'e fo named him as a Son 
 f mercy in faith , at appointed her by the Lord 
 be in Abels room, faithful as Abel , and the 
 ? ather of our Lord after the flefii , as Ainfwonh 
 n Gen. 4. 25. And is there no intimation in this 
 hat Seth was an Infant member of the vifible 
 church I I confefi he that jJjall excommunicate this 
 ippointed feed or faith , that Seth was without 
 he Church in his infancy, doth jpeak^ in my ears 
 improbably^ and fo unlike the Scripture , that 
 r am very confident I fimll never believe him* 
 
 Mr.7Vs Anfwer to all, is a denial : faith he, [Then is 
 intimation that Seth was an infant member of ike vi fi- 
 le church ', from which Ifhmael was not excluded : In 
 
 I 3 ytYiOfi 
 
(nS) 
 
 • though I place not Seth, I h not tbfrehj exccttv,. 
 cite him, or faj that he wits without thi Church in bis in- 
 
 Reply. But you fay He was without the vifible 
 Church : ( or elfe within and without are confident 
 with you. ) And whether JJhmael was within, and 
 Seth t and Henoch , and Sem without , I will no 
 more difpute with you. 
 
 SECT. LXIII, to LXX. 
 
 R. B. TV T Ote aifo , that as God had thus cafi 
 l_\l out Cain, and fuelled Abels room by 
 Seth, and had given each of them pofierity ^ Jo 
 we find him in a jpccial manner re gi firing the 
 fucceffors of the righteous, and putting two titles 
 on thefe two difiinlt generations, calling fome the 
 fons of Cod y and others the daughters of men y 
 Gen. 6. 2. Suppofing that you rejetl the old con- 
 ceits that thefe fons of God were Angels that fell 
 in love with women, the current ordinary expo- 
 fit ion I thfnk^ will ft and, that thefe were the pro- 
 geny of Seth , and other members of the Church , 
 who are called the Sons of God ^ and that it was 
 the progeny of Cain, and other wielded ones ^ that 
 are called the daughters of men* Where note that 
 they are not them f elves denominated wielded, but 
 the children of men, ai being a generation ft pa- 
 rated from the Church from the birth. And the 
 other are not themfelves affirmed to be truly god- 
 /' ones, l:ic fons if God , a* being the feed of the 
 ::t, b.:t members of the Churchy or 
 
 the 
 
the forts of tbofe who were devoted to God, and 
 fo devoted to him them ft Ives : a feparated gene- 
 ration belonging to God as his vifible Church. 
 Where note, that thcfe that are called the fons of 
 God, even the line of Seth and, other godly pa- 
 rents, were yet fo wicked that God -repented that 
 he made them, and deftroyed them in the food, 
 (paring only Noah and his family. So that it 
 was not their own godlinef, that made them ai- 
 led the fons of God, but their relation, Church 
 fate and vifiblc feparation from open unchurched 
 Idolaters, (fompare this phrafe with the like, D:ur. 
 14. I. 2 Cor. 6. 18. In the former it is f aid 
 [ ye are the children of the Lord your God, ye 
 ihall not cut your felves, cf-c. ~] where the whole 
 people^ Infants and. all, are called Gods children, 
 as being a people feparatcd to him from the Ido- 
 latrous world •, and fo in the next verf. called a 
 holy people unto God, peculiar to him, eye. 
 And 2 Cor. 6. 8. Come out from among them , 
 and be yt feparate, cfrc. and I will be a fa.her to 
 you, and you fhail be my fons and daughters , 
 faith the "Lord Almighry. ~] So that. Gcds f??s 
 and daughters are that fociety that are feparatcd 
 from Idolaters unto the workup of God as the vi- 
 fible Church is. And then it appears that the ge- 
 neration of the righteous, even from the womb, 
 were enumerated to the refi, in that they are 
 not mentioned as a people called o>:t here 
 and there , a*d initiated at tine (there is rto;xc;i- 
 ttonof any fuch thing : ) but as a ftock, or gene- 
 ration oppjfed to the daughters of men, cr of the 
 unchurched, who were fuch from their infancy 
 
 1 4 
 
U2°; 
 as all will grant. For it was not the fame me?t 
 that were the Parents of thofe here called the 
 daughters of men and the fons of God ( though 
 fome of the later might be ex communicate when 
 they fell : ) But it plainly intimates , that it was 
 another fort of me?i that thefe were the daughters 
 of j than thofe that were Parents to the fons of 
 God. So Ainfworth in loc. [The forts of God, 
 i.e. the meri of the Church of God, for to fuch 
 Mofcs faith , Dcur. 14. i, dec. 1 John 3. i« 
 Daughters of men , meaning of Cains po ferity 
 that were out of Gods Church , Gen. 4. 14. \ So 
 our Annotations^ and many more. 
 
 An intimation of this priviledge, and that they 
 were fons of mercy and of the promife , appear eth 
 in the very names of many of the children of the 
 righteous, both before and after the flood, which 
 I will not (land on particularly. 
 
 And when all the world had fo defied them- 
 felves , that God was refolved to cut them off^ 
 he /pared Noah and his family or fons. .Though 
 Cham was to be cur fed, yet was he of the Church 
 which w or flipped the true God , and (pared as a 
 fon of Noah , and one of that fociety. And if 
 God fo far fpared him then for his Fathers fake 
 as to hoitfe him in the Ai\ ( the type of the 
 Church ) he fure took, him to be of the fame fo- 
 ciety in his infancy, and then bare him the fame 
 favour on the fame account. 
 
 As foon as Noah came out of the Ark^ God 
 bleffed himfelf in his ijfkc y as he did Adam, with 
 an [~ incrcafe and multiply ~\ and made a Cove- 
 nant with him and his feed after him. , Which 
 
 Cwe* 
 
(121) 
 
 fivenant though the expreffed part of it be that 
 the earth Jhould be drowned no more , and fo it 
 was made with the wickedfi of Noahs feed, and 
 even with the beafis of the field, yet doth it im- 
 port 4 fpecial favour to Noah ^W his feed, as one 
 whom God would fhew a more fpecial refpett to , 
 as he had done in his deliverance, and upon this 
 fpecial favour to him the creatures fare the bet- 
 ter. For though the word £ Covenant ] be the 
 fame to man and be aft , yet the diver fity of the 
 fromijfary and his capacity may put a different fenfe 
 on the fame word, as applied to each. nAnd in- 
 deed it Jhould feem but a fad blefftng to Noah to 
 hear an [_ increase and multiply ] // all his In- 
 fant poflerity mufi be cafi or left out of the vifi- 
 ble Church, and fo left as common or unclean. 
 This were to encreafe and multiply the Kingdom 
 of the Devil. Jf he that was fo mercifully hou- 
 fed in the Ark, with all his children , mufi now 
 be fo blefi as to have all their iffue to be out of the 
 Church, it were afirange change- in God, and a 
 firange blefftng on Noah ! Ane[ an uncomfortable 
 fiabh firing of a (fovcnant with his feed , if all 
 that feed mufi be fo thrufi from God and dealt 
 With as the feed of cur fed Cain. 
 
 Moreover it is certain that Noah did prophe- 
 tically , or at leafi truly pronounce the blefftng on 
 Shem and Japher. And in Shems bltffimg he 
 blcffeth the Lord his God, jhewing that God was 
 his God and fo in Covenant with hi???. And it 
 is plain that it is not only the perfons , but the 
 pofterities of his three fons that Noah hereintend- 
 ed. It was not Cham himfelf fo much as Canaan 
 
 and 
 
and his fucceeding pofterity that were to be fer- 
 vantsto Shem and Japhet, that is, to their pofte- 
 rity. And the bleffmg muft be to the ijfue of 
 Shem, as well as the curfe to the iffue a/ 7 Cham. 
 And indeed a Hebrew Doctor would take tt til 
 at that Expositor or Divine whatfoever that 
 Jhould pre fume' to exclude the Infant feed of them 
 ont of Gods (jiurch. And well they may , if in 
 the bkfiing God be pronounced to be their God, 
 Saith Ainfworth in Ioc. [_ under this Shem affo 
 himfelf receiveth a blefftng : for blejfed is the peo- 
 ple , whofe God Jehovah is, Pfal. 144. 15. and 
 eternal life is implied herein , for God hath pre- 
 prepared for them a City of whom he is not aftm- 
 med to be called their God, Heb. 11. 16. and 
 Shem is the firft man in Scripture that hath ex- 
 prefly this honour, f) 
 
 cJWoreover in Gen. 9. 27. in Japhets bleffing 
 there is much, though in few words, to this pur- 
 pofe intimated. Fir ft , note that the Jewijh 
 Church is called [ the tents of Shem. ] From 
 whence it appeared), that the Church priviledgcs 
 of that people begun not with or from Abraham , 
 but were before : And that it is the fame Church 
 that was of Shem and of Abraham, and after all 
 the additional promifes to Abraham , the Jewijh 
 Church is fit 11 denominated \ 'the tents of Shem : ] 
 now they were the tents of Shem before Abrahams 
 days. And therefore it .is clear, that it being 
 the fame Church , muft be fuppofed to have the 
 fame fort of members or materials : and there- 
 fore Infants muft be n embers before Abrahams 
 days as well as after. That Church which 
 
 was 
 
iv** Sheras fe»^ had Infant Church-members (for 
 the Jews Church is fo called , ftff<? which Japhec 
 was to pafi: ) But the Church both before and af- 
 ter Abraham was Shems tents. Ergo, 
 
 Tet further let it here be noted, that it is into 
 Shems tent s that Japhec mufl pafi. I fuppofethat 
 the evidence is better here for that expofttion that 
 applyeth the word [ dwell J to Japhet than to God, 
 and fo that this is jpoken of the converftsn of the 
 Gentiles, as many Expofitor shave cleared at large* 
 And fo, as Ainfworih faith, the fcnfe is that Ja- 
 phet jhaH be £ untied with the Churches of the 
 Jews, the pofierity of Shcm , which was fulfilled 
 when the Gentiles became joynt-heirs, and of the 
 fame body, and joy nt -partakers of Gods promife in 
 Chrifl, the flop of the partition-wall being broken 
 down, &c. Ephef. 3.6. &2. 14, 19. Although it 
 may further imply the grafting 0/Japhets children, 
 into the ftock^of the (fhurch, when Shems pofleri- 
 :y jhuld be cut ojf,fkc.~\ vid. ulr. Now tf it be 
 Shems tents even the fame Church that Japhets 
 children mufl dwell in , then as Shems Infants 
 were Church-members , fo mufl Japhets, and not 
 all his Infant feed be cafl cr left out. So that 
 here is a promife of Infant Church-memberflrip 
 unto the Gentiles in thefe words. 
 
 Reply. To all this the fumm of Mr, TVs an- 
 fwers are, 1. A denial of the fenfes gi^n of 
 fome Texts, which I leave to the Readers exa- 
 mination, being refolved not to tire him with a 
 tedious Reply. 2. He grants that their perfons 
 were blcflcd , God their God, and their feed 
 in the Church : As if Gods open Covenant and 
 
 pro- 
 
promife made them not vifible members but invi- 
 fible. 
 
 SECT, LXX, to LXXIX. 
 
 R.B. TX7^ come next t0 the Vromife made 
 VV to Abraham, which I jhall fay the 
 left to } becaufe you confef it. But again note , 
 that whereas your felf make the beginning of 
 Gods taking the Jews to be his -people , and fo of 
 Infants to be members of the Church , to be at 
 Abrahams call from Ur ^ i. There is no one word 
 of that in the Text. 2. Lot came out ofWx with 
 Abraham, yea, and from Haran, and lived with 
 him : were not Lot and his Infants Church-mem- 
 hers then? 
 
 3 • The chief note I intend is this, that there is 
 no more faid then to prove Infants Church -mem' 
 hers, than what we have (l)ewed was faid long 
 before, and is faid after of the Gentiles Infants, 
 no nor fo much. If therefore the parage of Abra- 
 ham out of Ur, yea , or the promife made to him 
 in Haran , Gen. 12. 2, 3. will prove Infants 
 Church-member ^iip , then have we as good proof 
 of it to the Gentile Church as to the Jews. 
 
 And here I note further , that in the begin- 
 ning iff ore the command for Circumcifion , yon 
 plainly yield that Infants Church-membtrjloip is a 
 thing fc parable from Circumcifion, and begun not 
 With it , but before. And indeed I have evinced 
 that to you in my Book of Baptifm. Abraham 
 him felf was not made a member by Circumcifion , 
 
 but 
 
but circumcifed becaufe a member of Chrifls 
 Church by faith. Ifhmael was a Member before , 
 and fo was Ifaac, and the Infants born in Abra- 
 hams hoafe. 
 
 Whether there were any promt fe or precept of this 
 ( but a meer tfanfeunt fat} ) let the Text lafi 
 mentioned, and the following bear witnej?. Gen* 
 12. 2, 3. In thee (hall all families of the earth 
 be bleffed, and, Gen. 17.7,9,10. And I will 
 eflablifh my Covenant between me and thee and 
 
 thy kzd after thee—- and I will be their 
 
 God. And God faid to Abraham, Thou (hale 
 keep my Covenant therefore , thou and thy feed 
 after thee in their generations. This is my Co- 
 venant which you (hall keep between me and 
 you, &c. to verf. 15. In all this let thefe things 
 be noted , 1. That here is an exprefi promt fe 
 or Covenant to Abraham and his feed af- 
 ter him* 2. That it is not only de praefenti, 
 but for the future , called an everlafting Cove- 
 nant. 3 . That this promt fe or Covenant doth ma- 
 nifeftly imply and include Infants Church-mem- 
 ber firip ( as you confeft. ) 4. That yet here is not 
 the leafl word that intimates an inftitution of it 
 de novo, but rather the contrary plainly intima- 
 ted. The promifes before Gen. 17. are mainly 
 about the multiplication of Abrahams feed. What 
 is that to (hurch— member fhip ? ( except what in- 
 timates the promifed feed \ of which anon* ) Ha- 
 gar hath a promife alfo of the multiplication of 
 Khmaels feed. And the very precept of Circum- 
 cifion is only one part of the Infant member x,viz. 
 the males , and therefore it cannot be foundation 
 
 of 
 
( 1**6 ) 
 
 rf their Church-memberjhip , which leaves out 
 half the members. 5. Note that the promife that 
 Cod will be their Cod , doth exprefly contain the 
 Church-membership of the feed. 6. Note that 
 this is more than a tranfeunt fatly Ergo, being 
 an ever lading Covenant. Had h been a natu- 
 ral tranfennt faEi, that had left no permanent ti- 
 tle behind it in the obligation of the Covenant , 
 the?t it had been null and void as joon as /poke* ' 
 then the word ofCjodts but a bare found and of no 
 further force. 7. Note that the Apoflle ( as is 
 faid) Rom. 4. 10, 11, 12, 13. doth fully manifest 
 to w, that this promife was made to Abraham as 
 a believer , and that Circnmcifon was a feal of 
 the righteoufnefs of faith which he had, yet be- 
 ing uncircumcifed : and therefore that the chief 
 fart of the Covenant of having God for our God, 
 and his taking us as his peculiar people , belongs 
 to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews. 8. And 
 he oft Jheweth that the faithful are Abrahams 
 feed, and therefore the chief blejfwgs of the pro- 
 wife belong to all the faithful. But one of the 
 blefflngs was, that their Infants flwuld be compre- 
 hended in the fame Church and Covenant, Ergo, 
 the Infants of the faithful who are the heirs of 
 the fame promife , muft be comprehended in it too. 
 
 9. / thinks it is not to be made light of as to 
 this matter , that in the great promife, Gen. I2#3. 
 the blejfmg from Abraham in Chrift is promifed 
 to all the families or tribes on earth, all the fami- 
 lies of the earth (hall be bleffed, as the Heb. Sa- 
 mar. Arabic, or all the kindreds as the vulgar 
 lat. and ChaUL paraph, or all the tribes as the 
 
 Septc 
 
( **7 ; 
 
 Sept. mm tit Qvhctl* And doultlefs it is byChrifi 
 that this bleffing is promifed, and fo a Gofpel 
 blcffing ( Ergo, the Syrian adds and in thy feed, 
 and the Arab, hath by thee. ) And the Apoftle 
 fully tefitfieth that. So that as trtbes y kindreds, 
 families, do mo ft certainly comprehend the Infant s i 
 and as it was to fuch families that the promife 
 was made before Chriji as to the Jewiffi Church , 
 fo is it exprejly to fitch families or trtbes that the 
 promife is mads as to the Gentiles fence Chrift. 
 
 10. Note that as Infant Church-member jhip is 
 here clearly implied in Infant Circumcifion , fo 
 the) are two diftintl things-, and as the fegn is 
 here commanded de novo , fo the thing fignified 
 (I mean the duty of engaging and devoting to 
 God as their God in Covenant ) is commanded 
 with it, though not de novo, as a thing now be* 
 ginning as the fign did, So that here ts in Civ 
 cumcifion not only a command to do the circum- 
 cifing outward att, but alfo to do it as a fign of 
 the Covenant , and fo withal for the Parents to 
 engage their children to God in Covenant as their 
 God, and devote them to him as his feparated pe- 
 culiar people. So that here are two diftintl du- 
 ties concurrent. The one external newly infti- 
 tuted , the other internal not newly in ft it u- 
 ted. And therefore the former may ceafe , and 
 yet the later ftand : and it is no proof that 
 the Inter ( Covenant engagement of Infants to 
 God ) is ceafedy becaufe the fign of Cir cumcifion 
 is ctafed , no more than it proves that fuch Cove- 
 nant engagement did then begin when Circum- 
 cifion did begin $ or that women were not Church- 
 members 
 
(128)- 
 
 fnembcrs feparateh, engaged, dedicated to Ged tit 
 Infancy, becaufe they were ?wt circumcised. And 
 no more than yen can prove that all Ifrael was 
 unchurched in the wildernefs when they were nn- 
 ctrcumcifed for 40 years. So that here you have 
 a command for entrvng Infants as Chmch-mem- 
 bers. And fo yon fee both promt fe and precept in 
 Gen. 12. 3. & Gen. 17c 
 
 And when I confidcr the Parents, breeding and 
 manners of Rebekah , / think it far more proba- 
 ble that fhe was a Church-member from her In- 
 fancy, than that fhe was entred afterwards at .age, 
 or that fhe was a heathen or infidel when Iiaac 
 married her. 
 
 And as here are before mentioned ft anding Co- 
 venants, fo it is to be noted how God intimateth 
 the extent of the main bleffing of them to be fur- 
 ther than to Abrahams natural feed , not only in 
 the exprefs promt fe of the bleffing to all the nati- 
 ons or families on earth ( of which before ) but 
 in the ajfigned reafon of the bleffing which is com- 
 mon to Abraham with other true believers. For 
 Gen. 22. 16, 17, 18. it is thus alledged [becaufe 
 thou haft done this thing , &c. And in thy feed 
 (kail all the nations of the earth be bleffed, becaufe 
 thou haft obeyed my voice. ] And Gen. 26. 3, 4, 5. 
 the Covenant is renewed with Ifaac, and the fame 
 reafon aligned, £ becaufe that Abraham obeyed 
 my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, 
 my flatutes and my laws e j How mans obedience^ 
 is faid to be a caufe of Cods bleffing, I am not de- 
 termining ; but taking the words as J find them 
 in general y I may conclude , that they are here 
 
 given 
 
( ^9) 
 
 given as a caufe or reafon of it fome way or otherl 
 And though a Jpectal mercy may be given on a 
 common ground or reafon , yet where there is no 
 apparent proof of the reftriclion, vpe are to judge 
 the bleffing common where the reafon u common : 
 At leaft , tf a fecial blcffmg be fuperadded to 
 Abrahams feed ( upon the freenef of Gods grace, 
 or the eminency of Abrahams obedience , ) yet there 
 goes with it a mercy common to all where the 
 reafon of the mercy is found. It being therefore 
 the cafe of every true believer to be faithful and 
 obedient , yea, to prefer that before his own hfe y 
 and not a fon only , it may be hence gathered , 
 that Cod who bltffed Abrahams feed on that ac- 
 count y will blefi theirs on the fame , with the fame 
 bleffings in the main ( as to his favour and ac- 
 ceptance of them J though not with the fame in\ 
 the variable fuperadditionals or overplus of exter- 
 nal things* 
 
 In Exod. 12. 48. there is a law for the circ urn- 
 tifing of all the males of ftrangers that fojourn in 
 the land, that will keep the pajfover : which com- 
 frehendeth their (,hurch-memberfl)ip, as is flewed* 
 
 Reply. To all this neither do I find any new 
 thing calling for any anfwer, but what the con- 
 fidering Reader can eafily make : His repeated 
 fayings, that if [Admijfionbe by Baptifm I mufi 
 make Parents Mmifters to baptize 3 a child may 
 well anfwer. There are more Parties that a& in 
 baptifm than one : God by his Lftfimfters expref- 
 feth his Covenant-Gift and Confent, and deliver- 
 cth it fealed to the Receiver by the inftituted in- 
 yefting fymbol: The party receiving expreflah 
 
 K his 
 
( 130) 
 
 bis confent, and this the Parent hath power and 
 truft to do for the child , as you may take a 
 Leafefor your Child: Cannot the Parent do this, 
 and fo be a Caufe of Reception without being a 
 Minister ? 
 
 SECT. LXXIX, toLXXXVI. 
 
 R-B* HT*//<? premife to the whole people of If- 
 X rael, Infants and all, that they (l)onld 
 be f a peculiar people , a Kingdom of Trie ft s, and 
 a hcly Nation, 3 Exod. 19. 5, 6. yon cannot de- 
 ny* This is a promt fe , and not a tranfeunt fail 
 which wade no promife. And the people are cal- 
 led to keep Cods Covenant ■, that they might have 
 this promife fulfilled to them. Tea , if yon had 
 faid, that it was a meer tranfeunt Covenant or 
 promife, reaching but to the perjons then exiftent, 
 and dying with them, though you had jpoken more 
 fexfe* y et nQ more truth than when you denied the 
 law and premife, and fubftituted a tranfeunt fall* 
 For , i* It is exprefly a promife de futuro to a 
 Nation. 2. Tea , and the Apofile Peter giveth 
 the fame titles to believers under the Gojpel, in- 
 timating the fulfilling of the promife even to them, 
 as the promife to Abraham was fo the faithful 
 •who were his uncircumcifed feed. However, 
 here is a Covenant granting by way of confirma- 
 on the bltfting of Lhurch-memberfhip to Infants 
 with the reft of Ifrael : For certainly, this pecu- 
 liarity, and holinefs , and prie flood here mentio- 
 ned, containtth their Church-memberftiip: It is 
 
undeniable therefore , that fuch Church -member^ 
 jhip is here granted by Promt fe or Covenant , not 
 as a thing then beginning, but by way of confir* 
 mat ion of the like former grants. And it is t& 
 be noted, that though this promife is made to all 
 Ifrael , yet not to be fulfilled to any of them , but 
 on condition that they [" obey Gods voice , and 
 keep his Covenant, ~] verf. 5 . on which conditions' 
 alfo any other might have then enjoyed the fame 
 bleffmg, and therefore fo may do now* 
 
 In Deut. 17. 1,2. The Infants with the reft 
 are called the children of God, and a holy and pe- 
 culiar people to the Lord their God* 
 
 And Deur. 26. 14,18. the Covenant is expref- 
 fed [Thou haft avouched the Lord this day to 
 be thy God, and to walk in his ways, and keep 
 his ftatutes, and his commandments, and his judge- 
 ments, and to hearken to his voice. And the Lord 
 hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar 
 people, as he hath promifed thee, &ei And that 
 thou maift be an holy people, &c. Is hen no 
 fromife, when the fromife is expreft f and is here 
 no Covenant, where the mutual Covenant is de~ 
 fcribed t And I think^you grant that Infants are 
 included* 
 
 So Deut. 28.4, 9. Where the promife to the na~ 
 tion is, that if .they hearken to Gods voice -and 
 obferve his Commandments, they frail be bleffed in 
 the fruit of their bodies, and the Lord will efta- 
 blijh them a holy people to himfelf , as he had 
 fworn unto them. ~\ Here is not only a Covenant 
 and Promife for the future, but alfo an oath con- 
 firming it 7 at annexed to the fame before* Is 
 
 K z thh 
 
030 
 
 this eflablifinng Covenant or Promlfe but a tran- 
 feunt fait / or doth not this confirm tbetr right 
 to the benefit promt fed^ which was received before 
 by the fame means I 
 
 And Ezra 9. 2, They are called the holy feed* 
 Of that in Deut. 29. / have formerly (poke 
 enough. It is called a Covenant. iAll Ifrael 
 With their little ones did enter the Covenant and the 
 oath with Cod, and which he made to them* It 
 was a Covenant , to eftablifh them for a people 
 to himfelf, and that he may be to them a God, 
 as he had before faid and fworn. It is a Cove- 
 nant made even with them that flood not there , 
 whether it he meant only of the fuceejftve Israelites 
 { and then it is not a tranfeunt Covenant ) or of 
 oR people whoever that will accept of the fame 
 terms ( and then Us not proper to Ifrael. ) It is 
 a Covenant not made to them as meer Ifrael ites : 
 but as obedient to the Covenant terms , and Co- 
 tenant breaking would cut them cjf, verf. 19, 20, 
 2 1 , 23 , 25, 26. Is not fi>urch~mcmberjhip contain- 
 ed in y Gods being their God , and taking them 
 for his people thus m Covenant ? Doth not the pro- 
 mtfe give them an e ft ablijhed right in this bleffmg ? 
 Is ail this then no promife y but a tranfeunt fall ? 
 
 Deik- 30.19. There is a law and promife , 
 choofe life , that thou and thy feed may live. 
 This is the fame Covenant which Khcaufed the 
 people to enter , 2 Chron* 1 5 . and if there had 
 been no law for it, there would have been no pe- 
 nalty, and then he would not have made it death 
 to withdraw*. It is the fame Covenant which Jo- 
 Cnh caufed the people to enter , z Kings 23 . 2, 3^ 
 
 Z Chron. 
 
2-Chron. 34. 31, 32. Of Levir. 25.41,54, 55ns; 
 / have (poken elfewhere , arid of jfome ether 
 Texts. 
 
 Mr. r. For the file efficient caufi being atlualtf 
 
 •put C as the Covenant and the Parents believing are? 
 Vent. 29. ) the ejfett muft be in aft : but it is not fi m tb? 
 unborn : therefore the Covenant and Parents faith are not 
 
 the fole efficient fo that though the Covenant give 
 
 a Right to a bldfing, yet it doth not make actually vifi- 
 ble Oimrch-members , without fome other tranfeunt 
 fact 
 
 Reply. ( The reft let the Reader make his beft 
 of. ) We are it feems by this time in a fair way 
 •of agreement , and have almoft done our work. 
 It feemeth by this time he could find in his heart 
 to grant that the -Covenant is an efficient caufe^ 
 chough not the fole efficient : well , we will not 
 ftick on that : Gods love and revelation , and 
 Chrifts merits (hall be antecedent chief efficients : 
 And he feemeth now inftead of faying ftill that 
 £ It is only by the Thyfical tranfeunt fall ] to be 
 content if we will fay, it is not till or without 
 that faEb y that is , that men are not members of 
 the Church till they are men. We will not be 
 Co fowre as to deny him that much,. And indeed 
 is this all at the upfhot } But I will not grant hiai 
 the logical notion too cafily, though we will not 
 cjuarrel about it* I think a caufe materially may 
 long exift before the effec~l 7 though it be not for- 
 maliter caufa till it effed : And I think that Gods 
 conditional Qovenant or Vromife 7 is but canfa vir- 
 tual! s & aptitudinalis till it effect , and yet may 
 be the fole proximate efficient of our Right of* 
 isny^rd : I think the childs being bom did not 
 
 K 3 tfiSt 
 
1 134; • 
 
 fffeft his Right to Church Relation, nor doth 
 ii^r Faith now, nor the Parents faith or confent 7 
 but only as a condition make men capable RecipU 
 ents. And I think the efftEt may begin de novo 
 without any change in the efficient, upon a change 
 in the Recipient : And that the Sun unchanged is 
 the proximate efficient of motion, light and heat, 
 to the next exiffcent wight that received not his 
 influx before it did exift : And the Covenant or 
 Donative Inftrument of God which faith \_He 
 that believeth fl?all be ji4ftified~\ may eiFed my 
 Juftification when I believe and not before y 
 though my faith effett it not at all, but dijpofe the 
 recipient. But I deny that the Parents faith be- 
 ing put, all the capacity of the recipient is put , 
 even when he is born : For if it be pofiible for 
 the Parent to confent for himfelf and not for his 
 child , and to devote himfelf and not his child to 
 God , part of the condition of reception is 
 wanting. 
 
 As far as I perceive , could I but hope to be 
 fo happy a difpufa.nt, as to convince Mr. T. that 
 Church-memberfhip ( vifible ) is any benefit at all 
 it felfj or was to the Ifraelites , he would grant 
 me all that I plead for of the conveyance of it by 
 Covenant. And if I cannot it is a hard cafe 
 
 SECT, 
 
(135) 
 
 SECT. LXXXVI. 
 
 R, B. pm Jf^He fecond Commandment , Exod. 20w 
 X 5, 6. Deur. 5. 9, 10. / thinks is * 
 law 9 and containeth a promife or premiant fart , 
 wherein be promifeth to [hew mercy to the gene- 
 rations or children of them that love him and 
 keep his Commandments : of which I have alfo 
 fpokgn elfewhere, to which I refer yon. J fee no 
 reafon to doubt but here is a ftanding promt [e , 
 and difcovery of Gods refolution y concerning the 
 children of all that love him , whether Jews or 
 Gentiles , to whom this Commandment belongs : 
 nor to doubt whether this mercy imply Church* 
 membership : And that this is fetcht from the ve- 
 ry gr adopts nature of God^ I find in his proclaim- 
 ing his Name to Mofes, Exod. 34.6, 7. 
 
 Mr. T. If this mercy here imply Church-member/Bi^ 
 to the Infants of them that love him to a thoufmd Ge- 
 nerations , then it implieth it to all the Infants in the 
 world But there is nothing to prove that this mer- 
 cy muft be Church-membermip, or that it mud: be to all 
 the children of them that love God, or that it mull be 
 
 to them in Infancy I incline to conceive this a pro- 
 
 mife of temporal mercies, cliiefly to the ifraelltes 
 
 Reply* r. That it is not only of temporal mer- 
 cies y the words \_ Love and Hate ~\ as the qualifi- 
 cation of the Parents , feem to prove ; and the 
 joyning the children to the Parents in the retri- 
 bution : And all the terms feem above fuch a 
 fenfe : It is the revenge of ajealopu God on Ido- 
 later Sj and mercy to his Lovers that isfpokenof : 
 
 K 4 And 
 
And the joyning this Command to the firft which 
 fefleiti our relation to God , with the Laws an r 
 nexed in Dent, for the cutting off whole Cities 
 ( Parents and Children ) that turn from God to 
 Idols, fneweth that it reached to Church-Commu- 
 nion and Life. 
 
 2. And that it was not only to the Ifraelites 
 (whatever you chiefly mean,) is proved both in 
 that it is in the Decalogue , and the proclaimed 
 name of God, Exod. 34. 5, 6. and exemplified 
 throughout the Scripture and in the Gofpel. 
 
 2. As to the extent, we can hardly exped that 
 the world fliould endure a thoufand Generations: 
 Therefore it can mean but that God who bound- 
 eth the punifhment to the third and fourth gene- 
 ration, will fet no bounds to the fucceiTion of his 
 mercies while our capacity continueth. And what- 
 ever the mercies be, the exposition of this conti- 
 nuance concerneth you as much as we. 
 
 3. As to the conditions, I doubt notbutitfup- 
 pofeth that the child at age imitate the Parents in 
 their Love or Hatred , duty or fin : And that if 
 on Repentance the Parent be forgiven, his fin may 
 not be vifited. to the third and fourth. And if a 
 child of Godly Parents turn wicked , the right is 
 intercepted. 
 
 4. But the Commandment with the forefsyd 
 expofiiion (hews, that God meaneth that his Retri- 
 bu ion to Parents that Love or Hate him , (hall 
 fxtend to their children as fuch •, unlefs they inter- 
 rupt ic at age by their own ads: And if to their 
 £ 'uldren qua talcs, then to Infants. 
 
 And it fpeaketh fuch a fiate of mercy as can- 
 not 
 
037) 
 
 pot in reafon be conceived to belong to tliem 
 without, and can mean no lefs than Gods vifible 
 &vour,by which the Church is differenced from the 
 w, rid, when Lovers and Haters are diftinguifhed 
 fides. 
 
 And when God hath Recorded this decreed 
 granted diftinguifiied mercy to the children of the 
 faithful asfuch in the Tables of flone , fure it is 
 a vifible notification, which will make them vifi- 
 ble favorites and Chnrch-members as foon as they 
 vifibly exift. 
 
 And the quatenm feemeth to me to prove that 
 it extendeth to all the children of the faithful , 
 becaufe it is to them as finch. But itfolloweth not 
 that it rouft extend to them all alike, as to equal 
 mercies, nor yet that the fin of Parents after may 
 make no kind of forfeiture. But of this I have 
 faid more in my Chrifiian Directory. 
 
 SECT. LXXXVII, to XCIV. 
 
 R. B. XN Pfal. 102. 28. It is a general pro- 
 X wife, the children of thy ftrvants fhall 
 continue, and their feed fti all be eftablifhed before 
 thee. It is ufual in the Old Tefiament to exprefi 
 Gods favour by temporal blcjfings , more than in 
 the Gojpel ♦, but yet ft ill they fee ure m of his fa- 
 tpur. As, I will not fail thee, nor forfake thee, 
 might fee ure Jofhua more than us of temporal fuc- 
 cejjhy und yet not more of Gods never failing fa- 
 vour* 
 
 There 
 
{ *3*J 
 
 There is a ftable promife to all Gods people in 
 general that have children^ Pfal. 103. 17. But 
 the mercy of the Lord is from everlafting to ever- 
 lafting upon them that fear him , and his righte- 
 oufnefs unto childrens children. And to be fe- 
 cured by promife of Gods mercy and righteoufnefi 
 is the ftate of none without the Church, 
 
 And if they were all to be kept out of the 
 Church , 7 fear ce thinks that Children would be 
 called an heritage of the Lord, and the fruit of the 
 womb his reward, Pfal. 127. 3. nor the man hap- 
 py that hath his quiver full of them. Nor would 
 the fuckjng children be called as part of the fo- 
 lemn affembly to the humiliation 7 Joel 2. 1 6. 
 2 Chron. 20. 13. 
 
 There is a (landing promt fe to allthejuft, Prov. 
 20. 7. The juft man walketh in his integrity, his 
 children are blefled after him. There is no fort 
 of men without the Church that is pronounced 
 bleffed in Scripture. A blefled people are Gods 
 people , and thofe are the Church feparated from 
 the cur fed world. One lower bleffmg will not de- 
 nominate a man or fociety , a blejjed man or fo- 
 ciety. 
 
 If it were a good argument then^ Deut.4.. 37, 
 becaufe he loved thy fathers, therefore he chofe 
 their feed after them, then it is good fill as to fa- 
 vour in general. So Deut. 10. 15. Pfal. 69. 36. 
 Prov. 1 1. 21. The feed of the righteous (hall be 
 delivered. In Pfal. 37. 26. there is a general 
 promife to, or declaration of the righteous^ thathli 
 feed is blefled, and then they are Church-members, 
 
 In I fa. 61. 8, 9. it is prom i fed I thinly of Go- 
 
 fpd 
 
( 139 J 
 
 ftel times, I will make an everlafting Covenant 
 with them , and their feed (hall be known among 
 the Gentiles, and their off-fpring among the peo- 
 ple : all that fee them fhall acknowledge them, 
 that they are the feed which the Lord hath blef- 
 fed. And cap. 62. 12. They ihall call them the 
 holy people, the redeemed of the Lord : and thou 
 (halt be called, fought out , a city not forfaken. 
 Gojpel promifes then extend to [ people and cities, ] 
 whereof Infants are a part, lfa.6$. 23. they 
 are the feed of the bleffed of the Lord, and their 
 off-fpring with them. This is plain , and full , 
 and durable. 
 
 What is necejfary to be faid in anfwer to the 
 common objettions , as £ that experience tells us 
 all the feed of the righteous are not bleffed ~\ with 
 the like , I fuppofe already done in my book^ of 
 Baptifm. AH the feed of the righteous are blef- 
 fed , though not all with that blejfmg which can~ 
 not be lofi and cafi away by themfelves when they 
 come to age. 
 
 Mr. 77s Anfwers all contain the difficulty of 
 difcerning the fulfilling of thefe promifes, andfo 
 denying that they infer vifible Church-member- 
 ihip: and he faith \That without the Church a\ 
 per [on may be pronounced bleffed, is apparent from 
 Ifhmaels blejfmg, Gen. 17. 20. when he was ex- 
 cluded the Covenant and caft out. ] 
 
 Reply. He was excluded the Covenant of pecu- 
 liarity, but not the common Covenant of" Grace 
 made with mankind in Adam and Noe : And the 
 1 Church was larger than the Jfraelites Nation* 
 1 The reft I leave to the Reader. 
 
 SECT. 
 
V **t~ ) 
 
 SECT. XCIV, XCV. 
 
 %. B. TF you fay that the word \_feed^\ doth not 
 JL nee ejjanlyincluae Infants, I anfwer, In- 
 fants are fart of the feed of the righteous > yea afl 
 their feed are fir ft Infants. If therefore God have 
 made general promi fies at to age andperfon, who is 
 he that dare limit it , without juft proof that in- 
 deed God hath limited it f Doth God fay, that the 
 feed of the righteous are not bleffed till they come 
 to age f If he pronounce the feed blejfed, they muft 
 be bleffed^ when they are fir ft fitch a feed : And 
 if any one age might be more included than anom 
 ther y one would think^it muft be that wherein they 
 are ft meerly the feed of fuch as that they ftand 
 not on any diftinfl: account of their own allual 
 faith cr unbelief for the feed of the righteous, 
 as fuch, have a promified bleffing : But the feed of 
 the right eons turning them fe Ives to unrighteouf- 
 nefi y do turn f r-om -that blejfing , and become ac+ 
 curfed. 
 
 I fuppofe I have already been more tedious 
 than yon expelled: I will therefore add no more 
 cf the fie parages of Scripture , having faid that 
 which fit is fie th me formerly to the fame pur po fie , 
 and having yet fen nothing that leaves me un~ 
 fatisfied. And alfio bee ait fe one text either con- 
 taining fuch a Law or Covenant as you call for \ 
 or declaring to us that God did make fuch a Law 
 or Covenant^ is as good as a thoufand in point of 
 Authority. 
 
 Mr, 71 
 
f*40 
 
 Nr.T. Mr. B. not holding children in the womb un- 
 born to be viiible Church-members, all this may be retort- 
 ed : They are part of the feed of the righteous. 
 
 Reply. The whole feed ( in the womb and born ) 
 are taken into this relation to God which im- 
 plyeth his bleffing on them as feparated from the 
 wicked, according to their capacity : An Infant m 
 the womb is vifibly feparated to God, if you de- 
 nominate viftbility from the notoriety or viabili- 
 ty of Gods promife that doth it : But the per [on 
 is not vifible to you, though fenfible to the mo- 
 ther. As Chrift was the Head in the womb, fo 
 far Infants are members • the Parents then pri- 
 vately devoting them to God : I told you before, 
 the viftbility of pur ftate hath feveral gradations* 
 To quibble thus on all Gods promifes to the chil- 
 dren of the faithful by queftions and exceptions 
 about embryo's, abortives, &c. is vanity. 
 
 SECT. XCVI, XCVII. 
 
 R. E. 'Hp HE next Quefiion that I jpouldfpeak. 
 X to is y whether thefe Laws , or Cove- 
 nant s y or Promifes , are capable of a revocation , 
 or repeal ? and I Jliall take this for a qneflion 
 that needs no further dsbate , among men that 
 know what a Law or Promife is. Gods 'immu- 
 tability an) perfection may make fome Laws un- 
 repealable , while the fnb)e£h remains : but other- 
 Wife the thing itfelf is capable of it. Only where 
 a Promife or Law is but for a limited time , 
 ypben the time is expired it ceafcth , and the cef- 
 
 fatio?2 
 
C»40 
 
 fat ion is as to the nulling of it, equal to a revo-. I 
 C at ion or abrogation, I put in this que ft ion , left 
 )ox Jhould hereafter change your mind and fay , 
 that indeed it is a law, or promife , or covenant , 
 by which the right of Church-memberfliip is con- 
 f erred , and Infants dedicated to God : bkt it is but a 
 fanfeunt Law or Covenant.^ Anfw. If fo, then it 
 is either immediately or prefently tranfeunt, or at 
 a certain limited time only , when it will ceafe. 
 The former is certainly falfe and intolerable. 
 For, i . They are promifes and laws for the future^ 
 and therefore ceafe not immediately. 2« That 
 were to make God the moft unfaithful promifer 
 and mutable Law-maker in the world, if his pro- 
 mife and his laws ceafe as foon as they are made. 
 Nay it makes them to be no laws or promifes* 
 3. It was one ftanding law and promife that be- 
 hnged to the Nation of the Jews fucceffively. And 
 God did not make his promife anew to every In- 
 fant that was made a Church -member, nor renew 
 his law to every Tare nt to enter their Children in- 
 to his Covenant by the fign of Circumcifion, Were 
 not the uncircumcifed Ifraelites in the Wildernefs 
 made members by the efficacy of the former Cove- 
 nant of God remaining in force. And did for- 
 mer Laws oblige to Circumcifion till Chrift ? Elfe 
 there were but few members, nor but few that cir- 
 cumcifid warrantably, if the promife and precept 
 did extend but to the perfon that it was fir ft deli- 
 vered to, and every one elfe muft UktWife have a 
 perfonal promife and precept. The Mother of 
 Chrift cannot then be proved to have been a 
 fourch- member in Infancy '. If it be faid thai 
 
 theft 
 
tbefe fromifes were limited in the making of them ^ 
 to a certain time when they were to ceafe, I fay when 
 that is f roved we fiall believe it , which I have 
 not yet feen done. 
 
 And it falls in with the lafl queftion, which is 7 
 whether thefe fromifes be indeed revoked and cea- 
 fedj and thefe laws repealed or ceafed. s/ind 
 here it is that I have long expelled your folid 
 proof together with the fatisfdiory anfwer to my 
 arguments to the contrary. And fo I Jhall leave 
 this task^ in your hands. Sure I am that Chrifi 
 never came to cafi cut of the Churchy but to ga- 
 ther more in : much lefs to caft out all the Infants^ 
 even all of that age in which him f elf was head of 
 that Church : But to gather together in one the 
 children of God that were fcattered, Johnn. 52. 
 And therefore he would oft have gathered all Je- 
 rufalem and Judaea, even the National Church that 
 then waSy unto himfelf as the true head, even as 
 a Hen gather eth her Chickens under her wings, 
 and they would not. It was not becaufe he would 
 not ( as intending a new frame , where Infants 
 could have no place ) but becaufe they would not , 
 andfo caft out them fe Ives and their Infants. Certain- 
 ly it is the joy of the formerly de folate Gentiles , 
 that they jJ?all have many more children than 
 Jhe that had an Husband , and not fewer , 
 Gal. 4. 25 , 26 , 27. And we as Ifaaq are 
 children of the promife , even that promife 
 which extended to the Infants with the Varents. 
 Gal. 4. 28. 
 
 Mr. 7*. I conceived a Promife not in congruous 'ferft 
 
 repealablt ; For although a promife be a Law to the FW 
 
 jnifer, 
 
jnifer, yet I know not how congruoufly it flhould be r& 
 pealed : 'Tis true , the act of promifing being tranieunt 
 ccaieth •, but that cannot be repealed : that which is done 
 cannot be inpBum y not done. 
 
 Reply* 1 perceive we muft difpute our firft 
 principles, as well as our Baptifm. Reader, Gods 
 promife in queftion is not a particular promife to 
 tome one perfon only , but his Recorded Jnftru- 
 went of Donation^ or ftablifhed written or conti- 
 nued word , which is the fign of his will ; It is 
 the fame thing which is called , the Vremiant or 
 Donative part of his Law, in one refped:, and his 
 Teftament in another, and his Donation or Gift 
 in another, and his Covenant as Conditional in 
 another, and his Promife in another. As \_ He 
 that believeth flail be faved ~] is the Rewarding 
 or Giving part of a Law, and it is a Teftamenr, 
 a Covenant, a Promife, a Gift, all thefe. Mr.T. 
 cannot fee how this promife can be repealed ; 
 what, not an univerfal promifing Law, or Cove- 
 nant or Inftrument ? The queftion is not whether 
 it ever was repealed, but whether it be repealea- 
 ble y in congruous fenfe. Why may not the King 
 make a Law that every one that killeth fuch and 
 fuch hurtful creatures ( a Fox, &c. ) or that kil- 
 leth an enemy in war, fliall have fuch a reward ; 
 and repeale this Law or Promife when he feeth 
 caufe ? I think the firft Covenant ceafed by mans 
 fin, without repeal. But I cannot fay that no 
 promife to the Ifraelites was repealed, upon their 
 fin ! The non-performance of the condition depri- 
 veth the party of the benefit while it is unrepeal- 
 ed: but may not God thereupon repeal the Law 
 
 ex 
 
(M5) 
 
 or Covenant, and nuU the very offer to poftenty ? 
 Is it not fo as to the Jews policie and peculiar^ 
 ty? What pains is taken in the Epiftle to the£fc- 
 brews to prove the change of the Covenant as 
 faulty in comparifon of that which had better pro- 
 mifes ? But if you will call it ameer cejfation 7 z\l 
 is one as to our queftion in hand. 
 
 SECT. X'CVIII. 
 
 R„ B. TJ Efore I end I flmll be bold to put twa 
 JD or three Qucflions to you out of your 
 lafi Letter. Queft. I . Whether the circumcifed 
 fervants of Ifrael fold away to another nation , 
 and fo feparated from the Civil flate of Ifrael , 
 did eo nomine ceafe to be £hurch-me mbers, though 
 they forfooh^ not God I And fo of the Infants if 
 they were fold in Infancy? If you affirm it^ then 
 prove it. If you deny it^ then Infants might be 
 (fhurch -members that were not ef the Common^ 
 wealth. 
 
 Mr. r. None was of right of the Jcwifli Church 
 
 who was not of the Common- w&lth. 
 
 Reply. But my Queftion was, when without for- 
 faking God, they are forcibly feparated from the 
 Jewifh policy and fubjec'ted to others, are they 
 not members of the Church-umverfalft\\\> though 
 not of the Jews ? s 
 
 SECT, 
 
d4*> 
 
 SECT. XCIX. 
 
 R.B. Queft.2. T F ( as you fay ) it was on the Jews 
 A rejection of Chrift that they were 
 broken off from bang Gods people, were thofe thou- 
 fands of Jews that believed in Chrift fo broken 
 °ff \ or not •> who continued fuccejfively a famous 
 Church at Hierufalem, which came to be a Tatri- \ 
 archal feat* Whether then were not the children J 
 of the Difciples and all believing Jews Church- 
 wembers in Infancy . ? If no? then it wm fomewhat 
 clfe than unbelief that broke them off. 
 
 Mr. T. They were broken off from the Jewifh Church, 
 not by unbelief, but by faithin thrift. 
 
 Reply, This is too fhort an anfwer to fo great 
 an evidence againft you. The Infants of the Chri- 
 ftian Jews were the day before their Converfion 
 members of the Jewifh Church and of Gods uni- 
 verfal Church , of which the Jews were but a 
 part : For as he that is a member of the City is 
 a member of the Kingdom, and a part of a part 
 is a part of the wfcole, fo every member of the 
 Jews Church was a member of Gods univerfal 
 Church. Now, iV The very Jews policy totally 
 ceafed not tiil the deitru&ion of Jerufdem at 
 kaff. 2. But if it had, I ask, was it no mercy to 
 be a member both of the Jews Church and the 
 univerfal? If not, the Jews loft nothing by being 
 broken off? If yea, how did the Chriftians Chil- 
 dren forfeit it ? Was it better to be of ho vifible 
 Church;, than of the univerfal ? The J;ws were 
 
 broken 
 
CM7J 
 
 broken Off by unbelief: you <av Chriftians In- 
 fants were put out of that and the whole vifible 
 Church by faith, or without unbelief. 
 
 SECt. C. 
 
 R. B. Queft. 3. XTTTHether it be credible that 
 VV he who came not to cafi 
 out Jews, but to bring in Gentiles, breaking down 
 the partition-wall, ana making of two one Church, 
 would have fitch a Lin fey Woolfey Church of par- 
 ty colour s y or fever al forms : fo as that the Church 
 at Hierufalem jhould have Infant member*, and 
 the Church at Ronae ftwuld.have none! ? Jews In- 
 fants Jhould be members jnd not Genties ? 
 
 Mr. T. fo anfwereth as before, and needethnc 
 other Reply. 
 
 S E C T. C I. 
 
 R. B. Quelr. 4. TF unbelief brake them off , 
 X will not repentance graff theni 
 in ? And fo fwuld every repenting believing Jews 
 Infants be Church-members f 
 
 Mr. T. Not their Infants 
 
 Reply. Then it would be but a part of the peo- 
 ple that would be graffed in; 
 
 hz SECT 
 
(i 4 8) 
 
 SECT: CI I. 
 
 R. B. Queft. 5. TT7^ not Chrifts Church be- 
 V V fore his incarnation Jpiri- 
 tual^ and gathered in a jpiritnal way ? 
 
 Mr. r. The invisible was 5 the vifible Jewifh Nation 
 \vas_ not. 
 
 Reply. Not in comparifoi of the times of matu- 
 rity : but the vifible Jevvifli frame had the Father 
 of fpirits for Soveraign, and commanded fpiritual 
 duties, upon promifes of fpiritual bleffings , even 
 life Eternal. 
 
 S E C T. C 1 1 T. 
 
 R. B. Quell. 6. T TOw prove yon that it was a 
 
 .E"X blemijh to the old frame , 
 
 that Infants were members ? Or that Chrifts 
 
 Church then and now are of two frames in regard 
 
 of the fubjetts age f 
 
 Mr. f. It was a more imperfeft ftate in that and other 
 regards. 
 
 Reply. I called for fome proof that the Infant- 
 memberfhip was any part of the Church-imper- 
 fection : If it be not a blemifh , why mufr. it be 
 done away : what, was the Church the worfe for 
 Infants Rights ? 
 
 a' 
 
 SECT. 
 
Cmp) 
 
 S E C T. C I V. 
 
 R. B. Queft.7. TN what regard is the new 
 JL frame bettered by cafiing out 
 \ Infants which were in the old f 
 
 Mr. T. The Church is more fpiri ual < 
 
 Reply. What , doth Infants Relation detract 
 from its fpirituality ? The adult have fouls and 
 bodies, and fo have Infants ? The adult come in 
 by the fame kind of confent for themfeives, as they 
 make for their Infants > The adult blemifli the 
 Church with more carnal fins than Infants do? 
 The Kingdom would be never the more fpiritual nor 
 excellent, if all Infants were disfranchifed : Na- 
 ture teacheth all Kingdoms on earth to take them 
 for members, though but Infant-members. 
 
 SECT. CV. 
 
 R. B. Queft. 8. \TT7Hether any Jew at age 
 
 VV was a tn ember of the old 
 Church without fwfeffmg faith ( in the Articles 
 necejfary to falvation ) repentance and obedience ? 
 And wherein the fuppofed new call and frame 
 doth in this differ from the old ^ fave only that a 
 more full and exprefi revelation of Chrift , re qui- 
 reth a more full exprefi faith ? 
 
 Mr. T. I know not what profeffion each Jew did maker, 
 ©r was to make. 
 
 I 3 ##//« 
 
Reply. I would you had been as cautelous and 
 modeft throughout. It is evident, that they were 
 to profcfs confent to Gods Covenant , which thofc 
 that denied, Afa would put to death. 
 
 SECT. CVI. 
 
 R. B. '\7 r Ou may fee the words near the end of 
 1 your Letter that occafiun the [even 
 lafl Queftions, and towards the middle that occa- 
 foneth the firft. As for your motion . of my ful- 
 ly defer ibing the priy Hedges of Church-member s, 
 I fhall add no more at this time to what is aire a- 
 dy elfe where faid of it. 
 
 Reply. Here Mr. T. chides me for wronging 
 him by length ; and being afraid the Reader will 
 dofotoolmakehafte. 
 
 SECT. C VII, CVI JI. 
 
 R. B. A Nd now 1 have gone thus far with 
 JIX yoHy in an enquiry into the truth, I 
 entreat you be not too much offended witn me, if 
 I conclude with a few applicatory que ft ions to 
 your f elf. Queft. I. Is it not an undertaking at 
 ■palpably abfurd as mo ft ever any learned fober 
 Divine in the world was guilty of y to maintain 
 that [ Infants were vifiblc Church-members not 
 by any promife or precept , but by a tranftun% 
 fatly and that there was no law or ordinance de- 
 \erm\ning it jlwtld be fo ? but only a fatl of God> 
 
 which 
 

 d5i) 
 
 ythich is a tranfeunt thing not repealable ? ] 
 But either by this fali you mean Legislation 
 and Covenant-making , or not : if yon do , what 
 a [tying is it that Infants were made Church* 
 members not by Covenant , but by a Covenant - 
 makings not by a Law , but by a Law-making .? 
 If not , either you mujl fay, that God makes du- 
 ty without any law , and gives right to the bene- 
 fit without any promife, or five 'riant -grant as the 
 caufe ■ or elfe^ that it ps no benefit to have right 
 to Church -member finp^ and no duty to e?iter into 
 that relation, and to accept of that benefit, andto 
 be devoted to God, Which ever of thefe ways 
 you chufe ( and one you mufl chufe , or change 
 your opinion) hath the world heard of any more 
 unreasonable and ridiculon* ? or elfe more unbe- 
 feeming a Divine y from a learned fober man of 
 that prof ejfion? Pardon the high charge: Let the 
 indifferent jndge. 
 
 Reply, To this I find no anfiyer worth the re- 
 citing. 
 
 SECT. C IX. 
 
 R. B. Queft. 2. T5 it not a great dif grace to ^ 
 X your followers ', that they will 
 be led fo far into fuch ways of Schifm y and be /<? 
 confident that they are righter and wifer than 
 others, and that by fuch unreafonable arguing* 
 and Jhifts as thefe , which one would thinly any 
 man jhoiild laugh at that knows what a Jjaw , 
 Promift, or Covenant is ? And do yen not jrove, 
 
 L 4 
 
that it is not becaufe of the evidence of truth , bat 
 by your nteer inter eft or confident words , thefe 
 people are changed and held to your opinion ? Do 
 they know what £ a tranfunt fall vs , that with- 
 out haw or Covenant makes Church* members ? ~\ 
 I fay i do they know this? which no man that 
 ever breathed till now , nor ever man will know 
 again f And do you not proclaim them men of 
 diftempered consciences , that dare go on in fuch 
 a Schifm , on the encouragement of fuch fancies 
 as were hatcht fo long after their perverfion, and 
 never waking man 1 think^did before fo folemnly 
 maintain . ? J 
 
 Reply. I have nothing to fay here, but Mr. I*, 
 feems very angry at this. 
 
 SECT. CX. 
 
 R. B, Queft. 3. T5 it not a defperate nnderta- 
 Jl king j and dare you adven . 
 ture on it^ to juftifie all the world before Chrifts 
 incarnation except the Jews , from the guilt of 
 not dedicating their children to God^ to take him 
 to be their God, and themfelvesto be his people? 
 Ifya, to juftifie all Jews again ft this charge , that 
 Jnould negleU or refufe to engage their children to 
 (fod in Covenant as members of his Church ? 
 And l doth not he that faith there is no law , fay 
 there is no tranfgreffion ? 
 
 Mr. r. He doth — Let him tremble at his defperate 
 undertaking to uphold his Lie of Infant Church-mem- 
 berfhip and Eaptifm by fuch Lies as thefe; and fear the 
 are of Liers, Re- 
 
eply. Charge not your felf , and I will not : 
 propofe it to your confederation , whether the 
 perfons that folemnly take God for their God 
 according to Gods Covenant, and are by his vi- 
 fible word of' Covenant, taken by God for his 
 people, be not vifible members of the Church uni- 
 versal ? And whether he that faith, There is no 
 Law of God binding to do thus for his children 
 do not infer that they fin not by not doing it > 
 
 S E C T. C X I. 
 
 R. B. Queft.4.Tnv^? you yet.jufiife alfo at 
 JL/ the Bar cf God, all the 
 world fmce Qirifts incarnation from the guilt of 
 fin , in not dedicating their children to Chrifi , 
 and entring them into his Covenant as members of 
 his Church ? Dare you maintain that all the world 
 is finlefs in this rejpetl , ? 
 
 Mr. T. I dare juftifie the Non-baptizing them 
 
 Reply. Here you makeamodeft flop. It feem- 
 eth you dare not juftifie men for not folemnly 
 dedicating them in Covenant to God, and vifi- 
 bly engaging them to Chrift as members vifible of 
 his Church, 
 
 SECT. 
 
fi54j) 
 
 SECT. CXII. 
 
 R. B. Queft. 5, T'XAve yon well confidered of 
 Jti the fruit of your ways ap~ 
 parent in England and Ireland at this day * Or 
 have yon not feen enough to make you fufpctt and 
 fear whether i?jdeed Cod own your way or not ? 
 Jind is it any wonder if foflerity be left in con- 
 troverfie about the Hiftory of former times, when 
 you can venture , even in thefe times when the 
 ■perfons are living in our company, to tell me thap 
 \^you thinly I am misinformed that they are Ana- 
 baftifis , and you think^that there are very few 
 of them that were ever baptized, ] when of many 
 that we know , and multitudes that we hear of , 
 there are fo few that were not before againfl In- 
 fant JBaptifm, and the Seekers firfi fuch, and 
 when the Quakers themfelves commonly cry down 
 Infant Baptifm ; and it is one of the queftions 
 that they fend to me, and others to anfwer, [_ how 
 we can prove it by exprefs Scripture without con- 
 fequences , or elfe confefs our felves falfe Pro- 
 phets. 
 
 Reply. The anfwer to this I leave to the Rea- 
 ders judgement. 
 
 SECT. 
 
f*55') 
 
 SECT. CXIII. 
 
 Pv, B. Queft. 6. T TAve you felt the guilt which 
 XjL we too ftrongly fear you 
 have incurred , of the perverting of Jo many fouls y 
 opening them fuch a gap to fchifm , contempt of 
 the <sjfrfinifiry, and Apoftafie, deftroying a hopeful 
 reformation that coft fo dear : or weakning our 
 hands in the work,, and filling the adverfaries 
 mouths with fccm y enticing the Jefuites and Fri- 
 ars to feem your profelytts , and lift t hem fe Ives 
 among you, as the hopeful party to tefriendtheir 
 caufe, hardning thou funds both of the Papifts and 
 profane y and fetling them again on their dregs , 
 when many once began to jhake ! O what aChurch 
 might we have had, and were likely to have had ? 
 Had it not been for the Separatifts and you ? 
 And what a lamentable confufion are we now 
 brought into by thefe ? Have thtfe things toucht 
 your heart f 
 
 Reply. Mr. T*. here is angry, and I wonder 
 not^ one (tone he fnatcheth up from Dodr. Owens 
 Appendix , and one from the Scotch Church , 
 and Elders, and the Church at Kcderminfter, and 
 the Worcefterjhire AfTociation , which few before 
 him I think have faid much againft. 
 
 SECT. 
 
U5«) 
 
 SECT. CXIV. 
 
 R. B. Queft. 7. TS £ 4 tranfeunt faU , making 
 JL Infants Church -members with- 
 cut Law, Vromife, or Covenant^ a fujpcient me- 
 dium f<? encourage yon to venture on ail thefe hor- 
 rid things , and run fuch hazards us you have 
 done f Or is it pojfible that an humble fober man, 
 and a tender conscience , durfi make all this ha- 
 vock^ y and fland out in it fo many years confi- 
 derately as you have done, and this upon fuch a 
 palpably unreasonable pretence ? When you jhould 
 ■prove to us the revocation of Infants Church- 
 memberjhip , to tell us that they had it only by a 
 tranfeunt fall ? Is this a fafe ground to build fa 
 great a weight on f Sir, my confcience witnejfcth, 
 that it is not your reproach that is the end of 
 (peaking thtfe unpleafmg words to you , but fome 
 compajfwn on you ( do not [corn it ) and more on 
 your poor followers ; and mofi on th; Church of 
 God which you have fo much injured and troubled* 
 Reply. Here Mr. T. is angry again, which is the 
 fumm. 
 
 SECT.CXV. 
 
 R* B. Queil. 8. f^\An ym prove that ever there 
 V^ was one age , or Church 
 {particular ) on earth fmcc Adam till about 200 
 years ago^ that the Anabaptifis rofe, wherein In- 
 fants 
 
057.) 
 
 fonts were not de facto taken for members of the 
 Church f If you can do it: Let m hear your p-oof 
 Mr.T. I can ; and for proof look back to Scft. $0, 51. 
 and befides Cot?Jlantine Augustine? Na\. Hierom 
 
 Reply. I can find no fuch thing there : what if 
 the four men you name were baptized at age 
 ( the fpecial reafons are told you elfewhere. ) 
 Doth that prove that others were not baptized 
 in Infancy ? Your 52 Sed. I think to examine in 
 the end. 
 
 SECT. CXVL 
 
 R. B. Queft. 9. f~>An yon bring us poof of any 
 V> one Infant of true (})urch- 
 member s> that was not rightfully a Church-member 
 himfelf from the creation tiU Chrifis days? or 
 from the creation till this day ? except the Ana- 
 baptifts,who reject the benefit ., whofe cafe (as If aid 
 before ) I will not pre fume to determine ? 
 
 Mr. T. I can, look back to Seel:. 50, $i, 52, 57. . 
 
 Reply. I have done, and I find no fuch proof. 
 
 SECT. CXVII. 
 
 R. B. Queft. 10. QEeing that Infant shave been 
 O de facTo Church-members 
 from the creation to this day ( as far as any re- 
 cords can lead us ) is it likely that the Lord , 
 and head and a 11 -f efficient Governeur of his 
 Charchp would have permitted his Church till now 
 
 !9 
 
to be attually made up of fttch fubje&s, as in regard 
 of age be difallowed ? And juffer his Church to be 
 Wrong framed till now ? Or is it a reasonable y 
 mode ft and lawful undertaking , to go about now 
 in the end of the world to -make Cjod a new fra- 
 med Church, as to the age of the fubjecls ? And 
 is it not more mode ft and fafe, to live quietly in 
 a Church of that frame as all the Saints in Hea- 
 ven lived in , till the other day, as a few Ana- 
 haptifts with vile and ftnfUt means , and mifera- 
 blefucceft, did attempt an alteration ? 
 . Mr. T. here denieth the fuppofitions : I leave 
 the Reader to judge how truly. 
 
 SECT. C X V 1 1 1, C X I X. 
 
 R. B. CJ I R, pardon the weaknef, and bear with 
 O the plainneft and freenefs of Tour 
 faithful Brother (though not as is meet ) Rich. 
 Baxter. May 14. 1655. 
 
 Sir, if you have any thing of moment to fay, 
 in reply to thefe, which you have not yet in your 
 Wtitings brought forth , / jhall be willing to wn- 
 fider of it : But if you have not , / pray you tell 
 me fo in two words , and [pare the reft of your 
 pains ( as for me ) and trouble me no more with 
 matters of this nature. For truly I have no fuf- 
 ftcient vacancy from greater workj. Tea, I am 
 conftrained to forbear much greater than thefe. 
 R. B. After this he tells me , that whereas I 
 preached a Sermon at Bewdley , in which I re- 
 futed by mmy arguments Infants viftble Church- 
 
 memberjhip, 
 
wewberflrip) 1 mufl be either mutable or hypderiii- 
 cal, if I deny [neb a Law and Ordinance which 1 
 tgok^ on me then to refute , and de fires a Copy of 
 that Sermon , that he may jhexv the fad miftakei 
 and vanity of thofe my arguments. 
 
 Reply. Reader, to Mr. TVs anger at thefe ten 
 Queftions I mufi: fay, i.That the dolefulnefs of 
 the Churches cafe conftrained mi in grief of 
 heart to deal plainly with him. 
 
 ;2; But it Was in a private letter , extorted by 
 his importunity , and publifhed to the world by 
 himfelf and not by me -, who confefs that this 
 plainnefswas too great for me to have ufed to him 
 publickly : But fecret admonition difparageth him 
 not to others. It hath new been by himfelf 
 about nineteen years divulged to the world, and 
 I did not fo much as trouble his patience by a" 
 word of anfwer, and little thought ever to do it : 
 But Major Danvers his loud invitation hath drawn 
 me to give them this Farewell. 
 
 TH E Reader mud here take notice that I am 
 not here called to prove Infants » Church- 
 memberdip out of the New Teftament, but to 
 fhew out of the Old that they were vifible Church- 
 members before by a Grant or Covenant , which 
 Chrift hath not repealed. The reft ( out of the 
 New-Teftament ) I have done long ago in my 
 Treatife of Infant Church-memberfhip and Ba- 
 ptifm, which Mr. T. is fo much difpleafed at. 
 And indeed I think that the proofs are plain, though 
 many objsftions may be difficult to be anfwered, 
 
 efpe daily 
 
efpecially by thofe who have not throughly corf- 
 fidered the cafe. When I (a together Chrifts 
 own Infant memberfhip, and his kind reception I 
 of Infants, a^nd his chiding thofe that would have 
 kept them off, and his offers of taking in all the 
 Jewifli Nation into his Church , and that they 
 were broken off by unbelief, and consequently the 
 feed of Believers not broken off from the Church 
 univerfal , and that whole houfholds are oft faid 
 to be baptized, and that Paul pronounceth Belie- 
 vers children holy , and that Chrift exprefly , 
 sJWatth. 28. commandeth his Minifters as much 
 as in them iiethto Difciple all Nations baptizing, 
 and it's prophefied that the Kingdoms of the 
 world fhall be made the Kingdoms of Chrift, and 
 there is no Nation or Kingdom on earth that In- 
 fants are not members of- 5 All this and much 
 more feemeth to me a plain revelation of Gods 
 will, that as he never had a Church which ex- 
 cluded Infants , fo he doth not now exclude them. 
 Andit is expreily faid of the Jews that they were 
 z\\ baptized unto Mofes in the cloud and in thefea y 
 1 Cor. 10. 2. where doubtlefs the Apoftle in the 
 name hatl refped to our being baptized into 
 Chrift , of which theirs was a typical Baptifm ^ 
 And it is not faid in vain that they were [_ all ba* 
 ptized'] including their Infants, but as part of the 
 Analogie, as if he had faid [_ os4s we now are all 
 baptised into Chrift. J 
 
 Thefe things feem to me a certain notificati- 
 on of Gods will herein • which in the forefaid 
 former Treatife I have tullier opened and im- 
 proved. And thould I ftand to anfwer all the 
 
 words 
 
(161} 
 
 words that Mr. Tombes hath faid againft it , i 
 fliould needlcfly tire the Reader and my Self, and 
 lofe that time which I cannot fpare. 
 
 A Confutation of Mr. Tombes'* Rtafons Seel. 520 
 by which he prctendeth to prove that Infants 
 were not reckoned to the vifible Church-Ch'ri- 
 fiian in the Primitive times, nor are now. 
 
 t.T. 1. T <^4rgue thus : If no Infants were 
 I part of the vifible Church-Qjrifti- 
 4n in the Primitive times, then whatever OrdC 
 nance there were of their vifible membership be- 
 fore, mufi needs be repealed : But the antecedent 
 is true, ergo, the confequent - — The Antece- 
 dent I prove thus. If in all the days of Chrift 
 on earth, and the Apo files, no Infant was a pari 
 or member of the vifible Qourch Chrifiian , then 
 not in the primitive times : Bat, &c. £rgo, &c« 
 
 The Mmor proved, 1 . All vifible members 
 
 cf the Church-Chri fiian were to be baptised: But 
 xo Infants were to be baptised: Therefore no In- 
 fants were vifible members of the Chrifiian 
 Church. 
 
 Anfw. 1. To the Major ; they were to be ba- 
 ptifed after Chrifts baptifm was inftituted, Mat. 
 28. 19. but not before, when yet the Chriijian 
 Church was exifterit in Chrifl and his Difciples : 
 Therefore Chrifl: was not baptized in his Infancie. 
 
 2. To the Minor, If his bare affirmation would 
 prove that Infants wece not to be baptized, wha& 
 need he write his books ? 
 
 M Mr>T* 
 
c^/r.T. 2* They were not vifible members of 
 the Church-Chnftian who were not of the body of 
 forift: But no Infant was of the <uij?ble body of 
 Chrtft, proved from i Cor. 12.1$. AH that were 
 of the body of Chrifl were made to drink^into one 
 (pint in the Cup of the Lords Supper : But no In* 
 fant was made to drink^into one (pirit - 5 for none 
 of them did drink that Cup, &c. 
 
 oAnfw. Denying the Minor, I anfvver to the 
 proof : 1. To the Major ; 1. Mr. T. elfcwhere 
 pleadeth that 1 Cor. 12. fpeaketh of the Church- 
 invitible only , and yet now he maketh it to be 
 the viiible. 2 [All J isofc put for the Generali- 
 ty and not a proper univerfality : And it feemeth 
 bard to prove that every vifible member hath the 
 jpirit, which is exprefly there faid of all the mem- 
 bers, though whether Baptifm and the Lords Sup- 
 per be included, Mr.'T. elfewhere maketh difpu- 
 table. But I grant that it is fpoken of the Church 
 as viiible , and that all the members ordinarily 
 having Spin tits Savramentum^ are in judgement 
 of charity faid to have the Spirit. 3. But if Sa- 
 craments be indeed here included as he afTert- 
 eth, then Baptifm is fir ft included : and fo if we 
 prove Infants Church-members , this Text will 
 prove them to be baptizable, according to Mr. T. 
 Remember that. 4. But that Mr. TVsexpofition 
 is not true, that every member drinketh of the Cup 
 in the Lords Supper, he may be turned about to 
 confefs himfelf : For, 1. Doubt lefs he things that 
 this Chapter fpeaketh of the Church not only as 
 vifible ( if at all ) but as invilible alfo • and he 
 oft faith that many real members of Chrifts bo- 
 
 dv 
 
0*3) 
 dy have not the Sacrament. 2. By this his ex- 
 pofition, his adult Baptizing fhould not make or 
 prove any to be vifible Church-members till they 
 drink of the Cup ; though it were a year or ma- 
 ny years. 3. And no one that liveth without 
 the Lords Supper through fcruples ( about Church- 
 orders, or their own fitnefs, wrlich are the cafes 
 of multitudes ) fhould be vifible members : Nor 
 thofe that live where they cannot have the Sacra- 
 ment : Nor any Lay-man in all the Popifl* Church, 
 where the Cup is denied the Laity* 
 
 2, To the Minor, Infants might be baptized in- 
 to one fpirit by the initiating Sacrament, in order 
 to the reft to be parraked of in due time : And 
 as not every £hnrch-fpifpenfion, fo Natttral-fujpen- 
 fion of further priviledges, nullifieth not mem- 
 berfhip. 
 
 cJffr.T. 2. From 1 Cor. 10. 17. All that were 
 one body and one bread did partake of that one 
 %read which was broken : 'Bfit no Infant did far-' 
 j take 
 
 Anfw. 1. Chrifl and his Difciples did not par- 
 take of it before the inftitution : 2. No baptized 
 perfons partake of it in the interfpace between the 
 two Sacraments : which wiih fome is a long time : 
 3. A baptized perfon may die before he drink- 
 eth that Cup ; or may live where it is not law- 
 fully to be had. 4. Church-members may be 
 fufpended from the Lords Table. Therefore *the 
 text fpeaketh not of every member, but of the 
 ordinary communion of capable perfons. 
 
 <zJMr. T. Eph.4. 5. The whole Church is one 
 bodie, and hath one Lord, and one faith I But n* 
 Infant hath wt faith ~] Ma Anfw* 
 
Anfw. i. It is fpoken of the generality of the 
 nobleft and capable members , denominating the 
 Church : The Apoftle faith not that every mem- j 
 ber hath all thefe, but £ There is one Lord, one 
 faith j &c. ~} Chrift had not one Lord ( being 
 Lord himfelf as here underflood ) and yet 
 was a member : Chrift in the womb cannot be 
 proved to have a&ually h d that one faith j and 
 he vyas long the chief member before he was ba- 
 ptized : And whether ever the twelve Apoflles 
 were, is uncertain. 
 
 2. The Text feemeth chiefly to fpeak of the 
 Dofflrine of faith , called objective faith ^ one 
 Creed: And this the Church might have, and yet 
 not each member actually believe. For, 3* The 
 Parent in faith devoting himfelf and his Infant to 
 God , his Faith and Confent is reputatively the 
 Childs , who is ufed as a member of the Pa- 
 rent. 
 
 <iJMr. T. 3. They were no members of the vi+\ 
 fble Church , who were left out of the number of \ 
 the whole Church, all the Believers, the multi- j 
 tude of the Dtfcifles , &c But Infants are left 
 mt of the number in all places in the New Tefta- 
 menty Ergo : 
 
 Anfw. 1. Many texts fpeak of all that were 
 ■prefent only • and many fpeak only of fuch as 
 the prefent matter did concern : And it is moil 
 ufual to denominate All or the Body from the No- 
 blefl and Great eft part. If you were to defcribe 
 a Kingdom, would you not fay that it is a Civil 
 Society of rational creatures (*or men ) confent- 
 ing to the mutual Relations of King and Subjects 
 
 and 
 
/!*') 
 
 >nd the duties of each for the common welfare ? 
 fou would fo define k as that Reafon, fconfent 
 md Intention fhould be in the definition. Infants 
 lave none of thefe in ad:, and yet who doubteth 
 mt Infants are members of the Kingdom ( of eve- 
 ry Kingdom under Heaven that I have read of? ) So 
 you know that we take Infants to be members of 
 :ur Churches new : And yet is it not ufu- 
 al with us to fay ihar all the Church met to hear, 
 -,r to do this or that ? When yet the Infants and 
 nany others might be abfent. 
 
 The Texts Mr. T. alledgeth are, Ads i. 15. 
 The number of the names together were about 
 120. 
 
 Anfw. Though I take not the Church then to 
 be fo numerous as fome do, yet reafon is reafon : 
 Can we think that when Chrift was feen after his 
 rcfurreltion of more than 500 Brethren at once y 
 that only 120 of them were Chrifiians ? Andean 
 ive think that Nicodemm and Jojepti of Arima- 
 \thea and many more, were not timerous faint- 
 hearted Chrifiians ? It's like that the text mean- 
 eth that this 120 was the number of thofe bold 
 confirmed Chrifiians who fo quickly after Ghrifts 
 death appeared in open profellion and conjundion 
 with the Apoftles, and had opportunity to affem- 
 | tic at that time and place. 
 
 The next is Ad. 2. 1. They were all with one 
 accord in one place. 
 
 Anfw. This neeefcth no other anfwer than as 
 
 before. The other texts, Aft. 2. 41, 44. & 4. 4, 
 
 23,24. & 5.11,13, 14. &6. 1,2,7. & 8. 1. 
 
 '& ij. 22. i Cor. 14.23. need no other anfwer: 
 
 M 3 His 
 
His cxpofition would fometimes exclude women , 
 and fometimes many of the men ; Doih he believe 
 no man or woman was a member of the Church, 
 Aft. 15.22. who did not fend men of their own 
 company ? Nor any man or woman a member of 
 the Church at Jerufalem, that did not being feat- 
 tered go about Preaching, Aft. 8. i, &c. 1 Cor, 
 14. it is faid, Ton may all fro f \ht fie , and yet wo- 
 men are forbidden. 
 
 Mr. T« 4. They were no fart of the Chriftian 
 Church vi fib le to whom the things afcribed to the 
 •whole Church did not agree : But the things afcri- 
 bed to the whole Chrijiian Church vifible did not 
 agree to Infants ; Ergo ■ 
 
 Anfw. This is fully anfwered already. It is 
 moft-ufual to afcribe that to a Church or other 
 Society which is done only by the molt confide- 
 rable part. As I faid before, when rational Con- 
 fent, Contrad, Intention, are afcribed to a King- 
 dom -, which is conftituted by the confent of King 
 and Subje&s : an'd yet Infants are members who 
 confent notj fave by their Parents. The Church 
 meeteth to choofe a Paftor, when yet the women 
 meet not : The Church admoniflieth a faulty 
 member, when every w T oman doth not admonifh 
 him : Our Churches meet all to hear, when Chil- 
 dren meet not, whom we take for members: 
 Thefe are not fatisfa&ory allegations, being con- 
 trary to common ufe of words , and to many 
 texts of Scripture. 
 
 *JMr. T. The Minor is f roved , Matth. 16. 
 38. On this Rcc\will 1 faildmy ftttrch, viz. by 
 T reaching* 
 
 A" fie* 
 
\1 Anfw. When Preaching converted the Pa- 
 rents, they devoted themfeives to God y and all 
 that were in their truft and power . and that 
 Preaching. brought in by confluence the Infants 
 that did not hear. I prove i: , i. Chrift com- 
 ;:;. mandeth the difcipiing of Nations and baptizing 
 V, them (that is, as much as in the Preacher iieth : ) 
 But Infants are part of thofe Nations :. There- 
 fore he cornmandeth the difcipiing and baptizing 
 of Infants, (as much as in the Preacher lay, ) 
 which could be done but by the fuccefsof preaclv 
 ing on the Parents. 2. The Kingdoms of the world 
 are made the Kingdoms of the Lord and of his 
 Chrift: But Infants are members of all thofe 
 Kingdoms : But this is done at large elfe- 
 where. 
 
 zJMr. T. 1 Cor. 1.2. called to be Saints • Aft. 
 2.41,47. & 5. 14* They that were added to the 
 Church did hear and believe , &c. 
 
 Anfw. I will not weary the Reader with re- 
 peating the fame enfwers to the like things. 
 
 Mr. T. 5. They who are not reckoned Chrifts 
 Difciples were nor vifible Church-members : But 
 Infants are no where reckoned at Chrifls Difci- 
 ples : ergo. 
 
 Anfw. i« What is faid before to the other 
 Texts anfwereth all thefe. The A&ions of adult 
 Difciples only were in mention. 2. Infants are 
 called Difciples, Acts 15. as I have elfewfjere 
 proved, on .whofe neck the yoak of Circumcifi- 
 on was laid • And in Matth. 28. 19. when Na- 
 tions are to be difcipled. 3. Mr. T. himfelf confek 
 feth that Chrift was habitually and by deftgnation a 
 
 M 4 ' ?TQ~ 
 
( t : 8 ) 
 
 Prophet in Infancy , rf/zj that fo :r.ay Infants bs 
 pies. 
 
 . T. 6. //" z;z ffo diftribution of the man- 
 \?ers of the Church then ^ Infants are not corner e- 
 then Infants were not vifiblc Chitrih- 
 nkflibcrs - - But, &c. 
 
 ylfw. i. Here he inftanceth in i. The fex, 
 Men andWom.n, 2. Jews and Gentiles , 5. Cir~ 
 cumciiion and uncircumcifion, mentioned, but not 
 Infants. But if Infants be of neither fex, male 
 nor female, nor of jews or Gentiles, nor circum- 
 cifion nor uncircumcifion, I plead not for them. 
 
 2. If thoie Texts cited by you mention not In- 
 fants others do, as I have elfewhere proved: 
 Our children are called Holy, and a blefTed feed, 
 and received by Chriit, and of fuch is the King- 
 dom of Gtd, crc. And you confefs it of Chrift 
 hlnifelf lti his Infancie, and yen now forget it, 
 or contradict your felf. 
 
 Jidr. T. 2. / argue from the common received 
 rcfmtions of the vi fib I e Churchy A&S 19. of the 
 Church of England : A congregation of faithful 
 
 men dec. 
 
 Afw. And fo Kingdoms and all Societies that 
 Infants are members of, are accordingly'defmed, 
 as is albrefaid. You cannot deny it. And was 
 ' not the Church before Chrifts incarnation a focie- 
 ty of faithful men , when yet you' confefs that 
 Infants were vifible parts of is ? 
 
 Air. T. 3. / argue , They are no vifible members 
 of the Chyifiian Church, to whom no -note where* 
 by a vtfible Chriftian Church or Church-member- 
 pip u difcernadc^ do\h agree ; j^'&c. ergo : 
 
(XC9) 
 
 Aif\\\ When a man think* only what to fay 
 for his caufe, and never thinks what can he faid 
 againfl it, his judgement, is of little value, i. All 
 that agrcetlj to Infants which was requifite to a 
 vifible Infant member before Chrifis coming ^ 
 And do you not confefs that they were members 
 then among the Jews? 2. Did nothing in Chrift 
 himfelf in Infancy agree with vifible mtmberfhip > 
 Yes ; the open Revelations of Gcd as to a vifible 
 perfon : Yo* confefs before as much as I need. 
 3. The elTentiating qualification of a- Church- 
 member, is Covctiant'Coiftnty fuch as God ac- 
 cording to the fenfe of his offered Covenant will 
 accept as fuch: But Infants have this Covenant- 
 confent, feeing they confent by their Parents who 
 are entrufted to do it for them , as if they were 
 parts of themfelves : As the Jews Infants did. 
 Mutual confent of God and themfelves by their Pa- 
 rents is it that makeththem members. I have oft 
 wondered to read in orthodox Divines, that the- 
 Word purely preached, Sacraments andDifcipline', 
 are the marks of the true Church. No doubt 
 but Hcart-confent to the Baptifmal Covenant of 
 Grace makeih a fincere member of the true Church 
 ( which the Infant doth by the Parent , ) and pro- 
 feffed confent to the fame Covenant maketh a vi- 
 fible member (which regularly muft be by Ba- 
 ptifm for inveftiture.) Bur a true Church may long 
 by perfecution be hindred from pubhek afTem- 
 blies , Preaching , Sacraments and Difcipline ; 
 And may have much corruption in all thefe. 
 
 Mr* T. maketh this mutual confent as two 
 difimli pretended Notes , denying either of them 
 to be true marhj* Anfxw 
 
(170) 
 
 jinfw. Neither the Princes confent alone, nor 
 the Subjects alone niaketh a Common- weafth : Nei- 
 ther the Husbands confent alone , or the Wives 
 maketh a marriage » but both conjunct : So here : 
 Mutual confent maketh a Church-member : But 
 fo , that -Gods Confent is the Donative efficient 
 caufe , and rr.ans confent is the receptive caufe , 
 which is conditio fine qua non. They that will 
 not impartially think, of plain cafes cannot under- 
 ftand them. Your unthankful denying that God 
 hath made any fuch Promife, Covenant or Con- 
 fent , is elfcwhere confuted : And if I (hall fay 
 with Davenant and the Synod of Don that this 
 Covenant being the fame that is made with Pa- 
 rents themfelves , giveth the Children the fame 
 Right to Pardon and Life eternal according to 
 their capacity, fo that faithful Parents Jljculd not 
 doubt of the Salvation of their Children dying in 
 Infancy ( ut Synod. Don. Art. I.e. 17. ) I could 
 better with them bear the confequence ( of the 
 Jofs of Gratia Infantilis in fome at age ) than 
 the confequents of your turning them all out of 
 the vifible Church. The former I know noChri- 
 ftian that ever oppofed for many and many hun- 
 dred years after Chrift • and the latter the uni- 
 verfal Church as long oppofed : And yet I will 
 not fubferibe that [ It is certain by the word of 
 God that baptized Infants dying before aQual fin y 
 are certainly favedf\ without excepting the In- 
 fants of Heathens or Infidels , wrongfully bapti- 
 zed. 
 
 Mr. T. 4. / argue i They who have not the 
 form con flit uting and denominating a vifible 
 
 Qourch^ 
 
Church-member^ are not vifible Church-members* 
 But, Ergo. Profejfion of faith is the form conftitu- 
 ' ting, &C. 
 
 zAnfw. i. Covenant Confent is the form con- 
 stituting f* /wf? Rccipientis, and this they have 
 reputatively in their Parents , whofe will is as 
 theirs. 
 
 2. The Jews Infants had the form conflitu- 
 ting a vifible member as youconfefs. And that 
 was not circurncifion • For the uncircumcifed fe- 
 rrules 5 and males too in the wildernefs were 
 vifible members : Nor was it to be born of Jews , 
 For apoftate Jews forfeited it, and Profelytes of 
 other Nations obtained it : But it was [by confent 
 to Gods Covenant. 
 
 3. And Chrift was a vifible member by Divine 
 Revelation. His argnings would make againft 
 Chrifts Righteoufnefc Imputed to believers, and 
 Adams or the Parents fins imputed to them. 
 
 Mr. T. 5. If Infants be vifible Ckrifiian 
 Church-members jhen there may be /vifible Church- 
 Chrifiian which eonfifis' only of Infants of belie- 
 ■ vers — But this is bfinrd : Ergo. 
 
 An fin. Such quibbles feem fomething when 
 the Will giveth them their force. 1. Infants, ate 
 members of all Kingdoms under Heaven : And 
 yet there neither is nor can be a Kingdom of In- 
 fants only. 2. Members are Effential or Inte- 
 gral. Bccaufe the exercife of the faculties of the 
 Pars Imperans and Pars fubdita is the intended 
 means to the Common Good, which is the End 
 of Government, therefore there can be no Go- 
 verned Society , Kingdom or other proper Poli- 
 cy 
 
cy of which men that' have the ufe of Reafon are 
 not members : that there be fome fucfr to be 
 the Adive part is EfTential to the SocieLy s But 
 yet Infants that are yet but virtually fuch , are 
 Integral members, 
 
 Mr. T. 6. / argue : If Infants he vifible 
 Church-members , there is fome Caufe of it, : But 
 there is no Caufe : £rgo 
 
 AnfvQ, The . Caufe efficient is Gods Revealed 
 Donation and Covenant Confent : The Caufe Re- 
 ceptive or the Condition of 'Reception, is That 
 this be the Child of a Confenting believer, 
 
 Mr. T. To thps i. Mr. T. denycth any fuch 
 Covenant of grace to the faithful and their feed 
 ( which is foort faid. ) 
 
 2. He faith the Conditional Covenant promifcth 
 Jufiifcation , Salvation , on Condition of faith , 
 and not vifible Qhurch-membcrftrip^ and fo belongs 
 to all as Mr. B. &c, 
 
 Anfw, i. It giveth both Juftification and vi- 
 fible memberfhip - 5 that is , Right to both and 
 many other Covenant benefits. 2. It belongeth 
 Conditionally to all , and Conditionally gives 
 union with Chrifl and his Church, and Pardon and 
 life to all : But atlnally to none , till the condi- 
 tion be performed •, which is a believing Tarents 
 confent , and regularly his BapUfmal dedica- 
 tion. ( 
 
 Mr. T. If there t were a Covenant to the faith - 
 ful and their fee d^ to be their God y yet this would 
 not prove their Infants Chrifiian vifible Church- 
 member flip : As he is the God of Abraham, of 
 Infants dying inthe wombs of believers at the hour 
 of death ** 1 Anfw* 
 
r i73 > 
 
 , -Arifw. It's true, if they be not the Children 
 *f vifible believers - y becaufe they are not vifibly 
 capable fubjefts. But it being fuch that we fpeak 
 of, your three inftances are abufive. i. Abra* 
 ham is a vifible Church -memW of the Church 
 Triumphant where he is. I will not believe you 
 if you deny it. 2. Infants of vifible. Chriftians 
 dying in the womb , are in that degree vifible 
 Church-members as they are vifible perfons : that 
 is, It is a known thing that they are the children 
 of God according to their capacity. 3. One vi- 
 sibly believing at the hour of death is a vifible 
 Church-member : One not vifibly believing be- 
 longeth not to our cafe. 
 
 Mr. T. If all the fe which Mr. B. makes the 
 caufe or condition, may be in acl, and the ejfeB 
 not be, then the caufe which Mr. B. afftgneth is 
 not j Efficient. But &c. For they may all be be* 
 fore the child is torn. 
 
 Anfvp. A meer quibble. 1. Before he is born 
 I tell you as far as he is vifibly the child of a 
 vifible Chriftian , fo far h«^ is a vifible unborn 
 member : But as to that degree of vifible mem- 
 berfhip which is proper ta born baptizable In- 
 fants , two caufes are wanting to the unborn : 
 i. Gods confent or donation : For though the 
 Promife as a donative Inflrument was exigent a 
 thoufand years before, it effe&eth not the gift 
 till the fubjeft be Receptive or .capable :*God 
 may promife a thoufand years before in diem ox 
 fib conditione , which fignifyeth his confent that 
 fo and then it fhall be due , and not otherwife or 
 before. Thefe eafie things fhould not be thus 
 
 winked 
 
(174) 
 Winked ar. 2. The Parents confent is wanting • 
 For though the Parent dedicate the child in the 
 womb to God by promife, yet he doth not de- 
 liver him up in the baptifmal Covenant as a via- 
 ble perfon till he is born. 
 
 Mr. T. reciting my anfwer clfewhere faith 
 £ It defervetb a [mile : For I mak* Cbirift by his 
 Law. or Covenant -grant the only caufe efficient J 
 The reft of his words are 1 . To tell us that J uni- 
 fication Q"C. hath a further efficient after the Co- 
 venant ; which caufctb Juftifcability^ but not altu- 
 al Juftificntion without mans faith. 2. That I 
 err in taking vifble member flip to be a Right, and 
 moral effect. 
 
 Anfw. I take no: that for the picture of the 
 wifeft man, whom the Painter drawerh laughing 
 or fmiling. And I am now confirmed in that 
 fancy. 1. A Teftament or Dt^d of Gift in di- 
 em which faith At feven year send that landfliallbe 
 yours^mzy be the only efficient Inftrumen:, long be- 
 fore exiftent, and yet give ycu no right till the 
 time . and then give it: Eecaufe it effe&eth but 
 by fignification of the Doners will. Muft the 
 Chriflendom of Kingdoms be impetuoufly que- 
 ftioned by men that know not fuch rudiments as 
 theie ? 2. That Juftification which is given us ar 
 our believing, which is [_ our Right to Immuni- 
 ty and Life ] is the Immediate effect of the Co- 
 venant Donation ; and mans faith i< no efficient 
 but a Recipient caufe of it ( As eve 1 thty confefa 
 that call it a Receiving Instrument : ) And vet 
 we have it not till we believe or confent. VJid 
 would have thought that fuch am n as yc had 
 
f'75) 
 taken ycur oven faith to be an efficient caufe of 
 your own at ion , and fo that you jufiifie 
 
 your fclf r And what if one give land to you and 
 your heirs ? It is none of theirs till they are in 
 tx'ing : And yet their birth is no efficient caufe, 
 but only the caufe cf the fubje&s receptive capa- 
 city. I am afhamedrhat you put me thus to cate- 
 chize you. 
 
 Mr. T. 5.. If vifible Church-memberJJjip be 
 antecedent to m? inter eft a perfon bath in the 
 Covenant^ then the Covenant is not the caufe of 
 tt. But&c. Ergo — - 
 
 Anfw Theword[Intereft]may fignifie thelnte.- 
 reft that fallen mankind hath in the Covenant as 
 conditional antecedent . to mans confent : And 
 thus I fuppofe neither you nor I here fpeak of 
 it. But if by my Interefc ycu mean, that I am 
 the perfon to whom the Covenant giveth a pre- 
 fent Right to its benefits, I anfwer, Some bene- 
 fits follow long after : but when I confent, then 
 V am. the perfon to whom the Covenant giveth a 
 prefent Right to union withChrifi, in the firft in- 
 ftant, and confequently with his Church or body 
 in the fecond : fo ihat here is no fuch thing as 
 your feigned memberfhip before Covenant in- 
 tereft, that is, before a Right to that Relation 
 by Gods donation. And as to your former 
 dream that this is not a Right and moral # effed: 
 but a yhyfical , it was your felf and not I that 
 fubje&ed you to the fhame of fuch an afTertion,, 
 which I will no more confute. 
 
 Mr. T. 6. If the Covenant &c. be the only 
 efficient , then Infants bought Orphans of Turks, 
 
 **. ♦ 
 
cm) 
 
 wholly at our difpofe , are no vifible member:^ 
 (fee. 
 
 Anfw. No friend of truth will run into the 
 dark with a controverfie, and argue a minm not is* 
 Many judicious Divines think that Gods Cove- 
 nant with Abrahams Infants born in his hcufe , 
 proveththat two things go to make up the capacity 
 of an Infant for baptifm : i. That he be his own 
 and at his dijpofe who ofFereth him to God. 2, 
 That he be offered or dedicated by a finfenting 
 Owner, Nov their reafon is becaufeif they be 
 our own, we have the difpofe of them for their 
 good, and our wills are theirs. But the cafe is 
 mofc clear abovjt thofe that by Generation are our 
 <?wv/,and darker about thofe that are by Adoption or 
 purchafe our own. Now here you do nothing but 
 deny the darker ( which you cannot difprove ) and 
 thence the plainer which we have fully proved. 
 
 Mr. T. 7* If the Covenant o- Law with the 
 .Parents aVvual faith without profejfion , wake not 
 the Parent a vifible Church '-member 7 neither d&th 
 it the child. But — Ergo. 
 
 Anjw. I grant both major and minor : He 
 that is not known to have faith , is not a vifible 
 adult member : And he that is not known to be 
 the ( juftly reputed ) child of a profefTed belie- 
 ver , is not an Infant Church-member. And 
 what's this to our controverfie ? Heart confent. 
 maketh a myftical or invifible Chriftlan and mem- 
 ber, and Ptofeffed belief ( that is, Believing 
 Confent ) maketh a vifible member of the pa- 
 rent , and is neceflary to the vifible memberfhip 
 of the child : If I may. call that Making them, 
 
 • ' which 
 
077) 
 which is but the Diffofition of the material Re- 
 ecftive constitutive caufe. It's pitty we fhould 
 have need to talk at this rate. 
 
 Mr. T. 8. If ferfons are vifible Church-mem- 
 bers and not by the Qyvenant of Grace, then it 
 is not true that Chrifi ly his Law or Covenant 
 is the file efficient of vifible Church-memberjhip. 
 The minor is f roved in Judas and hypocrites. 
 
 Anfw. i. They are not the file efficient ; Gods 
 Love and mercy alfo is efficient. 
 
 2. You profefs your felf that the name [~ Chri- 
 ftian and Church-member ] are equivocal as to 
 the fincere and the hypocrites : If they be not 
 the fame things, no wonder if they have not the 
 fame caufes. That Donation or Covenant may 
 be the fole neareft Inftrumental efficient of True 
 membership, and yet not of Equivocal. 
 
 3. God who is our Paternal Beneficient Ru- 
 ler doth give fome of his benefits by his Law or 
 Covenant absolutely and antecedently to mans 
 conditions , and fome confequently as Rewards : 
 And Gods Laws having hrft a Preceptive part, 
 as 4 well as a Donative or Premiant , a Right may 
 accrue in foro ecclefu to an hypocrite from that 
 precept : As e. g. God antecedently doth by his 
 Covenant give the world an Impunity as to the 
 punifhment of Drowning it ;. And fo by his com- 
 mon Law of Grace he giveth the world many 
 common mercies by a Redeemer , and perhaps 
 many by that you call a phyfical ad: , immedi- 
 ately. And by his Law he ( having given a con- 
 ditional pardon and life to all ) commandeth his 
 Minifters to offer it, and All men to Accept ic, 
 
 N and 
 
(178) 
 and his Minifters to judge by mens profefiion, and 
 to ufe profeflfed Accepters as real . becaufe we 
 cannot fee the heart. This being fo , when the 
 hypocrite profefleth his confent, the Law obligeth 
 the Mini fter and Church to receive it, by which 
 in faro ecclefu he hath aright to his Church Ma- 
 rion. And Chrift himfelf called Judas , and fent 
 him out to Preach , and his mandates were as 
 Laws. So that the Right that an hypocrite ha'h, 
 he hath by theLaw which obligeth theChurch to ufe 
 him as a true believer , upon his profeffing to be 
 fuch. None of this can be denyed. But Judas 
 was called immediately by Chrift himfelf • and 
 his [follow me ] was a precept which gave him 
 a Right to his Relation. 
 
 Mr. T. 9. If Infants are vipble members by 
 the Covenant on Condition that the Parents &c 
 then either the next Parents or in any generati- 
 on precedent &x. 
 
 Anfw. The next Parents that are Owners of 
 the child, and have the truft and power ofdif- 
 pofing of him or covenanting for him : And the 
 Reafon is, becaufe they have 1. Thox Propriety y 
 and 2. That truft and power. 
 
 Mr, T. 10. If an Infants vipble Church-mem- 
 "berjhif be by the Covenant on the Parents atlnal 
 believing , and not a bare profeffton> then it is a, 
 thing that cannot be known , &x. 
 
 Anfw. I pitty Readers that muftbe troubled 
 with fuch kind of talk. 1. The Right of the 
 child is upon [_ the Believing Parents dedication 
 of that child to God by confenting that he 
 fee in the mutual Covenant. ^ 
 
 2. Heart 
 
(*79) 
 
 2. Heart content known only to God givetfr 
 no Right coram ecclefia> known to men, but only 
 to fuch mercy as God who only knoweth it, giveth 
 without the Churches judgement. 
 
 3. Believing and profeliion qualiiie for Right 
 n the Judgement both of God and of the 
 Church. 
 
 4. Profeffion without confenting faith, quali- 
 leth for Right, in the Churches judgement accord- 
 ng to Gods Command, who bidcteth them fo judge 
 md do : Wrangle not againft plain truth. 
 
 Mr. T. 11. If other Chriftian priviledgesbe 
 lot conveyed by aCovenant upon the Parents faith , 
 vithont the perfons own ali and confent, then 
 teither this. But &c. Not to be a Believer , a 
 
 itfciple, a zJWinifter, a Son of God There is 
 
 he like reafonfor them as for this, 
 
 *s4nfw. Priviledges are 1. Proper to the adulr, 
 ' thofe concern not our cafe, as to be Mmifters) 
 >r common to them with Infants : 2. Priviled- 
 ;es confift either in Thyfical qualities or other 
 °hyfcal accidents ( and thefe are given by fhyfical 
 dcliotty and fuch is Knowledge, Beliefs Love , 
 lifts of utterance, health, &c.) Or in Right 
 \nd Moral Relation, ( Jw Dcbitnm, obligatio ) 
 rhefe are given by Mural means , that is by fig- 
 life at ion of the Donors will, by precept ( obit- 
 ling,,) promife or fignal Donation, which is the> 
 nftrument of conveyance by that fignification 
 
 As a Teftament, Deed of Gift, A& of pardon 
 nd oblivion, &c. are among men. ) Now do v u 
 hink that the rctfon of Phyfical Qtt.lities zn&Mo? 
 al Rights ^Relations and duties ; -s the lame ?. 
 
 N 2 2. As 
 
fiSoJ 
 
 2. As a Difciple , or believer, fignifieth one i 
 that is Relatively fuch jure Relatione, and as I' ' 
 a Son of God fignifieth an Adopted heir of heaven^ !| 
 loved of God as a reconciled Father in Chrifi J 
 fo Infants are fuch : You fay (after,) thai Chrifi vpas i 
 habitually and by defignation the Head and Prophet jJj 
 of the Qhurch in Infancy , and fo mihgt Infants H 
 be difciples : And will you now deny it? Again! 
 I will fay though it offend you, that there is no ! 
 trufling to that mans judgement that looketh all j] 
 ( or partially ) on one fide , and ftudieth fo ea- 
 garly what will ferve his. caufe, as that he can- | 
 not mind what may be (aid againft ir. See here 
 what two abhominations you thruft on your pit- 
 tiful followers ( which yet I know you hold not j 
 your felf , but the heat of your fpirit in defirei 
 of vi&ory draweth you to fay you mind not j 
 what) You conclude that none is [ A Son of 
 God ] without his own confent : And fo i . All i 
 Infants ase certainly fhut out of Heaven : for j 
 they are no Sons of God without their confent 
 ( neither by Election, Chrifts interceffion, Co-j 
 venant or Gift : ) And I think you will not fay 
 that they confent : And if no fons^ no heirs - y For 
 the Inheritance is only of children : And if no 
 fans , then are they not Regenerate ^ which is 
 but to be made fons of God by anew Generati- 
 on, and renewed to his Image. And do you; 
 damn all Infants ? 
 
 2. And confider whether you deny not Chrift 
 in. Infancy to have been the Son of God accord- 
 ing to his humane nature ? For you can never 
 prove that in that nature he actually ' conftnted 
 
 in 
 
(Mi) 
 
 in the womb or in his Infancy. But partiality 
 is rafhand blind. 
 
 Mr. T. 12. If there be no Law or ordinance 
 of Cjod unrepealed by which either this Infant 
 vifible Church-member Jhip is granted^ or the lift- 
 ing of Infants or entring into the vifible Church 
 Chriflian is made a duty ? then it is not a caufe 
 of Infants vifible Church-mcmberflup which Mr« 
 B. affignss&c. 
 
 Anfw. I have here proved to you fuch a Law 
 and Covenant before Chrifts Incarnation , and 
 formerly at large proved it to be continued and 
 renewed by fpecial fignification of Chrifts will 
 fince his Incarnation in the Gofpel* Review 
 now your pittifui Reafans againft it. 
 
 N 3 
 
 i 
 
The Second Tart'. 
 A 
 
 CONFUTATION 
 
 O F THE 
 
 Strange Forgeries 
 
 Againft the 
 
 ANTIQUITY 
 
 O F 
 
 Infant Baptism ; 
 
 And of his many Calumnies againft 
 my Self and my Writings, with a Cata- 
 logue of 5 6 New Commandments and 
 Doctrines, which he and the Secta- 
 ries who joyn with hitrvin thofe 
 Calumnies feem to own. 
 
 By Richard (Baxter. 
 
 tL O N DO N , Printed for Nevil Simmons 
 and Jonathan Robwfdn, 1675. 
 
(i8 5 ) 
 
 I 
 
 The Preface. 
 
 SECT. I. 
 
 I. Of Controversies : z. Of the freight 
 of this Controverfie. 
 
 I 
 
 $. i. TTT is a thing that all arenotduely in- 
 formed bf,Howfar Controverfial Wri- 
 tings and Dijputes are to be prafti- 
 fed by pious and peaceable men? 
 And here ( as in almoft all things elfe ) men are 
 hardly cured of one extream but by another. 
 
 I. No doubt but the extream which hath 
 far moft injured the Church of Chrift, hath been 
 the exeefi of Diluting \ and given juft occafion to 
 Sr. H. W.'s motto, (_ The Itch of Diluting wakes 
 the Scab of the Church , 1 which is eafily dif- 
 cernable, both in the Caufe and the Ejfetts. 
 
 $• 2. i. In the caufe it is too notorious, that 
 ordinarily it proceedeth from the depravation of 
 the three faculties of the foul , Voteftative , In- 
 ttllettive , Kotttive , in the tjjree great Prin- 
 ciples 
 
fi80 
 
 cipies of iniquity, Pride , Ignorance 'and wrath. 
 
 0. 3, 1. Did not Pride caufc meri much to 
 overvalue their own farts and worthy Controver- 
 fie would have fhrunk into a narrower compafs 
 before this day : Men would have come to one 
 another as friends to be informed of what they 
 know not, by enquiry and gentle conferences, if 
 not as children to School, to learn : And if grace 
 by hard ftudies had given one man more infight 
 ■into any matters than another, humility would rea- 
 dily have acknowledged Gods gifts, antl defired to 
 have the benefit of a friendly communication ? 
 and whereever God had fct up a light, the Chil- 
 dren" of his family would have been ready to 
 work by it : It would not have been fo hard as 
 now it is for an Ignorant man to kyow his Igno- 
 rance ■, nor to difcern when another knoweth more 
 than he. 
 
 $.• 4. But now , alas , a multitude that under- 
 hand not half their Catechifm hear their 
 Teachers as Mailers hear their Scholars , to know 
 whether they fay their leflbn wel] or not : And 
 the Preacher that faith as they would have him, 
 may pafs for orthodox ar leaft, if not for a very 
 wife man, becaufe he is, fa far, as wile as they: 
 But if he will prefume to teach them more than 
 they know, they fufpeft him of herefie, and the 
 repetition of his Sermon which they make, is to 
 mangle fome fentences which they had not wit 
 enough to underftand, and thence to proclaim 
 ( or whifper abroad at leaft ) that the Preacher 
 hath fome dangerous errors, ( and doth not know 
 fo much as they \ ) unlefs it be fome lufcious un- 
 
 whole : 
 
f IS7) 
 
 Whole fom notions that he ofFereth them, or be a 
 militant wrangler and would lift them under ham 
 as his troop , to ferve him in fome new raifed 
 war, and then corrupt nature can magnifie novel- 
 ties as if they were new revelations from Hea- 
 ven, 
 
 jj. 5. And O that the Teachers wanted not the 
 fenfe of their intellectual imperfections , as well 
 as the people I But too many think that when 
 they are all ordained into the fame office, the ho- 
 nour of the fame office is equally due to them all, 
 and confequently all that honour of Knowledge, 
 Tarts and Piety, without which the honour of the 
 office cannot be well kept up. And fo when they 
 all walk in the fame robes and are called by the fame 
 titles, matters which they never underftood, mud 
 pafs according to the major vote , or at leaft, they 
 muft not be contradicted , nor their igno* 
 ranee made known : And therefore when they 
 have owned or uttered a Dodxine or Sentence , 
 their honour is engaged to make it good ^ And 
 they find a fareafierway to make orientation of 
 the Knowledge which they have not , by robes , 
 titles and big words, than to macerate their bo- 
 dies by imploying their minds in ferious long un- 
 wearied ftudies, till they have received into their 
 minds the well digefted frame of facred truths. 
 
 $.6. And if this tribe can keep the major vote 
 ( as it muft be a ftrangely happy country where 
 they do not ) whoever will be wifer than they , 
 fliall be a heretick. But if it fall out better, and 
 they be the weaker fart, they will make up their 
 honour by the way of fmgularity among fo many as 
 
 they 
 
cm) 
 
 ftiey can get to believe, that they are matters of 
 fome excellent truths which almoft all the Chri- 
 ftian world is unacquainted with. 
 
 f. 7. And even in men osherwife truly pious, 
 there is fo much remaining pride as is greatly 
 gratified by Singularity : Selfiflmefi and the Old 
 man are but One . And an opinion that is peculi- 
 arly their otvn, is as lovely to them, as their own 
 Children in companion of others : If they can fay, 
 ego frinttii invent , it is fweeteft : If not, yet to 
 be one of a lingular Society, that is fuppofed wi- 
 fer, and better and more excellent in their way of 
 worfhip than all others , is very comfortable to 
 them, that by taking the eled: to be fewer than 
 they are, do judge it a good mark to hold what 
 few hold, and do as few do. 
 
 £. 8. And there may be a conjunllion of good 
 and evil in the caufe of thefe effedta 
 
 And from hence we now live among many that 
 fall into various kinds of Se&s , and every one 
 hopeth for the comforts of fmguUrity in their 
 way. Many turn Quakers, becaufe they wzfwgular 
 in their aufterities : And many Congregations will 
 not endure the finging of Gods Praife in Pfalms, 
 at lead in Davids Pfalms • and fome will not have 
 the Scriptures read , and fome are againft hu- 
 mane learning and ftudies, and fome againft 
 Preaching upon a Text, and Praying before and 
 after Sermon, and fome againft ordinary Family- 
 worfhip, and many ftartle if they hear the Creed, 
 the Lords-Prayer and Commandments ; and hence 
 alfo the Doctrine of denying all Chriftians In- 
 fants Church-memberfhip hath profpered. 
 
 $. 9. And 
 
<. 9. And too many honeft perfons in oppo- 
 sition to ungodlinefs , are difaffe&ed to lawful and 
 laudable things in the wonlap of God meerly 
 becaufe the Vngodiy ufe them : When as expe- 
 rience telleth all the world , that they that have 
 no Religion in fmcerity , will ufually joyn with 
 the Religion that is uppermost ; And fo if good 
 Rulers and Teachers fet up that which is beft, 
 the beft will be outwardly the way of the ungod- 
 ly h and if we muft needs be lingular .'rom;h.m 
 we muft take the worft , and leave them the 
 beft : to their feif deceit and our fhame. 
 
 # 10. I have thought by this weaknefs offome 
 Angular people , that, if God friouid but let us 
 have a King and other Rulers that were Anti- 
 nomians , and againft Infant Baptifm, and againft 
 ringing Pfalms, and againft the ufe of the Creed 
 and Lords Prayer, and fuch other things, and 
 withal were themfelves of wicked lives, and would 
 make Laws for their own way, and impofe it 
 on the people , fo that the ungodly multitude 
 did fall into this way, it would prefentiy cure 
 moft that are now for fuch opinions : And though 
 the Godly and the wicked muft be greatly dif- 
 ferenced in the Church , yet before we are 
 aware , our fecret Pride fets in with this defire 
 of difcipline, and maketh us much defire to feem 
 eminently Good, by a more notable and confpi- 
 cuous difference from the common fortofChri- 
 ftians than God in Scripture or reafon doth al- 
 low. 
 2. And how much Ignorance hath to do in all 
 
 our 
 
our comroverfies , would foon be acknowledg- 
 ed if the queft ; on concerned not our felves : 
 For every difputer accufeth his adverfary of Ig- 
 norance : If they be of ten minds ( inconfitient,) 
 nine of them muft needs he erroneous , and there- 
 fore Ignorant , and yet every one charge th it on 
 the reft, and thinks that he alone is free. Alas, 
 that mans foul, which here muft a& m fuch a 
 puddle of brains , and in fo frail a receptive en- 
 gine as it here meth, fhould have fuch high and 
 confident thoughts of its own untryed and un- 
 digefted conceptions that will nor let Ignorance 
 be acknowledged or cured / Molt certainly we 
 are all fo dark and weak, that it is but a/>n? Great 
 neceffary things, or fuch as are very plain , which 
 we have caufe to be confident of , without all 
 fufpicion of miftake. Moft certainly natural dttlnefs, 
 or fhort and fuperiicial ftudies , through floth or 
 diverfions, or want of right teachers, or an ear- 
 ly reception of wrong methods or opinions, lead- 
 ing unto more, and many fuchcaufes, doth and 
 will keep not only moft Chriftians , but moft 
 Teachers of the Church in fo low a meafure 
 of Knowledge , as unficteth them to * mafter 
 and manage very difficult controverfies ; And yet 
 fad experience telleth us, that he that is leaft able to 
 fpeak,is oft leaft able to bold his tongue > 9 And it's too 
 rare to find a man that is not Ignorant of his Igno- 
 rance,and that chargeth no: him with Pride that will 
 prefume to contradict him. What wonder then 
 ifdifputes beendlefe? 
 
 p. 12. ;. And that wrath is in the caufe needs 
 no proof but experience, while we fee men come 
 
 forth 
 
fi90 
 forth with militant difpofitions, and animoilty 
 h their valour, and how to make their adverfaries 
 feem contemptible or odious is their work. 
 
 tf. 13. 2. And if I /hould but open to you 
 the Deputing evil, in the effetts as I have done 
 in the Canfes, what a woful tragedy, of 1500^ 
 years duration , ihould|I prefent you with ? Bur 
 I (hall put off that part of the work, fuppofing 
 that fight and experience do inform you more 
 effectually than words can do. 
 
 p. 14. On all thefe accounts I ftill fay as 
 Paul, The fervant of the Lord muft not ( need- 
 lefly ) ftrive, nor meddle with thofe wranglings 
 which mimfler Que ft ions rather than godly 
 edifying which ism faith : For the end of the 
 Commandment is Love out of a pure hearty and 
 a good Confcience and faith unfeigned : And the 
 high pretenders are too often \_ frond , know- 
 ing nothings but doting about queftions and ftrifes of 
 words, whereof cometh envy, ftrife , ratling , 
 evil furmifmgy perverfe difputings of men of cor- 
 rupt minds and deftitute of the truth. 
 
 i. 15. II. But yet for all this, as Politici- 
 ans ufe to tell Tyrants , that if God and man 
 did but fecurethem from all refiftance, men would 
 fiie from them as from Tigers or Crocodiles, 
 and fuppofe their boundlefs uncontrouled'pride and 
 cruelty would be infatiable -, fo I fay of B'ereti- 
 tical and truly Schifmatical Contenders, that If 
 they were once fecured that whatever folly , he- 
 teiie, or ungodly mifchievous conceits they vend, 
 and that with the greater! induftry and turbulen- 
 
 <7 
 
(191) 
 
 cy to deceive the people, no man yet mufi; 
 contradict them, nor open their folly that it may 
 be known to all, and go no further, for fear of 
 being taken for a man of difputation, controver- 
 fie and ftrife , this would fo embolden them to 
 attempt the fedu&ion of all forts of people, that 
 no place would be fafe or quiet. 
 
 £. 1 6. It is a foolifh pretence of peacea- 
 blenefs and quietnefs, to ftand by in lilence for 
 fear of our own or others trouble , and fee 
 Well-meaning people feduced , Chrift and his 
 truth and name abufed , and God difhonoured , 
 and his Churches fhaken , and made a fcorn 
 and fcandal to the world , and all for fear of 
 being accounted contentious. If it be lukewarm 
 ( as they fay themfelves ) to hear dayly fwea- 
 rers , curfers, fcorners , and fuch other prophane 
 finners , and not give them a clofe reproof or 
 admonition, fo much more is it to fee or hear 
 hurtful falfboods publifhed as the precious truths 
 of God, and not to contradict it, nor endeavour 
 to fave mens fouls from the iniection. li Sa- 
 tans work rauft be done without refiftance as ofc 
 as a miftaken well-meaning man will do it, there 
 will be little fafety tor the flocks. 
 
 £. 17. When Paul fore-told the Ephefians 
 of two forts that would afTiult them, viz.. Grie- 
 vous devouring wolves, and men arifing among 
 themfelves that would (peak perverfe things to 
 draw away dtfciples after them , his conclusion 
 is [Therefore watch J .• And what that watching 
 is he tells Timothy, The mouths of fuch deceivers 
 rauft be flopped : not by fcrcr y for that Timothy 
 
 had 
 
had no power to do ; but by evident trnth* And 
 Truth hath a power in its evidence , if it be but 
 rightly opened and managed. And were it not 
 that God in all ages had enabled fome of his 
 fervants, faithfully and clearly to vindicate truth, 
 and defend lound dodrine , and hold, faft the 
 form of wholcfome words, and ftop the mouth 
 of ignorant pride that wrangleth againft them, 
 what had become of us long agoe ? And though 
 ill difputes have done much mifchief, and too often 
 difputing fuccedeth more according to the Parts, 
 interefts or advantages of the Difputers , than 
 according to the evidence of truth : Yet for all 
 fuch abuics, Truth mud be defended, and it find- 
 eth fomething even in nature (as bad as manis*^ 
 to befriend it •, few love a piairi fa 1 mood, unlefs 
 where intereft greatly bribeth them : And upon 
 tryal Truth will at laft prevail , where fin doth 
 not provoke God in judgement to leave men to 
 the delufioris which they chufe, 
 
 £. 1 8.' If then the way be to Teach and 
 Learn , and quietly open the evidence of trnth y 
 and in meeknefs to inftrtiB thofe that eppofe tbem- 
 felves , and to avoid contentions as we avoid 
 wars , till other mens adults do make themi 
 unavoidably neceflary •, and yet not to be cow- 
 ardly betrayers of the Truth and Church of God, 
 nor fuffer Satan to deceive men tanrefifted, but 
 earneftly to contend for the faith once delivered 
 to the Saints, It muft be confidered, I. To whom 
 this earneft contending may be ufied, 1 1. And 
 by whom. 
 
$. 19. I. We muft not be ever jliarp or 
 earneft, j. With thofe that are ytiftrangers to 
 Religion , of whofe converfion there is hope y . and 
 who are liker to be won by a gentler way, which 
 more demonftrateth love and tendernefs, 2 Tim. 
 2.25, 26. 
 
 £. 20. 2. Nor with Godly Chrifiians who 
 
 fall into fuch (ins of infirmity as we are I y able 
 
 to , and whofe tendernefs maketh companionate 
 
 .tender dealing fitteit to their recovery, Gal. <5. 
 
 J, 2, 3. 
 
 £. 21. 3. Nor with humbled de'jetled Chri- 
 stians who are apter than we to aggravate their 
 o#n faults, and have need of comfort, to reftrain 
 their forrows and keep them from defpair, 2 Cor. 
 2. 7. 
 
 £. 22. 4. Nor with finners that under con- 
 verfion and repentance are humbling themfelves 
 by confeffion to God and man, Luk* 15. Philem. 
 10, 16,17. 
 
 £. 23. 5. Nor with Ghriilians that differ 
 from us in tolerable matters , and manage their 
 differences but with tolerable infirmities , not ha- 
 zarding the fafety. of the Church or mens 
 fouls*: 
 
 24. But in thefe cafes we muft ufe flain- . 
 nefs , .jharpnefs and eameftncfs. 1 . When in 
 fecrlet ( where mens honour with Oihers is not 
 concerned ) it is neceflary to mens convict on and 
 repentance ; 1. Becaufe of the Greatnefs of the 
 fin cr error , which will not be known if it be 
 not truly opened and aggravated. 2. Or by 
 
 reafon 
 
(*95) 
 
 reafon of the hard-lieartcdnefs or obftinacy of 
 the (inner, that will not be convinced- or humbled 
 by eafier means. 
 
 $• 25. 2. And when we. are called fo to ad- 
 monifh a pulplick Tinner for his crimes or here- 
 fies , which mud be opened as they arc, before 
 he will be convinced and humbled openly before 
 the Church. 
 
 £. 26. 3. And when the people or Chureti 
 is in danger of being infe&ed by the fin or er- 
 ror , if the evil of it be not fully and plainly 
 opened, and thefinncr rebuked before all,that others 
 may beware, 
 
 4 . 27. 4. When the offender or he- 
 rerick* fheweth us by his obftinacy , that we have 
 no caufe to exped his cure and convi&ion, but 
 are only to defend Gods truth and mens fouls 
 againft him , then he muft be ufed as Chriit did 
 the Pharifees : and as Rulers execute malefactors 
 not for their own good, but for the warning of 
 others aad prefervation of the innocent \ 
 
 $. 28. 5. And when our gentle fpeeches 
 tend to fcandalize thofe without , and make them 
 think that we prevaricate aad favour Chriitians 
 in their fins. 
 
 £. 29. All thefe cafes you may fee proved 
 
 1. In Nathans dealing with David, andChrifts 
 with Peter, Matth. 16, and Pauls, Gal. 2, &c 
 
 2. In Pauls dealing with the inceftuous m?n , 
 1 Cor. 5. and Peters with Ananias and his, wifje«i 
 I Tim. 5. 20. Them that fin rebuke before all \ 
 &c. 2 Tim. 4. z.Tit.i. 13. Rebuke them fiarply 
 that they way be found in the faith ( cuttingly ) 
 
 O % Sit, 
 
Tit. 2. 15. Rebuke with all authority ; efpecialty 
 when we deal with Inferiors who muft be hum- 
 bled, Tit. 3. 10, 11. Mat. 23. throughout; 
 And &H'i gentlenefs or remifnefs is ouf warn- 
 ing. 
 
 f, jo. 1 1. And as to the pe rfons who rxtltft 
 ufe this fiarpnefs and earmftnefs againft errors 
 and finners in contending for the faith, 1. It is 
 not thofe who overvalue their own conceptions, 
 and grow fond of all that is peculiarly their own, 
 and infoiemly take all men to be enemies to truth 
 and faith and godlineis, who are adverfaries to 
 their cdd opinions. 2. Nor muft inferiors rife 
 up with infolency againft fuperiors, or the young 
 againft their elders, and the ignorant againft 
 the wife , on pretence of a zealous ftanding for 
 the truth ; Though they may humbly and mo- 
 deftly defend that which is truth indeed. 3. 
 Nor fhould unftudyed Chriftians prefently think 
 hardly of any party and backbite them, and in- 
 veigh againft theaa > becnife their Leaders call 
 them herecicks or reproach them as erroneous 
 dangerous men : ( asalmoft all parties do againft 
 each other. ) 4. Nor fhould thofe Alinifters 
 who have not a through infight into a Contro- 
 verfie , meddle much with it , nor be too for- 
 ward to reprove and reproach where they do 
 not "underftand, nor to undertake difptites which 
 they cannot manage. 5. But as God doth in- 
 dow men with various gifts, if each man were 
 imployed according to his talent, all would have 
 their honour and comfort, and the Church the be- 
 nefit of them all f'i'l* 
 
^. 31. We have notorioufly all thefe forts 
 ©fMiniftcrs in the world. 1. Carnal, proud and 
 worldly hypocrites , who are enemies to that 
 which is againft their pride and worldly iiitereft : 
 Thefe contend malignantly againft Godlinefs* 
 2. Ignorant, idle, flefhly droans , that eat and 
 drink and mind the world, but meddle not much 
 with controverfies. 3. Profeflbrs of Religious 
 zeal , who efpoufe fome fingular dividing way , 
 and turn all their ftudies to make good their mi- 
 ftakes ^ who have laudable abilities perverted 
 by prejudice, error and intereft. 4. Honeft Prea- 
 chers that ferve God in practical preaching ^ 
 but being but half ftudicd in fome controverfies, 
 are yet as forward and bufie in difputing , cen- 
 tring and reproving difTenrers , as if they knew 
 as much as the caufe requireth. I would alhhefe 
 would meddle with no controverfies , but what? 
 great neceftity in plain and certam cafes calls 
 them to. 5. We have many humble truly God- 
 ry men, who as they are confcious that they 
 are not well ftudied for comroverfie , fo they 
 meddle not with it but lay out themfelves in 
 preaching the truths that we all agree in, and do 
 God and his Church much fervice in quiemefs 
 and peace : Thefe are the men that the Church 
 is moft beholden to. 6. Some are judicious 
 and very fit for controverfie, but too cold in the 
 practical part of Religion. 7. Some excellent 
 holy men flike Augufline) have fo digefted the 
 matter, as to be able to defend the truth againft 
 all adverfaries and live accordingly. Onlv thefe 
 two 1 aft fonsfhould be imploved infuchdifputes. 
 O 3 ' SECT, 
 
(19*) 
 
 SECT. II. 
 
 Of the weight and nature of the frefent contra- 
 verfie. 
 
 $. i.T think it a matter in this diftrafted age, 
 JL which you may be much concerned in , 
 to know what weight is to be laid on the contro- 
 verfie about Infant Baptifm that you may nei- 
 ther come too fhort nor go too far. For my 
 part , when the Chriftian Parent ( or owner ) 
 to whom God in Nature and Scripture hath intru- 
 ded the Infant , doth heartily dedicate him to 
 God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft, and con- 
 fent that he (land related according to the Bap- 
 tifmal Covenant , I am none of thofe that be- 
 lieve that God who is a Spirit, layeth fo much 
 upon the application of the water , as to damn 
 any fuch Infant meerly for the wane of it. And 
 though I cannot fubferibe to as much more , as 
 fome would have me ( who think fo much bet- 
 ter of their own understandings than ever any 
 evidence perfwaded me to do, as to judge them- 
 selves worthy to be Creed-makers for all others, 
 yea and to be called The Church it felf , ) yet 
 I approve of the Seventeenth Canon of the Sy- 
 nod of Dort Art. i. that \_ faithful Parents have 
 Ho caufe tt? doubt of the fahation of their children 
 'dying in Infancy.^ 
 
 6. 2. And I hope all the pious Anabay- 
 tifis tlumfelves do virtually though not actual- 
 ly 
 
f 199) 
 
 ly devote their children to God, and content to 
 their Covenant relation, while they vehement- 
 ly plead againft it. For furely they have fo 
 much natural affe&ion, that if they did think that 
 God would be a God in fpecial Covenant with 
 their children, and pardon their Original fin, and 
 give them right to future life, upon the Parents 
 dedication and confent, they would undoubtedly 
 accept the gift, and be thankful ? And I believe 
 moftof them would fay , [_ I would do all that God 
 intmfleth and enabkth me to do, that my child 
 may be a child of God^and 1 would give him up 
 to God and accent any mercy for him a* far as God 
 doth authorise me fo to do7\ 
 
 fa 3. And if Parents and Owners will not 
 confent that their children be in Covenant with 
 God and be baptized, I am not yet fatisfied what 
 remedy we have , nor who can do it for them 
 to as good effed. Por if any one may do it , 
 as fome plead , then all Heathens children may 
 be fo ufed and faved ; And he that perfwadeth 
 me that there is extant fuch a Covenant orpro- 
 mife of God that he will fave every Heathens 
 child that is but by any one brought to baptifm, 
 1. He muft fhew me that text where thispromife 
 is, 2. And when he hath done , he will leave 
 me perfwaded that God will fave all Heathens 
 Infants whether baptized or not. i. Becaufe I 
 and ten thouland more Chriftians would fir id 
 our clofets and offer to God all the Infants in 
 the world ^ that is, confent that he be their re- 
 conciled God, and they h±s children and in 1 Cove- 
 nant with him : what good man would not d fire 
 O 4 their 
 
tlieir falvation? 2. And I fliould not eafily be- 
 lieve that God will damn them all meerly for want 
 of a ftrangers confent to fave them, were that 
 wanting* 3. Much lefs chat when we do con- 
 fent a thoufand or ten thoufand miles off , that 
 all the children e. g, in China or Siana (hall be 
 baptized and faved , that this ir all not hinder 
 their damnation meerly becaufe the Infants and 
 we are fo diftant that we cannot in fight and 
 f re fence offer them to God : furely if my confent 
 that a Ti^r^ child be baptized and faved will do 
 it if he were with me, it may do it a mile off; 
 and if fo, then ten thoufand miles off, 4. And 
 if I be impowred to confent , I (hall never believe 
 that the bare want of the water will damn him, 
 who hath ail things elfe that God hath made ne- 
 ceffary to his falvation fas I faid beforej I think 
 they give too much to Baptifm , who fay that 
 God will either fave any one by it , who want- 
 eth other things necelTary to falvation, or that 
 he will damn any for want of it( that is, of the 
 wafhing of the body ) who want nothing 
 elfe which is neceffary to falvation. And I 
 doubt they that fayotherwife will prove difho- 
 nourers of the Chriftian Religion, by feigning it 
 to be too like to the Heathenifh fuperitition, laying 
 mens falvation on a ceremony as of abfolute ne- 
 ceffiiy : And I am confident it is contrary to 
 ChriiTs redoubled leffon, Go learn what that 
 meaneth, I will have' mercy and no* fiicrifice : 
 And no men fhallunteach me this great and com- 
 fortable leffon , which (Thrift hath \o indtiftri- 
 oufly taught me ? and which hath been long writ- 
 tea 
 
( 201 ) 
 
 t*n fo deeply on my heart , as hath made all 
 unmerciful ferfecutions and feparations, and ali- 
 enations very difpleafing to me, 
 
 tf. 4. I have proved afterwards that even 
 njduguftine himfelf doth as on great deliberation 
 aflfert that where the Miniftry of baptifm is not 
 defpifed, Heart coniierfion without it fufficeth to 
 falvatipn in the adult : And no fcripture or rea- 
 fon doth make it abfolutely nece(fary to Infants, if 
 not to the adult. 
 
 $. 5. And if Heathens Infants are not dam- 
 ned meerly for want of outward baptifm, nor yet 
 for want of the confent of others (either becaufe 
 that other rnens confent who are ftrangers to them 
 is not neceflary to their falvation , or if it be 
 neceflary they have it at a diftance ) then it will 
 follow that all the Infants of Heathens are in a 
 ftate of falvation, unlefs fomewhat elfe be yet pro- 
 ved neceflary to it : And if they are all faved, 
 then fo are all Chriftians Infants alfo, or elfe 
 they are rnore miferable than Heathens. And if 
 you can firfl believe that the Infants of all Infi- 
 dels, Atheifts, and ungodly Chriftians fhypocritesj 
 have a promife of falvation, you will next be in- 
 clined to think better of their Parents ftate than 
 God alloweth you : And where is this pro- 
 mife? 
 
 £. 6. Some fay that the new Covenant # gi- 
 veth grace and life to all that do not p onere obicew. 
 But I muft have Gods Covenant in his own terms, 
 that I may have it in his own fen fe, if I will be 
 gfiur.e'd of the benefits. Non fonere obicem fig- 
 rufiesh plainly no Attion or fofitive qualification 
 
 as 
 
f202) 
 
 as neceflary, but only a negation of fome contrary 
 a&ion : And it is certain that the terms of Gods 
 Covenant to the adult are clean contrary i It is 
 not he that neither Believeth nor oppofcth faith 
 jhall be faved, or he that doth neither good nor 
 harm , as a man in an apoplexy , or afleep : 
 But [" he that believeth jhall be faved , and he 
 that loelieveth not jhall be damned ^ And except 
 ye repent ye jhall all perijh^ And without holi- 
 nefs none jhall fee God:^\ But a meer negation is 
 no holme fs. 
 
 tf. 7. And if any will feign another Cove- 
 nant for Infants , let him fhew what and where 
 it is •, for I know but one Covenant of grace, 
 which taketh in the Infants with the Authorised 
 Parents, whofe members or Own God taketh them 
 to be, and reqnirtih a pofitive believing confent 
 and dedication :o Cod. as the pofitive condition : 
 which is more than a Negative ( nm ponere obi* 
 cem , ) though performed by the Parent for the 
 child : And fo the promifes throughout the Scri- 
 pture run to the faithful and their feed. 
 
 jf. 8. I know that God promifeth to blefs 
 children through many generations -for their faithful 
 Anceftors fake : But that is on fuppofition that fi- 
 delity continue in. the line, and that apoftafie 
 make rio interciiion. Elfe all fhould be bleffed 
 for the fake of Noe, even Cham s pofterity as well 
 as Shem's, 
 
 j. 9. What then is the thing made necefla- 
 ry ( and fufficient ) by the Covenant to their 
 falvation , but. that they be the feed of the faith- 
 ful devoted by them totGod, that is, that their 
 
 Pa- 
 
(20?) 
 
 Parents natural , or at lead civil , whofe Own 
 they are , and have the power of difpofing of 
 them for their good , do enter them by con- 
 fent into the Covenant with Chrift ? which it 
 is fuppofed rhat Faithful Parents virtually did 
 before, and will actually do when God doth call 
 them to it. 
 
 tf. 10. As to them that fay , [tht thing 
 further neceffary as the condition of the Infants 
 acceptance and falvation is \_ A promife to edu- 
 cate the Qhiid at a Chriftiati if he live 3 I an- 
 fwer, i. That promife indeed is included in his 
 dedication and confent -, 2. But who but the 
 Owners of the child are capable of making fuch 
 a promife? funlefs as feconds promifing that the 
 Owners (hall do their duty ) : For only he that 
 owneth him can educate him ( by himfelf or 
 others) or difpofe of him for his education : 
 who hath power to difpofe of another mans child, 
 and educate him ? They that undertake as fure- 
 ties to do it , in cafe the Parents apoflt^ize or 
 die , do plainly imply, 1. That till then it is 
 the Parent that is intruded to doit • and there- 
 fore that the Parent muft confent to do it ; and 
 therefore that the Parent muft enter his child 
 in the Covenant of Chrift : 2. And that if 
 the Parents apoflatize or die, they will take 
 the chiM themfelves as their Own • or t\(c 
 by what power can they educate him or difpofe 
 of him ? 
 
 c. 11. They that fay, God did not fave one for 
 the faith or confent of another • muft remember, 
 1. That we are all faved for the meritorious 
 
 Xgfc 
 
(204) 
 
 Right eoufnefs of Chrifl, by the way of a free gift >, 
 whofe condition is but fait able acceptance : And 
 why may not a Parent accept a donation for 
 his Child , who hath no will to accept it for 
 himfelf ? Shall he be certainly ftut out unto dam- 
 nation? Or fhall he have that gift abfolutelywhkh 
 is conditional to all others f Or is he not concern- 
 ed in the donation at all ? 2. And remember that 
 we have guilt and mifery from our Parents •, and 
 therefore though life and pardon be by Chrift on- 
 ly, yet it is congruous that the meer condition of 
 acceptance may be performed by the Parents. 
 1 £. 1%. Perhaps fome will lay all the right 
 of Infants to the pardon of lin , and falvation, 
 upon fecret election only •, as if all that we 
 knew of Infants Salvation were that God will fave 
 fome whom he fyath elected : but that there is no 
 Promife of grace and falvation to any particular 
 Infant in the world , as under any condition or 
 qualification : And if this be fo, then, 1 . No In- 
 fant hagh any Right to pardon, grace and falvati- 
 on , given him by the Covenant of Grace •, No 
 more than any eled perfon at age hath before 
 faith and regeneration : Election gave Paul ( nor 
 any wicked man ) no right to pardon or falvati- 
 on : Elfe elect Pagans and Infidels are juftified -, 
 if they have jus ad impttnitatem or Regnnm Cce- 
 lorum. 2. And if this be fo , we have no afturance 
 that God will fave ten or three Infants in all the 
 world : For he hath not told us whether he hath 
 ejected fo many. 3. And yet we cannot be fur e 
 but that they may all or almoft all be faved ; 
 while the number of the elect is unrevealed. 
 
 4. Nor 
 
(-20?; 
 
 4; Nor can we know that any more of the Chil- 
 dren of the Faithful are faved, than of the Hea- 
 thens or Infidels -, of thofe that love God and 
 keep his Commandments, than of thofe that hate 
 him. 5. And, in a word , we have then no pro- 
 per hope, upon Covenant right y that God will fave 
 any oue individual Infant in the world : For we 
 can hope ( in this proper fenfe ) of nothing but 
 what we do believe , and we can believe nothing 
 but what is promifed or revealed. And fo Pa- 
 rents mull be thus far hopelefs. 
 
 f. 13. God who made man after his Image f 
 teacheth him to govern according to thofe prin- 
 ciples which are his Image : And all the King- 
 doms in this world take Infants for Infant-mem- 
 bers ; and the Laws give them Right to Ho- 
 nours and Inheritances, the pofTeffion and ufe 
 whereof they may have in the time and degrees 
 that nature doth capacitate them. And can we 
 then think that God who made a Conditional 
 Gift of Pardon and Salvation to all the adult 
 perfons in the world , did wholly leave out In- 
 fants, and that his Covenant giveth them no 
 rights at all , no not to be members of his vi- 
 fible Church ? 
 
 £. 14. It feemeth to me a matter of doubtful 
 confequence to afTert , that God will fave more 
 ( yea fo great numbers as we will hope are fa- 
 ved in Infancie ) than ever he promifed to fave, 
 and gave any antecedent Right to Salvation to ? 
 I doubt we tV.all open fuch a gap to the hopes of 
 prefumptuous Heathens and Infidels this* way , as 
 will crofs our common dodrine r If God may 
 
 fave 
 
fave whole Kingdoms and millions of Heathens 
 Infants to whom he never gave Right to Salva- 
 tion by any gift or promife , meerly becaufe he 
 ele&ed them •, fome will fay , why may he not 
 dofo alfo.by the Parents ; at leaft renewing them 
 all in tranfitu ? 
 
 $. 15. If you fay that He givcth them free- 
 ly his fanUifying grace , and givcth them right 
 to Salvation a* janciificd , though he tell m not 
 who are fanclified, I anfwer , 1 . Take heed left 
 you teach the prefamptuous to fay the fame of 
 Infidels, Heathens ana almoft all, that God may 
 in the pafTages when :hey are dying fan&ifie and 
 fave them ail. 2. brill this giveth no pofitive 
 hope of any particulars , nor more to Chriftians 
 for their Children than they may have of the 
 Children of Infidel? ^ nor any promife of the 
 fpirit and specification, as Believers have. 
 
 £. 16. I take it therefore for the foundeft Do- 
 ctrine that Gods taking the Children of the Faith- 
 ful into Covenant with him, and becoming their 
 God and taking them, for his own, doth figni- 
 fie no Iefs than a ftate of Grace, and pardon 
 and right to life eternal •, and that they are in 
 this ftate upon their Parents Confent and Heart- 
 devoting them to Cod in Chrifl, before baptifm, 
 but baptifm is the (blemnizing and inveftiture, 
 which openly coram Ecclefia delivereth themp/~ 
 feffiori of their vifible Church-ftate with a fealed 
 pardon and gift of \ik : For it is not another, 
 but the fame promife and Covenant which is 
 made to the faithful and their feed : And all Gods 
 promifes 10 the many Generations, of them , in 
 
 the 
 
the fecond Commandment and many other Texts, 
 cannot mean any fuch little bleilings as confift 
 with aftate of damnation and the pofieflion of the 
 Devil, And all the ancient Churches in bapti- 
 zing of Infants were of this mind ( whom I will 
 not defpife. ) And Abrahams cafe perfwadeth me 
 that the Children of Natural and Civil Parents 
 ( truly their Owners ) have this right ( before they 
 are baptized. ) But the former ( natural Parents) 
 have plainer evidence than the later (which is a 
 darker cafe. ) But as for them that think either 
 that all Infants are faved, or all baptized Infants 
 (jure vel injuria) I though no Parent or Owner 
 confent or dedicate them ( heartily , or openly ) 
 to God, or though they are hypocrites and truly 
 confent not for themielves or theirs , let them 
 prove it if they can ^ but I rau.ft fay it is paft my 
 power. 
 
 £. 17. I know the grand difficulty is, that then 
 this Infant-Grace is loft in many that live to ri- 
 per age. I have faid fo much of this in my Chri- 
 stian Directory that I will refer the considering 
 Reader thither, only adding, 1. That far greater 
 abfurdities will follow the contrary opinion , and 
 the greater are not to be chofen. I am loth 
 again to name them. 2. That the univerfal Church 
 ( as far as by. any notice we can know ) did for 
 many hundred years grant the conclufion and take 
 it for no abfardity, but a certain truth ^ yea much 
 more, Anfliu and his followers themfelves, 
 thought more at age were truly juftified and fan- 
 ctifiedthan were ele&ed and did perfevere : And 
 Come hold, that not all that have the fanftifying 
 
 fpirit, 
 
fplri£ but only certain confirmed Chriftians, hivk 
 a certainty to perfevere : And others hold, thac 
 as the jpirit of Chrift is promifed to Believers , 
 though men believe riot without the fpirit, fo 
 that meafure of Grace which caufcth men only 
 to believe, as antecedent to that promifed Jpirtt 
 ( of Power, Love and a found mind ) is but fuch 
 as may be loft, as Adams was • and that it is the 
 ftirit following it (as the rooted habit ) which 
 cannot be loft: And others come yet lower, and 
 fay that the Grace which giveth faith it felf can- 
 not be loft ( becaufe fuch have the promife of the 
 fpirit •, ) but yet the grace which only enabkth 
 men to Repent and Believe ( called fufjicient ) 
 may be loft before it produce the Ad j Accord- 
 ingly fome think of Infant-Grace : The laft fort 
 think that they have real pardon of original (irt 
 and right to life, and have real Grace •, but being 
 Infants, that grace is but fuch zsmll enable them 
 to believe if they come to age , and not infal- 
 libly caufe it , and that this may be loft : And fo 
 I might run Over the opinions of the reft. And 
 among all thefe the judgement of Davenant , 
 Ward, &c. of the loj? of an Infant-ftate of Grace, 
 as by them opened is not fo hard, as I think the 
 contrary way will infer : And it feems by Art. i . 
 c. 17. that the Synod of Don was of their 
 mind. 
 
 <*; i8« Our darknefs about the f attire ftate of 
 Infants Souls, hath occafioned fome diverfity of 
 thoughts about their prefent ftate. Indeed they 
 will neither in Heaven or Hell have any work for 
 Confcience in the review of any former dlions , 
 
 S ood 
 
govd or evil: And it feemeth by NazAanteitk 
 before cited ( Orat. 40. ) that fome Ancients 
 thought as moft Papi(!s do , that unbaptized In- 
 fants have neither the joys of Heaven , nor any 
 punifhment but the lofs of thefe : But what ftate 
 then to place them in they know not : To think 
 that they fhall remain in a meer potentiality of 
 underftanding, and fhall know no more than they 
 did here, is to equal them with bruits, and to en- 
 courage the Socinians who fay the like of the Se- 
 parated fouls of the adult : And if they can allow 
 underftanding to thofe that died baptized, why 
 hot to the refit And if they under ftand, they 
 mull have grief or fleafure : But who can know; 
 more than God revealeth ? 
 
 $i 1$. In fum ; 1. That God would have Pa* 
 rents devote their Children to him , and enter 
 them according to their capacity in his Covenant 
 (as I have el fe where proved) is a great truth., 
 not to be forfaken. 2. And alfo that he accept- 
 eth into his Covenant a?l that are faithfully thus? 
 devoted to him, and is peculiarly their God, and 
 fuch Children are holy. 3 . That they are cer- 
 tainly members according to an Infant capacity of 
 the vifible Church as they are of all Kingdoms 
 under Heaven : Thefe are all clear and great 
 truths. 4. And that there is far more hope of 
 their falvation than of thofe withour. 5. And I 
 think the Covenant maketh their Salvation cer- 
 tain if they fo die. 6. And it feemeth to me that 
 the inveftiture and folemni^ation of their Co- 
 venant with Chrift, (hoiild be made in Infan- 
 tie,- from i&fattb* 2&> ip, 20. and th« expofiti- 
 
 P ©TV 
 
( 2IO) 
 
 on of the univerfal Church. 7. But if any (hould 
 think with Tertullian and Naz.umz.ene that the 
 time of invefliture and filemmzation is partly 
 left to prudence , and may be delayed in cafe of 
 health , yea or iliould think that Infants are not 
 to be folemnly inverted by baptifm, but only the 
 adult, fo they coniefo Infants relation to God y 
 hi* Covenant and Church •, I would differ from 
 fuch men with love and peace , and mutual tole- 
 ration and communion. 
 
 CHAT. 
 
C H A P. I. 
 
 The Occajion of this Writing* 
 
 $i 7. A S I was. by great and long imponu- 
 /l nicy unwillingly engaged at firft to 
 meddle publickly in the Controverfie of Infant 
 B.<ptifm with Mr.Towbes ^ fo I then refolved to 
 meddle no more with it, unlefs I found that ne- 
 ceflity made it an apparent duty. 
 
 £. 2. Accordingly when Mr. Tombes had print- 
 
 I ed the laft private papers which paft between him 
 and me, without my confent , 1 never anfwered 
 hib reply to this day • not ftritfing to have the laft 
 word, and ftippofing that the ftudious impartial 
 Reader, would find no need of a rejoynder : For 
 to me his Reply feemed fo empty and next no- 
 thing,that I thought it unneceflary to fay any more* 
 0. 3. But it is now grown the cuftom among 
 Papifts and Sectaries and almoft all the wrangler? 
 that trouble the world, to fcribble fomewhat fenfe 
 
 ' or nonienfe againft that truth which they have not 
 wit, or will, or humility enough to learn, and then 
 fay tothofe that would make them wifer, yon are 
 anfwered^ and itgoeth for a *id:ory to any foolery, 
 if they can but fay, fuch a one that hath written 
 againft yon is unanfvpcred : As if we dealt orj 
 fuch- terms with the world in writing, as that he 
 that fpeaketh laft, (that is, that liveth longell: ) 
 mud be fuppofed to be in the right. Or as if 
 we knew not when we write againft the groffeft 
 
 F % herefie 
 
herefie or error, that as many words may be 
 faid or written for it as againft it I 
 
 £. 4. And O what pity is it that with the vul- 
 gar fort of well- meaning people , number goeth 
 for weight, and he feemeth to be in the right 
 to them, who is nearefi them and hath befl op- 
 portunity to talk to them a few fmooth deceitful 
 words for his opinion , and to belie and vilifie 
 thofe that are againft him I Not but that there 
 are great fundamental Truths which manifed them- 
 felves , which I hope thefe honeft fouls would 
 not be drawn from by an Angel from Heaven : 
 But verily no true Charity can be fo blind as to 
 deny it , that in lower controverted points , the 
 knowledge of the vulgar Religious people is fo 
 low, that he that is lower than an Angel, or 
 than a well-ftudied Divine, or thau a man of fo- 
 ber folid reafon, may deceive them ( having firft 
 been himfelf deceived ) if he can but fpeak z.ea- 
 lonfly y and refroach others impudently ^ by the fpi- 
 rit defcribed and e xorc ife d in Jam. 5. at large. 
 
 tf. 5. And I crave thy pity, Reader, to my 
 felf and fuch as I , that our Time and Employ- 
 ment is fo much at the will and mercy of fuch 
 a fort of wrangling men. That if I have it in my 
 defire to do Gods Church fervice upon fome 
 greater and more needful fubjed:, yet it is in the 
 power of the Devil to ftir up the corruption of 
 honeft well-meaning Chriftians, to put a neceffity 
 on me to do fome poor inconfiderable works, and 
 leave undone the greater and more excellent. 
 
 9. 6. For circumftances may make it a mans 
 duty to do that as frefently ncccjfary 7 which with- 
 
 id 
 
( 2r 3.) 
 in a few years will be of no fignification, but die 
 with the interefts and quarrels of the age. 
 
 p. 7. It hath pleafed the Lord , who did let 
 loofe the Serpent upon Adam in Paradife, to ex- 
 ercife his Church in almofl all ages with tempta- 
 tions from two forts that feem much contrary, but 
 are nearer in difpofition and principles than they 
 well underftand themfelves , I mean Church-Ty- 
 rants and Qnurch-Dividers ^ And though I ( and 
 mofl others of my quality ) have fuffered incom- 
 parably more by the former, yet it is not a little 
 that I have fuffered by the later : And efpecially 
 that by their flanderous and clamorous unquiet 
 importunity, they will not give me leave to live 
 by them in peace , nor to go on in better work 
 while I meddle not with them. I could not ob- 
 tain that leave from Mr. Tombs-, And now Mr. 
 JD. hath been pleafed to open the mouths of 
 fo many of his partakers againft me , as maketh 
 wife men tell me that to be filent will be to be 
 fcandaloufly guilty of their fin. And do we live 
 upon thefe terms , that any Railer can call us off 
 from our better fervices when ever He and Satan 
 pleafe? 
 
 £. 8. But my purpofe is to meddle with them 
 but this once : And if after this thefe crying Chil- 
 dren will bawl and wrarrgle and foul the houfe, 
 arid think that I am made for no better work than 
 either to rock the Cradle or to make them clean, 
 I will let them cry and take their courfe , and 
 will no more believe that their humours are the 
 mailers of my time. 
 
 P. 5 1, 9- By 
 
£.. p. By three or four arguments ( of his ma- 
 king ) it hath pleafed one Major Dunvers a 
 Souldier to call me to this task. i. By heaping 
 up a Catalogue of Accufations againft my Do- 
 ctrine in my Chriftian Diredory. 2. By re- 
 proaching me for not anfwering Mr. Tombes, 
 3. By proclaiming me to the world a flanderer 
 who owe the Anabaptifts fatisfadion, for faying 
 that many of them were Baptised naked. 4. By 
 peryerfe citations of my later Writings as if they 
 had been fervicea*ole to his caufe. 5, By his in- 
 jury to poor fouls and the Churches peace , by 
 his ignorant though confident opposition to the 
 truth, and writing a Volume of he knoweth not 
 what. 
 
 5*. iOo And to add to my invitation, it is be- 
 come of late a common faying among the Ana- 
 bapcifts, that I am turned to their opinion or ve- 
 ry near it , but have not humility to retrad my 
 former error, and openly acknowledge wtiat I 
 hold. 1 
 
 £._ it. The occafiofi of this is, 1. Becaufe I 
 have fo many years forborn toanfwerMr. Twbes 
 his lair. 2. B:caufe I feek peace with them, and 
 Jpeak for it upon all occalions, and feek to abate 
 other mens over-great opposition ro them. 3. Be- 
 caufe upon all cccafionsj prefs the consideration 
 and improvement of our Baptifm , taking it for 
 the fumm and Charader of our Chriftianicy, and 
 the true defer iption of Converfion, and the effen- 
 tial mark of Grace, and the qualification of Ca- 
 tholick Church-members, and the bond of all our 
 Ghriftiah duty : As if none but Anabaptifts could 
 think thus? £, rz, Wheri 
 
(215) 
 
 £. 12. When I firfl: read Major Denver s Boob 
 I thought fuch a Fardle could not be fo regarded 
 as to need an Anfwer •, But when his Book feller 
 came to know of me what I had againft it , as 
 -from him ; and when I heard how many thou- 
 lands of them were Printed , I rather chofe to 
 imitate him that had companion on a headlefs muU 
 titude, than him that {aid, fi populus vult decifiy 
 decipiatur. And they thar will not let me reft , 
 muft< bear fome of the fruits of my difquiet- 
 ment. 
 
 P 4 CHAP. 
 
(216) 
 
 CHAP. II. 
 
 oJWore of my Judgement of the Anabaytifts and 
 their Canfe, with a motion to them for peace, 
 
 £. i. T Confefs that in my Book againft Mr. 
 X Tombes I wrote feveral pages enigmati- 
 cally of the oifenfive fcandals of the Anabaptifts : 
 And they that now' read them' when the occafion 
 is forgotten or unknown , will either not under- 
 ftand them, or think them too fharp. But in" all 
 military Controverts, no man is fo meet a Judge 
 as he that is on the ground. 
 
 $. 2. I am almoft ready to condemn my felf 
 for that and many other things paft when I forget 
 the occafion of them and the ftate that we were 
 in : But f will not deny that at that time my heart 
 felt more than I expreft , 1. When I heard Ana- 
 fcaptiftry obtruded on the religious people , as a 
 great and needful part of their integrity : 2. And 
 when they that abhorred to hear of old fcandals 
 were bufify making more and greater : 3. When 
 1 faw what was done againft the Parliament, by 
 them that profefled to be their fervants, and that 
 the Anabaptifts and their Aflbciates were the for- 
 warded in the work : 4. And what was done 
 againft the King, when they had thruft out the 
 Parliament-, 5. And what was done in the wars 
 againft Scotland •, 6. And what orders paft for fe- 
 queftring all fuch as my felf that were not for 
 their Engagement or Keefing their days of faft- 
 
 **£ 
 
(217) . 
 
 ing and thanksgiving in caufes of blood ; 
 
 7. Anq when I faw thefe executed on many ex- 
 cellent men that were Mafters of Colkdges in the 
 tlniverfities, and ufeful Minrfters in the Country : 
 
 8. And when I faw what that called the Little 
 Parliament was and did, and how it was put to 
 the Vote whether all the Parifh Minifters of En* 
 gtand ' fhould be put out at once ? and carried 
 againft them but by a few : And that the Anar- 
 baptifts were of the forwardeft in all this work : 
 o. And after when I faw how many of them 
 turned Ranters, and read my felf fome of their 
 Letters , full of horrid Oathes and Blafphemies ; 
 All thefe things made me think that tbey were not 
 friends to the Churches welfare, and this was not 
 the way of holinefs or peace. 
 
 $. 3 . All this while I defired to have lived by 
 them in peace and quietnefs, but I could not ob- 
 tain it : Mr. Tombes thought that I flood in the 
 way of his fuccefles, even when I medled not with 
 them. And therefore I muft be either converted 
 to them or conquered , that the triumph might 
 promote their ends. And when that quarrel was 
 over I was glad , and purpofed to meddle with 
 them no more. 
 
 £. 4. One of the greateft things that offended 
 me, was that ( even in the Parifh es where there 
 were the ableft faithful laborious Minifters , ) 
 they laboured to gather feparated Churches, up- 
 on the account of their opinion - 5 And when they 
 had gathered them, they were militant Churches : 
 Prefently that Town was in a war ^ and the meet- 
 ings employed for the extolling of their opinions, 
 
 and 
 
and vilifying the Minifters and Churches that 
 were againft them , and making them odious or 
 contemptible to their followers : which could not 
 be the work of God. 
 
 $. 5. I dare challenge any man to make it good, 
 that ever I fought to perfecute any Anabaptifts , 
 or ftirred up others to perfecute them for their 
 judgements : I know not that ever I did any of 
 them any harm, except by not being of their 
 minds, or contradicting them. 
 
 But though my fufferings by them were no- 
 thing , ( that honour being afTumed* by another 
 party ) yet they have not carried it fo to me : 
 But have convinced me that were they uppermoft 
 they would then have had too little tendernefs for 
 thofe that hindred their fuccelTes : Even fome of 
 Mr. Tombes his flock, my neighbours and familiar 
 friends, I think, fought my life or ruine when I 
 meddled not with them. When Sir George Booth 
 had done what was done in Chejhire, I wrote a 
 Letter to Major Beak^ at Coventry , and the Mef- 
 fenger telling them at Bewdley that he had a Let- 
 ter from me, iome of them made themfelves Soul- 
 diers, and in arms way-laid the meflenger, affault- 
 ed him , and took his letters , and though they 
 found not what I fuppofe they expected, yet find- 
 ing in it but a great mans name, who then much' 
 ruled publick affairs, they fent it up to the Coun- 
 cil to Jrim, who fummoned Major Beak^ to Lon- 
 don to anfwer it, who had never feen it and knew 
 nothing of it : And though he fo fcaped, I was 
 loudly threatned \ but General Monks approach 
 out of Scotland flayed the execution of their dif- 
 
 pleafure. 
 
( 219) 
 
 pleafure. Thus did my familiar Friends unprovo- 
 ked ( fome of them yet alive J. 
 
 $. 6. Indeed my judgement was and is, that 
 the point of Infant Baptifm hath its confiderable 
 difficulties, which may occafion wife and good 
 men to doubt, or to be miftaken in it. And ma- 
 ny of the Roman party have taken it to be 
 proveable only by the tradition and judgement 
 of the Church : And Mr, Tombes hath publickly 
 intimated as if one of our moft Learned and En- 
 tire puhlick ProfefTors of Theologie in' one of our 
 Univerfities , had declared himfelf of the fame 
 mind, viz.* that it is not to be proved by Scripture, 
 (Mr. JDanvers hath alfo made advantage of this 
 teftimony ) , ( Though of late Scripture certain 
 f roof is found ('in the new Rubrick of the LiturgieJ 
 for a great deal more. ) I am not of that mind, 
 that it is not proveable by Scripture. I think I 
 have proved it ; but notby evidence fo clear, as 
 every good man can perceive. 
 
 £. 7. Therefore I never took the point of it to 
 have fuch weight, as that all that differed from me 
 in ir, muft be denied either Love, Liberty or Com- 
 wunion : If I know my own heart I do as hearti- 
 ly love a fober godly man that is againft Infant 
 baptifm , as I do fuch men that differ from me 
 in other fuch Controverfies 5 and much better 
 than one of my own judgement, who hath lefs 
 piety and fcbriery. And I make no doubt but 
 there are among us very many fuch , even fober 
 and religious men, as there be among other 
 parties. 
 
 0, 8. Nor do I think that there is forcuch ma- 
 lignity 
 
lignity in the bare opinion which denieth Infant 
 Baptiim, as that all the Anabaptifts mifcarriages 
 fhould arife from the nature of that opinion. 
 But I am pad doubt that they arife from the dif- 
 eafed minds of many that hold it. When injudi- 
 cious perfons lay hold upon an opinion which is 
 not common , their Angularity kindleth a proud 
 felfidi zeal , and they take that opinion as more 
 peculiarly their own, than the common Articles 
 which all Chriftians hold : And therefore they 
 grow fond of it, and are pufc up thereby with a 
 conceit of their extraordinary knowledge : And 
 then they feem to themfelves more religious than 
 others, and greater friends to the tru:h : And fo 
 Fride and Ignorance engage them in Angularity 
 and fefaratton : And thus they would do, were it 
 any other opinion, which they thought as high- 
 ly of as this : So that it is not an Anabaptift as 
 fuch, but the frond Church-divider , or Separa- 
 ted that I am moft offended at. 
 
 £. 9.tl know that in the Ancient Churches 
 men were lefc at liberty , both when they would 
 be baptized themfelves, and when their Children 
 fhould be baptized : And though Infant- baptifm 
 was without any known original, fince the Apo- 
 ftles, yet it was not a forced thing. • 
 
 $. 10. And were it in my power it fhould be 
 fo ftilh I would not deny Chriftian Love, nor 
 Church-Communion, nor publick encouragements, 
 to any pious peaceable man for being an Anaba- 
 ptift:' If he would not feparate for it from the 
 Churches, if he would live peaceably with me, 
 I would live peaceably with him, and fhould be 
 
 loth 
 
(221 ; 
 
 loth to be behind with him in love and peace; 
 
 £. 1 1. it is not ( 1 fay ) Anabaptiftry,Indepen- 
 dency, nor any fuch opinion which I impute our 
 calamities to dire&ly : But it is (next to Church 
 Tyranny J the fpirkof feparation ± I mean, when 
 men cannot fo far differ in judgement from others, 
 but a pcrverfe zeal for their opinion as fome ex- 
 cellent truth of God, doth inftigate them to run 
 away from thofethat are.againft it, as if they were 
 the enemies of the truth and God, and unworthy 
 of the Communion of fuch as they : which is no- 
 thing but a conjunction of Pride , Ignorance and 
 Vncharitablenefi ( or JUalice. ) 
 
 £.12. I have told thefe men that when they have 
 fpoken never fo lliarpiy againft Perfecutors, it is ap- 
 parent that there is much of the fame fpirit in them- 
 felves : One faith, of DiiTenters, Away with fuch 
 unworthy ferfons out of the Mmifiry or out of the 
 Country: and the other faith. Away with fuch unwor- 
 thy ferfons from your Communion'. And both contra- 
 ry to Chrifts fheep-mark which is Love, and both 
 tend to make their Brethren feem unlovely : And 
 whom they ferve by this means , whether the 
 Prince of Love, or the Prince of Malignity, it's 
 pity but they knew • or at lead would confider 
 of it, inftead of being angry with us when we tell 
 them of it. 
 
 £. 13. I am not therefore half fo zealous to 
 turn men from the opinion of Anabaptiftry , as I 
 am to perfwade both them and others, that it is 
 their duty to live together with mutual forbea- 
 rance, in Love and Church-Communion notwith- 
 standing fuch differences : For which they may 
 
 fee 
 
C 222 ) ' 
 
 fee more reafons given by one that once was of 
 their mind and way ( Mr. William Men in his 
 
 Retractation of Separation. * 
 * Satan will not con- and Ris p er f wa jl ve tQ Vni _ 
 fcnt that you Ihould ••* J J c , 
 
 foberly read the fooks. 00 wan any or. them can 
 
 foundiy refel , though they 
 may too ealily reject them. 
 
 p. 14. I am perfwaded that the formal Mini- 
 fters , and people , who make little more life of 
 Baptifm, than to give it to Infants, and to receive 
 it in Infancy, have been the greateft occafion of 
 Anabaptiftry among us : when the people fee that 
 all being Baptized in Infancy > many afterwards 
 live all their days, and never underftand what Ba- 
 prifm is , and few ever folemnly and diftinftly 
 own and renew that Covenant when they come to 
 age, (unlefs coming to Church and receiving the 
 Lords Supper with as little underftanding , be a 
 renewing it , ) this tempteth ferious people that 
 underftand not the matter well themfelves , to 
 think that Infant-baptifm doth but pollute the 
 Churches , by letting in thofe who know not 
 what they do, and after prove prophaneor Infi- 
 dels : And they think that it is the only way to re- 
 formation to ftay till they are ready to devote 
 themfelves underftandingly to God. But this is 
 their miftake ; For, 1. If it were deferred til) ripe- 
 nefs qf age, one part would negled: it and conti- 
 nue Infidels ; and anocher part would do all for- 
 mally, as we fee they do now at the other Sacra- 
 ment, where the fame Covenant is to berenewed, 
 2* There is a better remedy* 
 
 £. 15. For, 
 
$. iy. For we hold that all that are Baptk 
 2ed in Infancy fhould as underftandingly , and as 
 ferioufly and ( if it may be conveniently ) as 
 folemnly, own and make that Covenant with God 
 when they come to age, as if they had never been 
 baptized ; ( if not more, as being more obliged. ) 
 The reafons of this I have given long ago at^ 
 large, in a Treatife of Confirmation, written when 
 we had hope of fetting up this Courfe, under the 
 name of Confirmation, which fome of us pra&i- 
 fed in our AfTemblies not without fuccefs. To 
 be ferioufly devoted to God by our Parents firft, 
 and to be brought at age as ferioufly to devote 
 our felves to him , as any Anabaptift can do, is 
 a much liklier way -to fill the Church with ferious 
 Chriftians , than to leave all men without the 
 fenfe of an early Infant obligation. • 
 
 £. 1 6. I am as fully perfwaded that Infants 
 Church-memberfhip and Baptifm is according to 
 Gods will, as ever I was, when I was mqft en- 
 gaged in the Coivroverfie : And I am perfwaded 
 that thefe Papers of mine to Mr. Tombes , are fo 
 unfatisfaclorily anfwered as is worfe than no An- 
 fwer, and fheweth how little is to be faid. 
 
 $. 17. Though the Ad of Baptizing be a du- 
 ty, and fo necefiary neceffitate fr&cepi, yet Pro- 
 tectants hold that it is not fo neceflary neceffitate 
 medii^ but that in fome cafes thofe that are unba- 
 ptized may be faved : As in cafe the Child die 
 before it can be done, or in cafe the abfence or 
 delay of the Baptizer be the caufe .• It is true-con- 
 fenting to his Covenant ( for our felves and thofe 
 that we have power to confent and accept it for) 
 
 which 
 
which Chrift hath made necejfary to falvatldn j 
 and if he fhould damn a true Confenter, he fhould 
 damn one that hath the Love of God , and one 
 to whom he promifeth falvation, John }J i6,.i8. 
 
 £. 1 8. It is utterly incongruous to the reft of 
 the Law of Grace , which is fpiritual , and to 
 Chrifts alterations, who took down the Law of 
 burdenfom Ceremonies ; to think that he fhould 
 lay fo great a ftrefs upon the very outward wafh- 
 ing , as that he would damn true Believers that 
 Love God, for want of it : when he hath done 
 fo much to convince the world, that God feeketh 
 fuch to'worfhip him as will do it in fpffft and 
 truth, and that Circumcifion or Uncircumcifion 
 is nothing, but Faith that worketh by Love : And 
 if Penitent Loving Believers fhall not.be faved j 
 Gods .promifes give us no aflurance or fecurity* 
 
 5> . 19. When the Apoftle, Ephef. 4. 4^ j. putteth 
 \^one Baptifm^ among the neceflaries of Church- 
 Concord , by Baptifm is meant, our folemn de- 
 voting our felves ( and ours under that truft ) to 
 Chrift in the B apt if mat Covenant • which can 
 mean no more but that as there are three things 
 fon our part) in Baptifm, i. Heart-con fent i 
 2. Profejfion of that content, 3. The Reception 
 of wafliing as the profeiiing fymbol ; So , 1 . The 
 heart-confent is necefTary to our memberfhip of 
 the Church as invifible, that is, to our union with 
 Cbrfft and our falvation ; 2. The Profejfion of 
 Confent as there is opportunity is necefTary, both 
 to prove the fincerity of Confent it felf , and to 
 other mens notice of it, and fo to our member- 
 fhip of the Church as vifible^ 3. And our fro* 
 
 'feffing 
 
("50 
 
 ftff M £ lt by being Baptized is necefTary to the 
 regular and orderly manner of our Trofeffion : 
 And Co far to our concord; 
 
 £. 20. And he that knoweth Baptifm to be 
 hie et nunc his duty and yet will not receive 
 it 5 fheweth his unfoundnefs by his difobedi- 
 ence. 
 
 <$. 21. As Baptifm is made our great duty 
 under that name , fo Profejfion or Confejfion of 
 Chrift, as fuch , is oft mentioned as necefTary, 
 even to falvation, Rom. 10.9,10. 1 7^.4.2. 3, 
 15. Mat. 10. 32. Phil. 2. 11. 2 John j. 
 
 And Baptifm being our 0/?<?>z confejftng and 
 Owning Chrift by a folemn Vow and Covenant, 
 it is principally as fuch that it is necefTary tofal- 
 vation , yea and to a perfect memberfhip of the 
 vifible Churchy 
 
 . 22. Therefore if any man that in a defart 
 or dry Countrey could have no water , or 
 that lived where there is no Minifter , fhould 
 openly before all the people devote himfelf to 
 God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft, according 
 to the Baptifmal Covenant , and folemnly pro- 
 fefs himfelf a Cbriftian, that man were a true 
 member of the vifible Church, though defective 
 as. to the mode of entrance , and were to be num- 
 bered with Chriftians : And Conflantine and 
 many another were called Chriftians long before 
 they were baptized. And it were injurious \o 
 the Rationality and fpirituality of Chrifts Cove- 
 nant , to feign him to be fo ceremonious, as to 
 rejeft a found profefling believer for want of 
 water. 
 
( 226) 
 
 £.23. Though Augufiine be called dmus pa- 
 ter Infantum^ and be fuppoied for fome paiTa- 
 gcs by many Papifts and others to damn allun- 
 baptized perfons fave Martyrs, yet thefe follow- 
 ing words among others r in his later times in 
 his deliberate difputes againft the Donatifts , ful- 
 ly (hew his contrary judgement ( which yet 1 
 believe the Interefl of his caufe againft the Do- 
 natifts was a help to in this point) And remem- 
 ber that he confirmeth it in his Retra&ations, by 
 retra&mg only the inftance of the thief on. the 
 * ■ crofs , as uncertain whether he was baptized or. 
 not. 
 
 <f. 24. Aug de baptif. cont. Donat. li. 4. c. 
 29. Q Quod etiam at que etiam confiderans in- 
 venio , non tantum Pajfionem pro nomine Chri- 
 fti y id quod ex Baft if mo deer at fojfe fupplere, 
 fed etiam Fidem convcrfionemque Cordis y (i for- 
 te ad cekbrandum myfierium bapifmi in an- 
 
 gufiiis temporum fuccurri non pot eft Et 
 
 Cap. 24. Cum Mimfterium baptifmi non con* 
 temptus religionk fed articulm neceffitatis exekt-* 
 dit : & baptif mm \quidem ptefi inejfe ubi con* 
 verfo cordis defuerit : Converfto autem cordis 
 potefi quidem inejfe non percepto baptifmo ; fed 
 contempto non potefi : neque enim ullo modo dicen- 
 da efi converfio cordis ad Denm, cum Deifacra-* 
 mentam contemnitur. Converfion then will fave 
 without baptifm , when baptifm is not contemn- 
 ed : It is the contempt that deftroyeth , and 
 that as k proveth men unconverted. And this 
 he profeflfeth to be his judgement after long and 
 great confideration. 
 
 *. 25- 
 
(Hi) 
 
 £. 25. Baftifm is to Qoriftianity much like 
 what Ordination is to the f acred Mimftry, and 
 what folemn Matrimony is to Marriage. It 
 is neceflary as a -D/*/y> and as a <JM.eans to our 
 ordinary and regular admittance to the Com- 
 munion of the Church. But as in cafe there were 
 no Or darner to be had, in a far Countrey in 
 ^America, no doubt but a qualified perfon might 
 become a Faftor, rather than God fhouid have 
 no Church , nor be folemnly wor/hipped j And 
 as in cafe there could be no regular jolemmz^ati- 
 on of Marriage ( as in fuch a wildernefs ) a 
 published confent may tie the knot • fo in cafe 
 there could be no Baptizing, a folcmn Frofcjfion 
 and Covenanting would ferve to Gods acceptance, 
 and to a right to the Chriftian name. 
 
 ^. 26. I only leave it to Chriftian Charity 
 and wifcjom to confider how far fome mens Edu* 
 cation, natural weaknefs of judgement, and other 
 impediments of information , may make their 
 error againft Infant Bapcifm , to participate of 
 fuch a Necejfity : The cafe hath its difficulties : 
 Papifts and Protectants confefs it , as to Scri- 
 pture evidence : Weak men cannot know all things s 
 And even confiderable heads, that have heard 
 and thought of much againft it, which they can- 
 not anfwer, may grow very confident that they 
 are in the right , and after by that prejudice may 
 become uncapable of what fhouid fatisfie them ; 
 Abundance of the forts of the Church that talk 
 moft againft them , give fuch weak reafons for 
 Infant Baptifm, and are fo unable to confute 
 an jinabAftifly as gieweth, that it is not More 
 Qjl know- 
 
(228) 
 
 knowledge y but fomewhat' elfe more incli- 
 ning them to the truth therein, that keepeth 
 them right. 
 
 o. 27. If the cafe were , whether the Lords 
 Supper might be Adminiftred with Beer , or 
 Milk, where there is no-Wine t> Or whether Ba- 
 ptifm might be Adminiftred by Mrlk or Wine, 
 where there is no water ? fuppofe the affirming 
 party were certainly in the right • yet if the con- 
 trary minded t*ould fay, I own Chrifts Sacra- 
 ment , and folemnly profefs my confent to his 
 Covenant ; and I would participate as you do, 
 but that I take it to be a fin , and with all the 
 means that I can ufe , in conference, reading, 
 meditation , prayer, my judgement is not chan- 
 ged ,3 I fhould not break fuch communion with 
 fuch a man, as he were capable and willing to 
 hold with the Church. And how near fome A- 
 nabapiifts cafe is to this, I leave to confidera* 
 tion. 
 
 <. 2?. But making no queftron but many of 
 them are far better men than I , and knowing 
 my felf ly ible to error, and knowing how much 
 Chrift in his promifes iayeih upon fmcerity of 
 Faith and Love more than upon ceremony \ and 
 having endeavoured to learn what this meaneth, 
 / Will have mercy and not fucrifice ■ As I am 
 far more offended at their Schifm , or feparation 
 froVn Communion with our Churches, than at 
 their opinion , fo I will here lay down thofe 
 terms on which I am perfwaded good and fo- 
 ber men will be willing on both fides to agree 
 and hold communion : Or on which I am fure 
 
 I 
 
(229) 
 
 Lwould gladly live in brotherly love and com- 
 munion with them my felf. 
 
 £. 29. Let the Anabaftifts confent to and 
 profefs as followeth or to this fenfe. 
 
 u Q Though we judge Infant Baptifm diflb- 
 <c nant from Chrifts inftituced order , yet find- 
 <c ing that God hath made many promifes to the 
 " feed of the faithful above others, and that Chrift 
 " expreflTed his readinefs to receive little children 
 " when they were brought to him for his blef- 
 <c fing, and knowing that all Chriftian Parents 
 "fhould earneftly defire that their children may 
 "be the children of God through Chrift , and 
 ct fhould devote them to him, as far as is in their 
 " power , and knowing that there are- difficul- 
 ties about the extent of this power , and 
 * c Chrifts promifes • we do here folemnly pro- 
 "fefs, that we thankfully delire all thofe mer- 
 <c cies for this child which God hath promifed 
 ic $ fuch in his word • and that we heartily 
 " offer, devote and dedicate this child to God the 
 <c Father, Son and Holy Ghoft , as far as he 
 ** hath given us power to do it, befeeching him ac- 
 f f cordingly to accept him-.And we promife faithful- 
 cc ly to endeavour to educate him in the nurture 
 cc and admonition of the Lord, and as we are 
 cC able to perfwade him when he is capable, to 
 "believe in Chrift, and folemnly devote himfelf 
 " to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft in 
 " Baptifm. ] 
 
 Let this much be done in the Church or fo 
 openly as may fatisfie the Church, that they are 
 not defpifers of Gods mercies, nor their childrens 
 fouls. Q^3 Mucli 
 
(230) 
 
 Much more would it tend to our quietnefs and 
 concord , if thofe that profefs that they cannot 
 fatisfie their conferences in their Infant Baptifm, 
 would but do as the Liturgie doth by thofe 
 whofe Baptifm is uncertain , [ If thou be not 
 Baptized, I Baptise thee^\ and fo would fay, [Be- 
 ing uncertain whether my Infant Baptifm be va- 
 lid , If it be not I now receive that which is J 
 And when they have fitisfied their confciences, 
 WDuld live quietly in the Love and communi- 
 on of the Church J Who would not receive 
 them, though we approve not of their way ? 
 
 tf. 30. And were it in my power as a Paftor 
 of the Church , I would give fatisfa&ion by 
 fuch an anfwerable profeflion as this. 
 
 ic £ Though it be our judgement that Infants 
 u have ever been members of Gods vifible Church, 
 " fince he had a Church and there were Infants 
 " in the world, and do believe that thrift hath 
 "fignified in the Gofpel that it is his gractdus 
 "will that they lhould ftill be fo - And that 
 c< he that commanded, Mat. 28. 19. [_ Go ye and 
 ^Difciple all Nations 'Baptizing thcm~} would 
 <c have his Minifters endeavour accordingly to 
 "do it, and hath hereby made Baptifm the re- 
 gular orderly way of folemn entrance into a 
 * c vifible Church ftate •, and therefore we devote 
 " this child ro God in the Baptifmal Covenant : 
 <c Yet we do alfo hold, that when he cometh 
 ic to age , it will be his duty as ferioufly and 
 u devoutly to make this Covenant with God 
 " underftandingly himfelf , and to dedicate him- 
 " felf to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft, 
 
e>30 
 
 H as thofe mull do that never were Baptized in 
 ic Irifancie : And we promife to endeavour faith- 
 C4 fully as we have opportunity, to inftrud: and 
 "perfwade him fo to do , hoping that this 
 fi his early Baptifmai dedication , and obligati- 
 <c on to God will rather much prepare him for 
 "it, than hinder it. 
 
 <$. 31. Me thinks rhefe Profeffions fhouidput 
 off the chief matter of offence and exception againft 
 each other , as to the ill consequents of our opi- 
 nions ? And if fober good men would by fuch a 
 mutual approach, be the more difpofed to live to- 
 gether in love and holy peace, how eafilyfhould 
 I bear the fcorns of thofe Formalifts that will 
 reproach me for fo much as motioning [ a Peace 
 with the Anabaftifls , even in the fame Commu- 
 nion ! 1 Who by making it a reproach will but 
 perfwade me, that fuch as they are lefs wor- 
 thy jof Chriftian Communion than fober, pious, 
 and peaceable Anabaptiftu 
 
 £. 32. And if with the partial fort of them- 
 felves fuch motions of Peace be turned into mat- 
 ter of contempt , and they proceed in their 
 clamours and reviling of me, as an enemy of 
 the truth, for being againft their way, I fhall 
 account it no wonder nor matter of much provo- 
 cation, finding in all Seds as well as theirs, that 
 the injudicious fort are apt to be abufively cen- 
 forious, and the more mens Pride, Ignorance 
 and uncbaritablenefs remain, the more they will 
 fwell into felf-conceit , ^nd trouble the Church 
 with a miftaking wrangling hurtful fore of 
 zeal. 
 
f 232) 
 
 £. 33. And as I muft needs believe as ill of 
 {ome fort of Zeal as St. James hath fpoken of 
 it, Jam. 3. and experience hath too long told 
 the world of it ; yet I take it for truly amiable 
 in men , that they have a love and Zeal for 
 Truth in general, and a hatred to that which 
 they think to be againft it 5 and that their bit- 
 ternefs againft the truth and me, is upon a fup- 
 pofition that both are againft the truth and God j 
 for this beareth them witnefs that they have a 
 zeal of God, though it be not according to Know- 
 ledge • and if they knew truth indeed, they would 
 be zealous for it, 
 
 $. 34. I conclude with this notice to the con- 
 trary minded,that the evidence for Infants Church- 
 memberfhip fecmeth to me fo clear, both in na- 
 ture and in Scriprure , that I bid them de- 
 fpair of ever perfwading me againft it : But 
 if they will have any hope of changing my judge- 
 ment , it muft be by confejfing the vtfible Church- 
 memberjhip of Infants , and proving that 
 yet they are not to be baptised ,and that Baptifm 
 was appointed for initiating none but adult con- 
 verts , and, not to be the common entrance into 
 the £hurch : which yet I thinkthey canneverdo, 
 while the plain Law of Chrift Mat. 29. 19. and 
 the expofition of theuniverfal Church, doth ftand 
 on record to confute fuch an opinion / But here 
 they have more room for adifpute. 
 
 £. 35. But ( though I expeft to be cenfured 
 for it ) I will fay onc^ ( becaufe truth is truth ) 
 that though Rebaptix-ing and Reordaining are 
 juftly both condemned by the ancient Churches , 
 
 and 
 
and pronounced alike ridiculous by Gregory Mag* 
 Lib.i.Ep* IndiB. u. c.46. and many others • yet 
 were men Re baptized but for Certainty to them- 
 felves or to the Church , and to quiet their con- 
 tinences , and on fuch terms as in my Chriflian 
 DireBory I have {hewed that a feeming Reor- 
 dination might in fome cafes be tolerated, and 
 would not wrong Infants , nor make it an occafi- 
 on of divifion or alienation ^ I know not by any 
 Scripture or reafon that fuch Rebaptizkig is fo 
 heinous a fin , as fhould warrant us to contemn our 
 brethren : No though it were as faulty as the 
 oft commemorative baptizing ufed by the sAbaj- 
 fines. 
 
 CHAR 
 
(*34) 
 
 —^ — , — jMJl — ! 1 — i — 
 
 CHAP. III. 
 tA General Viewof\Ax f Danvers book^ 
 
 $' l * TV /T^' danvers book is entitled * Trea* 
 1V1 f#/i of Baptifm^ in which he giveth 
 us the Hiftory of Infant and Adult Baptifm out 
 of Antiquiiy , as making it appear that Infant 
 Baptifm was not pra&ifed for 300 years (in his 
 fecond edit, it is [_ near 300. ) And in his Ap- 
 fend. ed. 2.£ / cannot find that it was pratti- 
 fed upon any till the fourth Century :~] And he 
 giveth us a Catalogue of witneffes againft it. 
 By which thofe that hold their Religion on the 
 belief of fuch mens words , will conclude that all 
 this is true, and that Infant Baptifm is a Novel- 
 ty , and thofe that are againft it do go the old 
 and Cat ho lie k^rv ay, 
 
 $. 2. Having perufed his teftimonies on both 
 fides, I am humbled and afhamed for the dul- 
 nefs of my heart, that doth not with floods of 
 companionate tears lament the pittiful condition 
 of the feduced , that muft be thus deceived in 
 the dark j and of the Churches of Chrift that 
 muft be thus afTaulted , and fhaken ; and diftra- 
 ded , by fuch inhumane horrid means : The 
 booK being compofed , in that part of hiftory 
 which the ftrefs of the caufe lyeth on, of fuch 
 UNTRUTHS m fatl and hiftory, as I pro- 
 fefs it one of my greateft difficulties to know 
 how to call them. Should I fay , that they are 
 
 fo 
 
fo notorious and fhamelefs , as that ( I fay sot 
 only a Papift, ) but any fober Turk or Pagan 
 fHould blufh to have been guilty but of fome 
 page or lines of them, and much more a man 
 of any tendernefs of confcience , the Readers 
 would think that the language were harfh, were 
 it never fo true , and fome would fay , Let us 
 have [oft words and hard arguments J. And 
 fhould I not tell the Reader the truth of the 
 c*fe, I might help to betray him into too much 
 fearlefncfs of his bait and fnare, and I doubt I 
 may be guilty of untruth by concealing the^j/*- 
 iity of his untruths : And it is not matter of 
 Argument , but faB that I am fpeaking ok 
 
 JS. 3. But it pleafeth that God whofe coun-^ 
 fels are unfearchable , as to permit five parts 
 of the Earth to remain yet grangers unto Chriil, 
 fo to permit his Church to be fo tryed and dt- 
 ftraded between Church Tyranny, and dividing 
 Reparations , Setts and parties, as that in many 
 ages it hath not been eafie to know which of them 
 was the more pernicious. 
 
 £.4. And it mult grieve every confcionable 
 and difcerning lover of Truth and Peace, to ob- 
 ferve how. thefe two Church-difturbing parties, 
 do by their extremities of opposition, increafe 
 as well as exafperate each other : As the Ithaci- 
 an Prelates did by the Prifcillianifts , and the 
 Trifcillianifls by them. The Pride , covetouf- 
 nefs, dead formality, and cruel violence of Cler- 
 gie Tyrants maketh the poor Se&arics think that 
 they muft go fofar from them, till they have 
 loft thetnfelves and know not where they are ^ 
 
 and 
 
(2 3 6) 
 
 and as Mr. Danvers mufters up a catalogue 
 of my fayings in his mode and drefs , which 
 feem ugly to the poor man that thinks he feeih 
 Antichriftianity in fuch G off el and natural truths 
 which he underftandeth not , ( Like that melan- 
 choly perfon, who thinks fhe feeth Spiders upon 
 every one that comes near her , and they muft 
 brufh them off before fhe can converfe with 
 them , though fhe be c&tera fana ) j fo thofe 
 on the other extream think them fo fanatick, 
 and almoft mad , that they are apt to fufped eve- 
 ry word almoft that they fay, of madnefs, and 
 fometimes thereby injure the truths of the Gof- 
 pel, and foberer people, that partake not of their 
 guilt , and fo fay of fuch as agree with them 
 but in aliquo tertio, They are all alike, 
 
 tf. 5. This was the main caufe which made 
 St Martin feparate from his neighbour Bifhops, 
 and deny communion with them to the death : 
 Becaufe their perlecution of the Frifcillianifis had 
 fo animated the loofer fort againft ftrid Reli- 
 gious people , that they had brought men un- 
 der the fufpicion of PrjfcilUanifm, , if they did 
 but faft,and pray, and read and talk of the Scripture. 
 It's eafie to fee of late who they are that have 
 done the like, 
 
 £. 6. When this fort of men fee the weaknefs 
 of the Sectaries , and the bold-faced falfhood 
 which fuch as Wir.Ddnverj obtrude on the world, 
 and hear them furioufly revile what they under- 
 ftand not,it maketh them think that they are fitter 
 for Bedlam than for humane focietie : And their 
 consciences juftifie them for all the cruelties that 
 
 they 
 
they ufe againft cither them , or rtiore innocent 
 perfons, whom in their ignorance and uncharita- 
 blenefs they number with them. 
 
 f. 7. And on the like account when they read 
 and hear their erroneous Do&rines, and hear 
 their incongruous words in prayer , they think " 
 they can never be too ftrid in (hackling them and 
 all others in prefcribed forms : And nothing 
 quieteth their Confciences in all this fo much, as 
 the undeniable errors , and follies and mifcarria- 
 ges of thofe that thus provoke them. 
 
 £. 8. But in this the Church in Auguftines days 
 did not think that way the wifeft cure : when he 
 faith \_ Ajferat^ ut fieri folet, aliquant frecem in 
 qua loquatur contra regulam fidei ( multi quifft 
 irrmnt in freces non folum ab imferitis lequaci- 
 bw y fed etiam ab h&reticis comfofitas, & fer ig- 
 worantia fimflicitatem non eas valentes difcerne* 
 re 7 muntur iti> arbitr antes quod bona fint : ) Nee 
 tamen quod in eis ferverfum eft evacuat ilia que 
 ibi reQa funt - 5 fed tib eis fotim evacuatur ] 
 Aug. de bapt. cont. Donau f as I remember about 
 lib. 5. c. 11.) O truly charitable and peaceable 
 Doctrine ! And he that will feparate from other 
 for every difference ( or real error ) in Doctrine 
 or Prayers, fliall have enow to feparate from 
 bim. 
 
 #. 9. I know nothing that fo much multiplieth 
 Sectaries as the notorious mifcarriages of Church- 
 Tyrants that oppofe them : And I know no- 
 thing, next carnal intereft it felf , that fo much 
 tnultiplieth and confirmeth Papifts and Church- 
 Tyrants , as the madnefs of the Sectaries • The 
 
 wildenefs, 
 
(238) 
 
 Wildenefs , but efpecially the diverfity of theii* 
 opinions, hath done more to increafethe number 
 of Papifts among us than any thing that ever the 
 Papifts themfelves could otherwife fay for their 
 caufe ; For people fee fo many giddy with turn- 
 ing round, and fee fo many Seels among us, that 
 they are confounded, and know not which to be 
 of • but they rauft lay hold of fomewhat that is 
 more ftable, or be wheel-lick, 
 
 $. io. O what a confirmation is it to a Papift 
 to find fuch a one as Mr. Danvers calling Gods 
 Truths and Ordinances Antichriftian I Yea, our 
 very Baptifmal Covenant and dedication to Chrift 
 is Antichriftian, and the chief Fathers and Mar- 
 tyrs of the Church are Antichriftian/ ( no won- 
 der if I be fo. ) And I doubt almoft all the Church 
 of Chrift for 900 years, at leaft in this mans recko- 
 ning. And what will the Papifts defire more > 
 With what fcorn will they deride fuch men ? 
 Wo be to him by whom offence cometh. The chief 
 Quakers are charged by Mr. Faldo and others 
 (even fome of their own name ) of denying the 
 perfonand office of Chrift himfelf: It is worth 
 the enquiring whether they rejed him not as An- 
 tichrift, and call not Chriftianky by the name of 
 Antichriftianity ? 
 
 CHAP, 
 
(*39) 
 
 C H A P. I V. 
 
 Of Mr* Danvcrs^ his Witneffes againft Infant- 
 Baptifm* 
 
 £• u "\T7* Hen ne hath told you, that In his 
 VV "fmaUfearch f fhamefuliy fmall) 
 " he cannot find there is any authentick teftimony 
 "that it was pra&ifed on any till the fourth Cen- 
 <c tury •, he in the next words faith that it is grant- 
 ed that Tertullian fpake againftit in Africa , 
 " which is clear evidence that fome had been 
 " fpeaking for it in that corner of the world : ]] 
 This is no contradiction with him : And did they 
 only Jpeak^ for it and not pratlffe it i Speak once 
 like a man : And was not that till the fwrth 
 Century t 
 
 ^. 2. His Catalogue containeth three Columns : 
 The firft of the Baptifm of the Adult : And what 
 Chriftian ever denied this ? And what meaneth the 
 man in labouring to prove it? The fecond is of 
 the Inftituting and afferting of Infant-Baptifm ; 
 of which more anon. The third is of his Witneffes 
 againft Infant-Baptifm. And the fir ft of thefe 
 mentioned in the Catalogue is Tertnllian in the 
 third Century. By which he feemeth to confefs 
 that till the third Century he hath no wknefs 
 againft it. But I have faid fo much elfewhere 
 and others more, to prove, i. That Tertnlli- 
 ans words prove that Infant-Baptifm de fafto 
 was then in ufe j 2. That he only telleth his opi- 
 nion 
 
C*4o) 
 
 hion of the point of convenience , but concluded 
 riot againft Infant-Baptifm as unlawful 5*3. That 
 it is moll probable he fpeaketh of the Infants of 
 Heathens • 4. That he fpeaketh from that ftritt 
 fingulartty which made him plead alfo for the 
 *JMontanifts Fanaticifm, and againft fecond rtoar- 
 riages, and for his inordinate faftings, &c. as a 
 man differing from the Churches and numbered 
 with the Hereticks (though I think him a learn- 
 ed Godly man. ) And I refer it to the Readers 
 judgement whether in my book of Infant-Baptifm 
 
 I have not proved by many other words in Ter- 
 tullian that he was not againft all Intant-Baptifra, 
 but for it among Chriftians. 
 
 £. 3. His next and great Witnefs is the Doha- 
 tifts together. This is fomething, were it true : 
 but it is fuch a kind of falfhood as I muft not 
 name in its due epithets, left you think me over- 
 friar p. 
 
 a $. 4. His words are £ Donatus a learned man 
 u in Africa taught that they fhould baptize no 
 
 II Children but only that believed and defired 
 "it.] 
 
 Anfw. Utterly falfe : And how doth he prove 
 it ? By Sebafi. Frank, whom I will not fearch to 
 fee whether he fay fo or not. Reader, if the 
 queftion be, what was done, faid or held by thou- 
 fands of men twelve hundred years ago, and the 
 Writings of them and their Adverfaries were ex- 
 tant, and the Hiftories written of them in that 
 and the next Ages, would you have a man pafs by 
 all proof fromthefc, and tell you what a fellow 
 of his own opinion faith eleven hundred years af- 
 ter? 
 
ter } He brings us with great oftentationthe.D/tfc/? 
 Avabaptifis Martyrologie and fnch like Hiflorie^ 
 of a few years old, of fellows that knew little 
 more than as he doth, what their Party or Com- 
 panions told them, cr what they iguorantly ga- 
 thered from fuch Books as are yet to be feen by 
 us as well as by them. If Ifhould difpute what Augn~ 
 flim held, would Mr. D. fetch his proofs from 
 the writings of James Nailor, or George Vox, or 
 Jfaac Pennington, yea or Mr. Tombes to prove his 
 afTertions, while Augufiines works are at hand to 
 be feen ? 
 
 . cc ^. 5. So next, he faith [that the followers of 
 cc D mat us were ail one wLh the Anabapdfts, de- 
 " nying Baptiim to Children, admitting the Be* 
 "lievers only thereto who defired the fame J 
 And be citeth one called ( Twisk* 
 
 Anfxv. Utterly falfe ; They held no fuch thing. 
 £.6. His next proof is indeed from an unque- 
 ftionable witnefs * he faith u \_ Augufiines third 
 " and fourth Books againft the Donarifts do de- 
 <c monftratc that they denied Infant-Baprifm , 
 <c wherein he manageth the argument for Infant- 
 u Baptifm againft them , with great zeal, enfor- 
 cc cing it by feveral arguments, but efpecially from 
 cc Apoftolical Traditicn , and curfing with great: 
 <{ bitternefs they that fhould not embrace if. 
 
 £.7. Anfw. Mr. Bag flaw is now quite ovef- 
 done in the quality of untruths : Reader , either 
 this man had feen and read the Books of An- 
 
 J gttftine mentioned by him, or he had not. If 
 not , doth he ufe Gods Church and the 
 
 ■ fouls of poor ignorant people with any cender- 
 
 R ■ ne r s 
 
(242) 
 
 nefs of Confidence, fobriety or humanity , to 
 talk at this rate of Books, that he never faw or 
 read, which are fo common among us to be 
 feen ? If he underftand not Latine , how unfit is 
 he to give us the Hiftory of thefe antiquities > 
 And how audacious to talk thus of what he know- 
 eth not ? If he underftand it, what cruelty is it 
 to the Church to venture on fuch untruths to 
 fave him the labour of opening and reading the 
 books he talketh of? But if he have read them % then 
 I can fcarce match him again among all the falfifiers 
 that I know in the world ^ 1 dare not be fo uncha- 
 ritable to him as to think that ever he read them. 
 $• 8. The Books are feven that Auguftine 
 wrore of Baptifm againft the Donatifts : And in 
 them all I cannot find one fyllable of intimation 
 that ever the Donatifts denied Infant- Baptifm, but 
 enough to the contrary that they did not : Nor 
 do the third and fourth books mentioned by him 
 meddle with it any more than the reft : There is 
 not in the feven books nor in all the reft of Au- 
 flins books againft the Donatifts, one word that I 
 can find , of any fuch controverfie with them at 
 all : And for a man to fay that in two bookj he 
 managcth the arguments for Infant - Baptifm 
 againft them with great zeal y &c. when there is 
 not one word that fuppofeth them to deny it , blufh 
 Reader in companion for fuch a man. 
 «- £. o. Reader, the Donatifts were a great par- 
 ty of men in Africa : They were Prelatical and 
 for Ceremonies as the other Churches were : 
 They differed from the reft on the account of the 
 Perfonal fncce^ion . of their Bifhops. In a 
 
 time 
 
time of petfecution they faid ( tfuly or falfly was 
 a great controverfic ) that one of the Bifhops de- 
 livered up the Church-books to the Perfecutors , 
 10 be burnt, rather than die himfelf, when they 
 demanded them ; And that the Catholick Bifhops 
 received fucceffively their ordination from that 
 man , and called them Traditores 5 whereas the 
 Bifhop that all their Biflwps had fucceffively been 
 ordained by, was one that had refufed to deliver 
 up the Church-books j And confequently he was 
 the right Bifhop, and they that had their fuccef- 
 fion from him were true Bifhops and Churches , 
 and all the reft were no true Bifhops or Churches * 
 and therefore that all their Baptifmand Sacra- 
 ments were nullities , and their Communion un- 
 lawful, and that all people were bound in Confci- 
 ence as ever they would be faved to feparare from 
 the reft ( called Catholicks ) and to come to them 
 and to be rebaptized. So that their Schifm was 
 much like the Papifts, who confine the Church to 
 their party, and condemn all others, fave that the 
 Papifts (ordinarily) rebaptize not ( though they 
 fay fome Monks have done it, aselfewhere I have 
 cited.) The Donatifts were Epifcopal ceremonious 
 Separates, that did it on the account, of a purer 
 Epifcopal fuccefiom Till their days the holy Do- 
 dors of the Church had almoft all been againft 
 drawing the fword againft Hereticks, even Align- 
 ftin himfelf. But the greatnefs of their party 
 and the proud conceit of their greater zeal "ancl 
 ftri&nefs than the Catholicks had, made them fo 
 furious that the Catholick Paftors could not live 
 quietly by them. Infomuch that fome of them 
 
 R z wounded 
 
wounded the Minifters in the ftreets, and fdfrie of 
 them made a fait fliarp water and fpouted into 
 Minifters eyes as they paft the ftreet, to put out 
 their eyes j till many fuch infolencics provoked 
 Augufim to change his judgement of toleration , 
 (and efpecially the multitudes feduced by them, ) 
 and the Bifhops to crave the Emperors aid : The 
 Emperor made Edicts for mulcts and banifhment 
 to thofe that perfevered : This ( being a new way ) 
 fo exafperated the Donatifts, that in very pafljon 
 many of them ( yea Bifhops ) murdered themfelves 
 to bring odium on the Catholicks, to make the 
 people believe that the cruelty of the Catholicks 
 compelled'' them to it : And this was the flat e of 
 thefe two parties - 9 but not a word of difference 
 about Infant-Baptifm between them tlftt ever I 
 read in either part. 
 
 p, 10. The Controverfie between Anfiin and 
 them he thus ftateth ; Lib. I. c. i, 2. Si haberi 
 foris fotefl y etiam dari l:ur non poteft f Baptifm 
 received out of the Catholick, or true Church 
 among Schifmaticks is true baptifm : and there- 
 fore baptifm given without by Schifmaticks is true 
 baptifr/t, 
 
 " Impie facer e qui rebaptiz^are conantur crbis 
 " unit at em ^ & nos retle facere qui Dei Sacra- 
 <c menta improbare , nee in ipfo fchifmate aude- 
 <c mtu ; They do impioufly that endeavor to re- 
 <c baptize all the united Chriftian world, and we 
 " do lightly who dare not deny Gods Sacraments, 
 <c no not in a Schifm. ] For Aagufiin peaceably 
 held the Donatifts baptifm to be true and valid 
 though irregular and unlawfully given and. taken, 
 
 but 
 
(245) 
 but the Donatifts held all the Ouholicks, Mini- 
 ftry and baptifm null. 
 
 £. u. Therefore he thus fummeth up their dif- 
 ferences, cap. 3. Duo flint qua, dicimns , & ejfs 
 in Catholica Baptifmum, & ilUc. tantun rcVte ac- 
 dpi : Item alia duo dicimus , ejfe apud Donatio 
 ft as baptifmnm -, non ant em re tie acetyl : Hamm 
 fententiamm tres noftra t ant urn font, unam vera 
 Htrique dicimm.~\ That is, <c [Two things ws 
 "fay, that there is Baptifm in the Catholick 
 " Church, and that there only it is rightly recei- 
 cc ved : Alfo two things more we fay, that there 
 " is Baptifm with the Donatifts . but that with 
 " them it is not rightly received : of thefe fen- 
 <c fences,, three are only ours, and one is com- 
 <c mon to us both : ] Ah ft in held it a fin , to 
 be baptized among Schifmaticks, ( to joyn with 
 their Sect ) but not a nullity. 
 
 £. 12. Hereufon he addreffethhimfelfto evince 
 the firifulnefs of their Schifm and unchriftianing 
 all the Churches : And indeed he feenn; to think 
 that though Baptifw was among them > yet hardly 
 Salvation: And his argument (though I think we 
 rnuft abate for mens pajfions and temptations) is 
 worth the Scparatifts confederation : that baptifm 
 that deftroyetb (. remitt'eth he calls it ) not fin , is 
 not [aving: that which is without Uve remit nth 
 not fin : But Schifmaticks , faith he, have net 
 love: For, Nulli Schifm at a facer ent fi fra- 
 terno odio non txeaedfentur : Anno'n eft in Schif- 
 mate odium f rate-mum ? Qnts hoc dixerit ? Cum 
 .& origo & pertinacia Schifmatis nulla fit alia 
 mfi odium f rater nurt\~\ That is, Cc None M'o'utd 
 
 R 3 u n*'ks 
 
(MO 
 
 ff make fchifms if they were not blinded by the 
 t£ hatred of their brethren: Is there not the ha- 
 ci tred of brethren in Schifm . ? What man will fay 
 " fo ? Whenas both the Rife and the Pertinacie 
 Cc of Schifm is no ocher than the hatred of bre- 
 thren. ] But blind zeal will not let men know 
 their own hatred , when yet they defame their 
 brethren as no brethren , and endeavour to have 
 all others' thinly them fn bad as not to be commu~ 
 nicated mth y and feparate from them on that ac- 
 count. 
 
 £.13. The main fubjed: of all the reft of thefe 
 feven Books of Anfiin is to anfwer the Donatifts 
 claim of Cyprian and his Carthage Council as on 
 their fide- and to anfwer all the layings of him. 
 and the feveral Bifhops of that Council. The 
 plain truth is this : In the firft age the Churches 
 were fo fober and charitable as t not to account 
 every erring brother and party Hemicks, but 
 fuch as fubverted the EfTentLls of Religion : And 
 fome of thefe corrupted the very form of Baptifm s 
 The baptifm of thefe the Church took for null, 
 and baptized fuch as they pretended to have ba- 
 ptized. Cyprian and the other African Bifhops 
 knowing this, and being much troubled with he- 
 retical Churches about them , ftretched this too 
 far and rcbapiized them that fuch Hereticksbapti- 
 zed as did not change the form of Baptifm , 
 but incorporated men into their corrupt focieties : 
 The Donatifts took advantage by this example 
 and all the Reafons of the Council, to go fo much 
 further as to take the Catholickj for Heretic^* 
 or unlawful Churches 7 and rH J *ptiz,e thofe that 
 
 they 
 
C 2 47) 
 they baptized : Auflin anfwereth all the Councils 
 reaions , but praifeth Cyprian as a holy Martyr, 
 and no Heretick ihough miftaken. 
 
 £. 14. And if is noc enough for me to fay that 
 all thele Books of Aufltn have not a word of what 
 he fpeaketh, as controverting Infant -Baptifm with 
 the Donatifls, but moreover, he bringeth the Do- 
 natifts agreement with the Catholicks in the point 
 of Infant-Baptifm , as a medium in his arguing 
 againft them, Lib. 4. c. 23. (hewing how much 
 baptifm availeth, in that Chrifl himfelf would be 
 baptised by a fervant , and Infants that cannot 
 them fe Ives believe are baptized " f" Quod tradi- 
 cc tum tenet univerfitas Ecclefia cum parvuli In- 
 u fames baptizantur qui nondum pojjunt corde ere- 
 <c dere ad juflitiam & ore confiteri ad.falutem , 
 u quod latro potuit : Quinetiam flendo & vagien- 
 ic do cum ineis myfterium celebratur y ipfis wyfiicis 
 <c vocibus obflrepunt ^ & tarr.en NuIIm Chriftia- 
 ." nits dixcrit eos inaniter baptizari. ] That is, 
 £ Which all the * fourch holdeth 
 when little Infants are bapti- * Including the Do- 
 zed> who certainly cannot yet natifh. 
 with the heart believe to righ- 
 teoufnef and with the mouth confefi to Salvation : 
 And yet no foriftian will fay that they are ba- 
 ptized in vain, ] . 
 
 Thus he argueth againft the Donatifls , If the 
 whole Church hold Infant-Baptifm, andnoChri- 
 ftiau will fay that it is in vain, though ihey them- 
 felves believe not and confef s not, then you fhonid 
 not fay all baptifm is vain becaufe we Catholicks 
 adminifter it, or becaufe it is received in our 
 
 R 4 Churches. 
 
Churches. The whole tenor of Aafiins charita- 
 ble language to the Donatifts , and the fcope of 
 this place fheweth, that he here pleaded umver? 
 falcon ferity and by '[all the Church^ and [~ no 
 Chrifiian J inciudech the Donatifts. And to he 
 oft argueth againft the Pelagians, who though 
 they denied original fin, durft not differ from 
 the whole Chriitian world by denying Infant- 
 baptifm, but pretended that it was for the convey- 
 ance of Grace, though not for remitting fin. 
 
 tf. 15. And Aitfttn next addeth \_ht ft quif- 
 *quam m hac re author it at em divinam qiurat 
 ( Qmnquam quod waiver fa tenet Ecciefia , nee 
 Concilia infinitum ^ fed femper retentum eft, non 
 nifi authoritate Apoflolica traditum rcilijfime cre- 
 ditur i tarnen veraciter conjicere poffumiu, &c. ~\ 
 That is, Cc [ And if any one in this cafe ( of In* 
 f* fant-baptifm) ask^for Divine authority (Though 
 u that which the univ erf d (or whole ) Church 
 <c doth hold , and was not mfituted by Councils 
 cc but was ever held, is mo ft rightly Relieved to 
 ii be delivered by the Apo files authority) yet we 
 may truly con'jeVcare , &c. ( and fo he paueth to 
 the Scripture argument from Circumcificn. ) 
 
 $. 16. Here note, 1. That this was no contro- 
 vcrfie with the Donatifts, 2. Norwich any other 
 Setl 9 but held by all the. Church, 3. That he only 
 faith as in a Patfefithfem that [that which all the 
 whole Church holdcth, and did ever hold, not in- 
 fiituted by any Council, is jiift'y talzen for an 
 Apoftclical tradition , ] which I think k\v Pro- 
 tectants or fober Christians will deny. Who can 
 imagine that Timothy 3 Titm , &'/^ anq all the 
 
 whole 
 
(249) 
 jwfoole Church in the Apoftles daies and ever fincc, 
 ihould hold and agree in any thing as a part of 
 (fhriftian Doflrine or Worfhip, which they had 
 not from the Apoftles ? Had the Apoftles fo lit- 
 tie charity as not to endeavour to re&ifie any of 
 their errors? 4, Note here that the Donatifts ne- 
 ver denied this (that Infant-baptifm vpas ever 
 held by the whole Church to that day , and not 
 inftitutsdby any Council: ) And were not Auftin, 
 the Donatifts and the whole Church liker to 
 know the universality and Antiquity of the thing, 
 fhan the Holland or Englifti Anabaptifts about 
 fourteen hundred years after them ? 5. Note that 
 he bringeth Scripture for it alfo, 
 
 $, 17. Indeed I find fome that before thofe 
 times had been above Ordinances and again ft all 
 fraptifm^ but none againft Infant-bapttfm as un- 
 lawfuLTheretorc Auguftine faith elfewhere,that it 
 is e after to find Heretic kj that deny all baptifm, 
 than' any that change the form of baptising • fo 
 fure haih the Tradition of univerfal practice de- 
 livered down the form and words of baptifm to 
 us. 
 
 $. 18. Afterward fag, 230 Ed. 2, Mr. Dan- 
 vers corner^ to ts4uftin again , and faith thac 
 Vtncentias Killer did oppofe Auftin in the point 
 of Infant-baptifm y citing Auguft. li. 3. C, 14.de 
 Anirna. 
 
 An fa* Not a word of truth : no fuch matter 
 in that Chaprer or the whole book 
 
 $. 10. Next he faith Cc f Crefconius did alfo 
 u oppofe Auftin in the point of Infants baptifm^ and 
 7 1 did maintain — that there w<u no true irk- 
 
 m 
 
(250) 
 €c ptifm but that which adminiflred after faith. 
 
 Anfw. Utterly falfe ftill. There was no fuch 
 controverfie between them. No wonder if he had 
 mifcited fentences that will thus go to falfifie 
 whole Books, as fpeaking of that which they ne- 
 ver meddle with I Auguftine having written againft 
 Tetilian ( their beft (peaker, having of a Lawyer 
 been made a Biftiop ) Crefconins a Donatift Gram- 
 marian interpofed for Tetilian , and perfwaded 
 Auftin to gentler thoughts of them ; but fpeaks 
 not a word againft Jnfant-baptifm. 
 
 $. 20. Nay, lib. 3. cap* 31. Auftin tells us that 
 they held it as well as the Catholicks -. faith he, 
 £ Circumcifionem certe praputii in figura f atari 
 baptifmi {hrifti ab antiquis obfervatum ejfe , ne- 
 gare, at arbitror^ non audetis : That is, " lfup- 
 " pofe yoa dare not deny that Circumcifton was 
 u obferved by the ancients in figure of the Chri- 
 €6 ftian baptifm.~] It was a granted thing. 
 
 £. 21. And it was Crefcomus words to Auftin 
 [[ Vna Religio^ eadem SacY amenta, nihil in Chri- 
 ftiana obfervatione diver fum : & adhuc adverfm 
 invicem labor amm ? Saith Auftin, jQuare ergo re- 
 baptists Chriflianum ? Ego non rebaptiz.0 ; that 
 is, tc £ We have all one Religion, the fame Sacra- 
 " ments, there is nothing in our Chriftian obfer- 
 tc vat ion divers (faith Crefconins) And yet do 
 cc we ftrive againft each ether ? Why then do ft 
 iC thou rebaftiz^e a. Chriftian ( that diifereth not 
 "from them? ) / rebapti^e no Chriftian, (faith 
 lc Auftin,) So that here was no disagreement in 
 Sacraments or any Chriftian observance. Only 
 as Auftin faith lib, 7. de bapt, c. 2, the quarrel 
 
 was 
 
fas that the Cathalicks were charged to beTra- 
 Stores quia ex traditoribtu, the fucceffors of [in- 
 ner s\ Thus being -wife and righteous overmuch 
 did tear and almoft mine the Churches. 
 
 £. 22. " He addeth, fag. 223. Ed. 2. the fay- 
 cc ing ofOfiander, Fuller , Bulltnger, that the Do-' 
 ic natifts and the Anabaptifts held the fame opini- 
 
 "ons? 
 
 Anfw. 1. In what > In all things or fome ? 
 that is, in the point of Rebaptizing ferfons before 
 baptized ( do you own that indeed ? ) But not as 
 being againft Infant -baptifm. 2. So, many Pre- 
 lacies have called the Puritans Donatifts^ and 
 abundance of Proteflants lay that the Papifts fuc- 
 ceed the Donatifts in approbating the Church to 
 their party. Do not write next that they fay the 
 Papifts are againft Infant -baptifm, left you make 
 your f elves Antichriftian alfo. 
 
 £.23. Reader, the Donatifts were fo great a 
 party of men and had fo great a number of Bi- 
 flops, and fo many wrote againft them whofe 
 works are yet extant, and their caufe had fo ma- 
 ny pub lick, examinations , that I leave it to thee 
 if thou have the brains of a man, to judge whe- 
 ther if they had been againft Infant -b apt ifm in 
 a time when Auftin faid no Chriftian denied it, 
 neither Optatus, nor Auftin , nor any other of 
 their moil copious oppofers would ever* have 
 charged them with fuch an opinion, nor any ex- 
 aminers , Councils or Hiftorians of their ages j 
 even when the Catalogues of .hereticks unhappi- 
 ly took in fo many little matters as they did, 
 and made hereticks' fome more and worfe than 
 
 they 
 
they were? And now if JobnBecold will fay 
 they were of his fide, we muft believe him, 
 
 f. 24. His dealing with the Novatians is the 
 fame or worfe : He feared not in the face of the 
 Sun, to write that the Novatians oppofed Infant- 
 baptifm, and numbreth them alfo with his party. 
 When it is afalfhood as much aggravated as thefe 
 particulars import. 1. They were an honeftand 
 numerous people , and fcattered almoft all over 
 the Empire •, tolerated till Innocents time in Rome, 
 and long tolerated and much favoured by many 
 Emperors and Patriarchs in Conftantinople , be- 
 cause fas Socrates faith ) they agreed in Do- 
 ctrine with the Catholicks : And could they have 
 denied Infant-baptifm , and not be accuied of it ? 
 2. They had many bitter enemies that would foon 
 have caft this in their teeth. 3. Many Councils 
 had to do with them, where multitudes had op- 
 portunity to accufe them. 4. They were an an- 
 cient Sed, arifing even in Cyprians time, and 
 long continued : And in fo many generations it 
 would have been known. 5. They are put in 
 the Catalogues of many Herefiographers that are 
 keen enough , and none of them ( that ever I 
 tound ) accufe them of any fuch thing ; No not 
 f.piphaniiu himfelf, who is moll copious, and not 
 very backward to accufe. . And fhall either John 
 of Ley den or any of his party now in the end of 
 the world perfvvade us , by flandering fo many 
 thoufands of innocent men, that they were guil- 
 ty ? And' can Mr. Banvers now tell us that they 
 held that which for a thoufand years hath Iain 
 unknown } 
 
 <\ 25. He 
 
(253) 
 
 '§. 2$. He citeth Socrates, L 7. c. 9. that In- 
 nocent banifhed them out of Rome, 
 
 Anfw. Elfewhere indeed Socrates and many 
 more fay fo : But doth that prove they were againft 
 Infant- baftifm ? 
 
 £.20'. Somewhat he would fain fay at the fe* 
 cond hand out ofAlbajpinatu, Obferv* 20. I hope 
 he never read the book : Albafyin&m there pur* 
 pofely decideth the Controverfie, what the Nova- 
 tian Herejie was , in feveral Chapters 3 and ne- 
 ver mentioneth any fuch opinion or fajpicion of 
 them. The fame doth that great Antiquary Je- 
 fuit Veiavius *, ( and what thefe two men knew not 
 of the Fathers and Church-hiftory, few in the 
 world knew, unlefs I may except JBlondel and 
 Vfter:) In his notes on Efifhanim of the No- 
 vatians , he entreth on the fame Comroverlie as 
 Albajpinam did, arid never mentioneth any fuch 
 thing. 
 
 f. 27. Next he tells us that " Ecbertus andEmz- 
 " ricus do ajfert that the Waldenfes I the new C a " 
 ic thariy conform to the Dottrine and manners of the 
 u old \ the Nov at i an s. 
 
 Anfw. But did they fay that the Novatians 
 were againft Infant -Baftifm} Why did you cite 
 neither words, page nor Book? And if they had, 
 fhould two railing ilanderous Papifts near a thou- 
 fand years after Novatian be taken for witnefTes 
 that he was againft Ik f ant-baft ifa againft: all the 
 Hiftory of the Church that concerneth them to the 
 contrary? Socrates himfelf (an honeft Hifterian ) 
 and Sozj>men aifo are ordinarily by the Papifts ac- 
 cused as' Novatians, becaufe they fpeak fairly and 
 
 impar* 
 
( »54J 
 
 imprtiaily of them as honeft meni ( and whether 
 they were or not I know not, but by their own 
 words conje&ure the contrary ) And they lived 
 when and where the Novatians were beft known ; 
 And yet tell us not a fyllable of any fuch fufpi- 
 cion of them. 
 
 £. 28. Next he faith, Perin faith that the WaU 
 denies were the off-jpring of the Novations, dri- 
 ven out of Rome about Anno 400. 
 
 Anfw. It is very probable : Therefore the WaU 
 denfes were not againft Infant-bapttfm. For it 
 is certain the Novatians were not : And the fame 
 Perin faith the Waldenfes were not. But if they 
 had, would that prove that the Novatians were , 
 feven hundred or eight hundred years before ? 
 
 £.29. fsiext he citeth as Cajfanders reafon 
 againft him that the Donatifts were for Infant- 
 baptifm , the fixth Council of Carthage, faying 
 that £ All that returned from the Donatifts (hould 
 be received into the Catholick Qwrch without 
 rebaptization though baptized in Infancy, ] and 
 faith , "[It is but afuppofttion at beft that they 
 "might be baptized in Infancy or they might not, 
 <c and can fignifie nothing againft all the former 
 Ci evidence. J And is it not fhame and pity that 
 fo publick matters of fad muft be handled at this 
 rate } What is his former evidence but fuch as 
 humane nature may blufh at, to find that one call- 
 ed a man and a Chriftian, and too good for the 
 communion of fuch as we , (hould be guilty of ? 
 And why talketh he of this one reafon againft 
 him in fo publick a matter of Hiftory ? as if he 
 knew not what abundance more may eafily be 
 
 pro- 
 
produced , if it were of any need ? And how 
 fhamefully are^ thefe plain words of a Council 
 put off, as if all the Bifliops that lived in the 
 fame time and Countrey with them knew not 
 what the Donatifis hold, fo well as he and fuch 
 as he? 
 
 £. 30. His next witneffes are [ the ancient 
 Britain that having received the Chrifiian do- 
 Urine and worjhip from the Apo files times did 
 
 intirely keep thereto whom Auftin the Monk* 
 
 would have engaged [ ejpecially in Chrifiening 
 children and keeping Eafter> but in afmuch as 
 they utterly refused to be [educed by him there- 
 in &c. 
 
 Anfw. This is a witnefs ( being fuch a body 
 
 of witneffes ) of great importance fas that o£ 
 
 the Donatifis and Novatians was ) if it were 
 
 true : But it's all falfe ftill : And muft our own 
 
 Countrey , yea all our Chrifiian Anceftors be 
 
 thus flandered ? Whether Britain received the ' 
 
 Chrifiian do&rine and worfhip from the Apo* 
 
 files time ( if he mean in that time ) is very 
 
 doubtful and nothing to our bufinefs : we have 
 
 no fufheient proof of any fuch thing : The Reafox 
 
 of the cafe maketh me conjecture that Chriftia- 
 
 nity was firft brought hither by Soldiers, of the 
 
 Roman Legions ; especially fince I read in TSeda 
 
 that the firft Temple I find any mention of was 
 
 built at or near Canterbury by fuch Soldiers. 
 
 But who ever brought it, it's like they were of 
 
 the Afian and not the Roman opinion , fwhe- 
 
 ther Soldiers that had been in the ACian Legions, 
 
 or who elfe, is not known ) and it is certain 
 
 that 
 
that they were not againft the obfervition of 
 Eafter : For both they and the Scots that con- 
 curred with them againft the. Romans , did ftri- 
 dly keep it t But all the tmeilion was of the due 
 time* ■'- , 
 
 $. 31, Nor is there the leaft proof or pro- 
 bability that they were againft Infant Baptifm, 
 i. Becaufe Auguftine the Monk that quarrel- 
 led with them, never chargeth them- with it, in 
 his Ep. to Gregory or to themfelves. 2. Beda 
 that was downright againfi them, and a Roman 
 zealot j and the ancienteft Writer after aAtiftins 
 time, and lived in the fame Comtry with them$ 
 and knew them , and defcribeth all the contefis 
 with them, yet never layeth any fuch thing to 
 their charge - when yet he ntentioneth the Re- 
 btptizjng of One by Bijhop John, becaufe it 
 fras an ignorant inefficient man -for the Pried- 
 hood, thit Baptized him • and this a rare inftance. 
 
 3. The Beets that about Eafter and other con- 
 trarieties to the Romans, were of the Britains 
 mind , and refufed fo much as to eat with the 
 Romans , yet are charged with no fuch thing. 
 
 4. And the controverfie continued for above an 
 hundred years after Auftins time, and great ftir 
 and meetings and difputes were about it, as Bcdd 
 tells us at large, before the Scots were changed : 
 And in all that time , there would have been 
 opportunity for their forward adverfaries ( efpe- 
 cially Wilfrid, afterward St .Boniface ofMentz, 
 who was the Chief ) to have found out this 
 matter of accufation. 5. None of the hiftorians 
 near following thofe times do charge any fuch 
 
 thing 
 
057) 
 thing on them. And yet were the old Britain? 
 againft Infant -Baptifm ? 
 
 £.32. But to put all out of doubt take the 
 words of Anftin to them in his three demands 
 thus by Beda recorded , Eccl. Hill. li. 2. c. 2. 
 "_ Vt Vafcha fuo tempore celebretis •, ut sJMini- 
 flerium ba$tiz.andi quo Deo renafcimur jttxta 
 morem Rom& fantta Ecclefa, et Apofioltca Eccle- 
 fi& compleatis •, ut genti Anglorum una nobifcum 
 pradicetis verbum domini}. That is, cc £ i.That 
 u yon celebrate Eafler at the due time ^ 2. That 
 u ye complcat the Miniftry of Baptifm by which 
 <c we are born again toGod ^according to thefafhion 
 cc (or manner) of the holy Church ofRome^and 
 iC the csfpoftolical Qonrch. 3. That you Treach 
 * c with m the word of God to the Englifli Na- 
 tion}. 
 
 And what is here of Infant -Baptifm ? ^low 
 proveth he that that was meant by the, Soman 
 manner or fajliion of Baptizing ? Is th"e^ ' fubjelb 
 of Baptifm, the Manner? when about the Man- 
 ner indeed there were then fo many and different 
 ceremonies ? Nay when above an hundred years 
 before this Auflms dayes , a wifer Auftin had 
 told the Donatifts, that the whole Church was 
 agreed for Infant-Baptifm , and »o one Chriflian 
 held it to be in vain ? fure this was not fo long 
 I after , a Manner peculiar to Rome ? But thus 
 j the honour of our Anceftors , and the hiftoryof 
 ; the Church , and the fouls of poor ignorant 
 Chriftians among us, mufl all be heinoufly wrong- 
 ed by the falihoods of rafh prefuming ignorant 
 men. 
 
 S f. 33- 
 
(258) 
 
 £. 33» And if this had been as true as it is 
 felfe f that the old Britains were againft Infant- 
 Baptifm ) it would inform thefe men that k is 
 not delaying Baptifm till riper age , that will 
 keep it from formality, nor the Church from 
 falling into all impiety : For if our eldeft hifto- 
 rian Gildas may be believed (and who may if 
 not he?) his Countrymen the Britains, were 
 Princes, Priefts and People fallen to fuch abho- 
 minable wickednefs , murder, drunkennefs, filthy 
 lufts, deceit, theft , cruelty &c. that he takes 
 the Princes for wolves and monfters , and the 
 Priefts for no Priefts but traytors , ( excepting 
 fpme good men among them ) &c. It is neither 
 Infant not Adtdt Baptifm that will fecure againft 
 the corrupting of Churches, but Grace with either 
 hath faved fouls. 
 
 5f. 34. He cites himfelf hereF^v, quoting Be- 
 da, Pclychron. and others. And what fay they ? 
 £ Baptizing after the manner of Rome ~\ And 
 what's that to his queftion ? But he tells you that 
 Vabian faith £ that yon give Chriftendom to 
 children f\ I have not fabian to examine : but if 
 he do , when he knoweth that he is an empty 
 fellow, of the other day as it were, and that he 
 hath nothing but what cometh from Gregory^ 
 and Beda ; and that in them there is no fuch 
 thing : will a known falfification of a fabler about 
 nine hundred years after , difprove the yet*vifi- 
 ble words of the eldeft records , which undertake 
 to give you not only the fen ft but the very 
 terms > 
 
 £0 35. He proceedeth to prove by argument 
 
 that 
 
that the Britains were again ft -Infant Ba~ 
 ptifm. 
 
 I . Becanfe they received the Scriptures , the 
 Chriftian Faith, Dolirine and, Difcipline from 
 the Apoftles and Aiiatick Churches, who had 
 no fuch thing as the Baptising of Infants among 
 them $ 
 
 Anfrv. No fuch thing in the Afiaticks Chur- 
 ches ? He might as well fay, There is now no 
 fuch thing in England. But perhaps hee'l fay- 
 that he meaneth in the Apoftles time or foon 
 after : Of which you have tryed part of his 
 ftrength. But when he hath ftudied well Bifhop 
 Vjhers Primordia who faith all that is to be faid 
 for our Antiquity, he will find no proof that we 
 had our Religion from the Apoftles or any in 
 their time. 
 
 $i 36. But ask the man whether Afia it felf 
 long before the dayes of Gregory had not Infant- 
 Baptifm ? And whether they received not the 
 Scriptures and Religion as certainly from the 
 Afiatick, Churches, and fo from the Apoftles , 
 as the Britains did ? And whether this will 
 prove that at that time they were againft Infant- 
 Baptifm? If nor, why .will it prove the fame of 
 the Britains > 
 
 $. 37. His fecond Argument is [ Becaufc they 
 fo fully prized and faithfully adhered to the Scri- 
 pture, &c] 
 
 Anfw. What will not partiality fay ? 1. You 
 
 muft believe him that Scripture is Againft Jn- 
 
 fant-Baptifm : And then the coatroverfie is at 
 
 an end. 2. You muft believe hm how elofely 
 
 S 2 they 
 
( i6o) 
 
 they adhered to Scripture, if you can, when you 
 have read (fildas ( who is tranflated into En- 
 glish J their neighbour , one of them, the only cer- 
 tain hiftorian that knew them, who defcribeth 
 them as I have faid, as moft flagitious heinous 
 wicked men. Though I hope they amended after 
 Gild as ciayes ,yet that (hewed you how they held 
 to Apoftolick difcipline or Scripture. The 
 book is fo very (mall ^ it is but equal to intreac 
 him to read it before he ufe 
 
 * Itfeeiusby fome this argument again *. 3. You 
 citations oik of it af- muft bu to tnat a l] tnat: 
 ter that he hath read . . ,, « .*• 
 
 it , and yet fpeaks Pnze and adhere to Scn- 
 thus! pture are againft Infant -Ea~ 
 
 pnfm. Read and .try whe- 
 ther there be not greater evidence that Cyprian, 
 Athanafim, Nazianzene, foryfoftome, Aisgaftine, 
 the JEgyptian Monks, and other fuch ftrid per- 
 fons in thofe ages, at leaft the Novatians , and 
 Donatifis (in his own judgement) prized the 
 - Scripture than the Brit aim $ And doth it fol- 
 low ( in defpite of their own profeffions and pra- 
 difes J that all thefe and the reft fuch,were agamfi 
 Jpfant-TZaptifm I 
 
 £. 38. Were not this as good an argument ? 
 Ltifher, Calvin j Zuingliui, Bradford, Hooper • all 
 the Martyrs in Queen Maries dayes, &c. prized 
 the Scriptures : Ergo they were all againft In- 
 fant -Baprifm. Yea even Independents and Pref- 
 hyterians and all that prize and cleave to them 
 now in England ? 
 
 Jfo 39. 3. He addeth [_ uc Becaufe they did fo 
 "vehemently reje3 humane Traditiomin the \xor- 
 
(i6l) 
 
 c< fl)ip of God • efpecially all Romijh Rites dnd 
 cc Ceremonies ; this as before undeniably appear- 
 cc ing to come from Romes ordination and ImpO" 
 <c fit ton. J 
 
 Anfw. i. [Vndeniably] is a word thitjliameth 
 you to every intelligent Reader that underftand-- 
 eth Church hiftory. Will you not ccnfefs your 
 felf that Cyprian and that Carthage Council, 
 Naz.ianz.ene, BafiL) Auguftine &c. were for In- 
 fant-Baptifm ? were all thefe Papifts, or Romans ? 
 Can you prove any Roman Ordination of it be- 
 fore all thefe ? 
 
 2. How know you that they fo vehemently 
 rejected humane Traditions in the wo? flip of God ? 
 Did they not ufe the Afiatick Ceremonies I Did 
 they not precifely obferve Eafter , and place Re- 
 ligion in keeping it on their own dayes ? Had 
 they not Bifhops, and were they not Monks ? 
 And do you gather by Gildas that they were fuch 
 as you dream ? And did they not Plead Tradi- 
 tion for their difference from Rome t 
 
 3. And were not the Scots then of their mind, 
 and as much againft Traditions as they ? and 
 more againft* vice and formality in and after 
 Colmans and Colnmbanm dayes ? And are not 
 the Independents more againft Traditions now 
 than the Britains were ? And are they therefore 
 Anabaptifls ? 
 
 $. 40. He addeth [ 4. " Becwife Conftantine 
 " the Great (the fon 0/Conftance and the famous 
 1 c Helena , both eminent Chriftians ) in the yc> r 
 u 305. was not Baptised till he was age % as be- 
 J* fore. A clear proof that the Chrifi inns in Bri- 
 
 S 3 c: tain 
 
* c tain in thofe dayes did not 'Baptize their chiU 
 "drenj. 
 
 u4nfw. Some will laugh at thefe things, bui 
 I had rather mourn for the poor peoples fnares. 
 I. It's falfe that Con fiance was a Chriftian , at 
 leaft when Con ft amine was young. No regarda- 
 ble hiflory maketh him any better than a mode- 
 rate favourer of the Chriftians. 2. It is not 
 proveable that Helena was one in Conftantines 
 Infancy. 3 . There is no probability that he was 
 born in England, as many Learned men have 
 proved. 4. It is certain he was educated and 
 lived in other Lands. 5. He was no Chrifti- 
 an in his youth himfelf, nor profefTed it till after 
 he was Emperor : The fign of a Crofs appear- 
 ing in the skies and his viftory thereupon is 
 faid to be the means. 6. He lived long at 
 Rome, and Conftantinoplc, and elfe where before 
 he was Baptized. And was that a certain proof 
 that none of thofe Gountreys were for Infant- 
 Baptifm, no nor for Baptifm at Converfion nei- 
 ther, becaufe Confidntine was not Baptized ! 
 7. He kept in with the Philofophers (f having 
 one at his Table familiar with him) to hold all 
 parties to him. 8. And many in thofe times 
 thought that all fin being pardoned at Baptilm, 
 they muft lwe much ftn&lier after they were 
 Baptized , and were in much more dinger by 
 their fin , and ^therefore would not be Baptized 
 till old , as Confiautinc when he was like to die. 
 And now where is this mans cltar proof that the 
 BntaiM were Azabaptifts ? 
 
£. 41 . 5 . Saith he £ tc Becaufe of the Correfpon- 
 dency and unity that were between the French 
 Qoriftians after called the Waldenfes, and them 
 
 viz. Germanus and Lupus. ~\ 
 
 Anfw. What abundance of untruths will one 
 mans head hold / i. He would make the igno- 
 rant believe that the French Churches that fent 
 over Germanus and Lupus were fuch as after 
 were called Waldenfes : When yet before he ci- 
 teth Per in faying that the Waldenfes were the off- 
 fpring of the Noyatians banifhed from Rome* Beda 
 Hift. Eccl. lib. i. c. 17, 18, 19, 20,21. tells 
 lis briefly that the Britains being infe&ed with 
 Pelagian ifm by Agricola the fon of S ever i anus 
 a Pelagian Bifhop , fent to France for help, as 
 being unable themfelves to difpute the cafe. The 
 Bifhops of France in a great Synod agreed to 
 lend Germanus Bifhop of estfltijfwdore , and Lu~ 
 fus Bifhop of Trecajfe ( brother to Vincentius 
 Lerinenfis* ) Projper in his Chronicle tells us 
 that Germanus was fent by Pope Celefline by the 
 inftigation of Palladim a Deacon : Vfier reciteth 
 and reje&eth not Baronius his conciliation, that 
 it was done by the Pope and French Biftiops* 
 Germanus and Lupus come over, and work mi-" 
 racks by the way, and here Germanus carried 
 a box with him of the Reliques of ail the Apo- 
 ftles and many Martyrs ( Bedac.iS.) This he 
 layeth to the eyes of a blind maid and cured 
 her fuddedly, which confounded the Pelagians: 
 Thefe Reliques he buryed in St. Albanes Sepul- 
 chre -, Ana inftead of them took with him fome 
 oi the duft where St; Albanes bloo<Jhad been fhed, 
 $ 4 which 
 
which remained red till then. And after other mi- 
 racles and a vi&ory he returned with a pro- 
 fperous navigation, faith Beda c. 20. by his own 
 Merits and St. A.oancs inrercefiion. Afterwards 
 he returned again : n a fecond neceility with Se- 
 vent*', and delivered the Brit aim from Pelagi- 
 anifm, who yet lived in fuch wickednefs as Be- 
 da after GVA^r defcri be th. 
 
 Here let the Reader note againft Mr. Dan* 
 'vers dream, 1. That this was done in, 429, 
 And if Mr. D. could prove indeed that all the 
 Bifhops of France then were Waldertfes, or of 
 the judgement fo called fo long after, he would 
 do us Knights fervice againft the Papifts 
 in the queftion of the perpetual vifibility of the 
 Church. But if I cite Mr .Danvers for it, I doubt 
 they will laugh at me , and make no more of 
 his authority than I do of the Butch Anabaptifls 
 Martyrology. 
 
 2. Note that Prof per faith it was the Pope 
 that'fent Germanm. 
 
 3. Note that he was fent by the Bifhops of 
 Prance , who then did little differ from Kome y 
 but fubmitted to his Primacy, (and Patriarchate ) 
 in the Empire , though referving their liberties • 
 Read the Epiftlcs of Leo 1. againft Hillary 
 Arelat. and all that ftory, and you will fee how 
 much the Pope ufurped there betimes. 
 
 4. Pope Cclefiine was the great maintainer 
 of tAugitftinz zgzmftPelagiw, and fo theapter 
 todothif. 
 
 5. The Pope had before this fent Palla- 
 dia to the Br it aim who received him : And 
 
 there- 
 
therefore they were then on fome fair terms with 
 him. 
 
 6. Germanus and Lupus were Bifhops, and 
 they that fent him ^ and fo Antichriftian to fomc 
 Anabaptifts 
 
 7. Germanus fure was not of Mr. D*s. Churchy 
 that ufed Reliques fo ftrangely for working mi-; 
 racles ? Was this an Anabaptift ? • 
 
 8. This was all done after Augufiine had 
 written, that no Chriftian thought Infant-Ba- 
 pnfm vain : ( or about that time. ) And yet 
 were all the Britains then of another mind? 
 
 9. The Bifhops of France ( with Pope Ce~ 
 leftine ) took part with Auguftme againft Be lo- 
 gin* > and fent Lupin with Germanus to do that 
 work : And yet were all thefe Bifhops againft 
 Augufline^ about Infant-Baptifm, which he faith 
 all the Church Vniverfal agreed in ? 
 
 10. Laftly , the Britains were infected with Pe- 
 lagianifm ^ Velagim ( called tJMorgan, being a 
 Britain ( and Vjher faith, fdhie fay born the fame 
 day with Augufline ) and fcleftius ■ a Scctf or 
 /r*/fe man . And the Pelagians themfeives were 
 for Infan-tBaptifm , ( And if any Chriftians in 
 the world had been againft it, they would have 
 been the likelieft , who denyed Original fin : 
 Yet even they durft not deny this. ) And is it 
 a credible thing that all thefe Britains who were 
 fome ofPelagiws mind, and fome of Augufiines, 
 were yet againft both in point of Infant-Ba- 
 ptifm ? Yea and not a word faid of this by any 
 writer , when their Pelagianifm made fo great a 
 ftir / Yet this man gathereth that tbe Churches 
 
 of 
 
{266) 
 
 ©f France were Anabaptifts ( contrary to all 
 hiftory ) becaufe the Waldenfes 600 years after 
 were Anabaptifts (which is alio falfe:) And the Jfri- 
 tains were Anabaptifts r becaufe the Churches of 
 France fent two Learned men to difpute againfl 
 Pelagianifrn in England , fwhen the unlearned 
 Britains could not do it ). Reader , will not 
 this kind of arguing make thee an Anabaptifts 
 or elfe make thee pitty the feduced party ? 
 O what a temptation to Popery do fuch men lay 
 before the people / When men fee that every 
 fuch a one that hath ignorance and pride enough 
 to make him wife in his own eyes , (hall thus 
 pour out Mfhoods to cheat mankind , and the 
 ignorant know not but it may all be true, it tern- 
 pteth men to think that there muft be fome 
 Authorised men whom the Ignorant muft believe 
 be fere fitch feducers, or elfe confufion and fa If- 
 hood will take place of truth, and the people 
 will be as children toffed up and down, andcar- 
 ryed to and fro wkh every wind of dotlrine» 
 And indeed a concordant Miniftry is fo to be 
 preferred , though it infer not 3 Roman infalli- 
 bility. 
 
 f. 42. 6. His Iaft proof that the Britains 
 Were " againfl Infant Baptifm, is becaufe Augu- 
 u ftine the aJfyfonk was himfelf fo raw and igno- 
 u rant in the rite , as to ask^ y How long the 
 ic Baptizing of a child might be deferred , there 
 u being no danger of death? ~\ 
 
 Anfw. I grow afhamed that I have medled 
 With fuch a Collector : A baculo ad angulum* 
 Doth it not raftier imply tkat there was no contro- 
 vert 
 
(267) 
 verfie between him and the Brit aim about In- 
 fant- Baptifm, feeing he never mentioned any fuch 
 thing ? 
 
 £. 43. His next witneflTes againft Infant-Ba- 
 ptifm are in the fourth Century, called by hira 
 u Dadoes , Saba* , Adulphus , and Simonis who 
 "(faith he in his catalogue) oppofe it. And 
 ct p. 229. he faith to prove it, but thit they were 
 <c charged to have an ill opinion of the Sacrament 
 ^of the Altar and of Infants Bapttfm* And he 
 " citeth Hi ft or. Tripartita It. 7. c. 1 1. ( and fome 
 "fellow an hundred years ago.) 
 
 Anfw. And have we here any honefter dea- 
 ling than before ? Read and judge. That which 
 the Tripartite Hiflory cited by him faith is this > 
 that £ There was then a Sed called Meffalians 
 or Machetes ( known in the Catalogues of Here- 
 ticks ) and called The Praying Hereticks ) who 
 expedied the operation of fome Devil think- 
 ing him to be the Spirit of God , refufing to 
 work and giving themfelves to lie and fleep to 
 exped Revelations ^ Indeed their opinion was that 
 Frayer wot all, and Baptifm and the Lords Sup- 
 per were nothing , dicentes Divinum cibum nihil 
 nee prodeffe nee Udere ± that the Sacred or Sacra," 
 mental food, did neither profit nor hurt : Thefe 
 men were led by one Dadoes, Sabbos, Adelphi- 
 w, Hermas and Simeon : And Adclphm when 
 old ( for they hid their opinion ) bewrayed his 
 error in a fpeech to Flavian of <^Antioch ; that 
 Baptifm doth the Baptised perfon no good, but 
 prayer enly expelkth the DeviL And 1. Thefe 
 men were no more againft Infant -Baptifm than 
 
 tigainft 
 
againft the adults Baptijw. For they were above 
 all Ordinances fave Frayer. 2. They were 
 againft neither as unlawful , but againft both and 
 other ordinances as unprofitable. 3. They car- 
 ryed this much in fecret ; which they could 
 not have concealed had they not Baptized In- 
 fants. 4. Some hereticks, sind all Infidels and 
 Pagans were againft all Baptifm as well as they : 
 And doth any of this prove that any one Chri- 
 ftian was againft Infant Baptifm more than 
 adult .<* 
 
 f. 44. "Next he tells you that Vauftus Re- 
 ct gienfis faith that Perjonal and attual de fire was 
 *' re qui fit e in every one that was to be Baptised 
 ( Vincent and Crefconius I fpoke to before ) And 
 he citeth not a word of his writings for it, nor 
 any other but one Jacob Merning , I fuppofe a 
 Butch Anabaptift. 
 
 Anfw. Reader, thou feeft ftill how thou art 
 ufed. Fauftm Rhegienfis is a known Author ; 
 his works are common •, He is commonly taken 
 for a Semipelagian, and he hath a book to prove 
 that fouls are bodies^ which Claudianm Mammertus 
 hath anfwered. But I never read one fy liable in 
 him, nor in any other that ever wrote of him or 
 againft him, that fhould make one doubt whether 
 he was for Infant -baptifm. Could he be in fuch 
 a ftation as he was, and have fo many writings, 
 and fo many adverfaries , and yet hold fuch an 
 opinion and never be fufpe&ed ? Do the Anaba- 
 ptifts no better own their caufe ? But the words 
 he alledgeth are but fuch as he citeth of my own ; 
 If truly cited, no doubt fpoken only of the adult , 
 
 -ad 
 
(*69) 
 
 s»nd of what the Infants do by them. But who 
 can anfwer words not cited ? Muft we read all 
 his works again to fee if there be fuch a word , 
 as oft as fuch a man will talk to us at this rate? 
 
 £. 45. The next is " [ Albania a zealous god- 
 a ly Minifter in the fixth Century was put to* 
 u death for baptizing Believers , though baptized 
 j c in Infancy or by Hereticks.] 
 
 Anfw. Still" all alike. 1. Baronim is cited an. 
 413. n. 6. when in my Book there is not a fy lia- 
 ble of any fuch matter : 2. But thereabout he hath 
 the Hiftory of the Donatifts, who rebaptized all 
 both old and young , as if our Separatifts now 
 fhould tell all England , j Ton are all out of 
 the true Church which is only with m^ and if 
 you come not to m and be not baptized in our 
 Churches , you have no true baptifm nor can be fa~ 
 ved. ] And for fuch rebaptizing many were 
 troubled. And is this a witnefs againft Infant- 
 baptifm? Shall we not have one true word? 
 
 $. 46. His tale of Swermers he refers us for 
 to zJMerning and Rulicim > or Lulicim and 
 Glanaus , men that I know not fo well as him- 
 klf, and I had rather he had referred me to him- 
 felf or Mr. Tombes. 
 
 £.47. He addeth p. 23 1 . Cc £ Nicephorm 1. 17. 
 u c\ 9. faith that Q In the year 550. one Peter Bi- 
 cc jhop of Apamen and Zoroarus a Monk^ in Syria 
 <£ did maintain and defend the point of dippings 
 *& rebaptiz,ation or weder-dipping. 
 
 Anfw. Did Nicephorm write in Dutch ? 1. Is 
 dipping any thing to the cafe of Infants ? 2. Are 
 you really for Rebaptizing 5 and are you juftify- 
 
 - |ng 
 
(270) 
 
 ing it.? If nor, why cite you inftances of Rebapti- 
 Zers ? Too many befidcs the Donatifts rebaptized 
 others to engage them to their Se& as the only 
 Church, 3. Do you know the Hiftory of the 
 Council of Calcedon and Diofcorus 7 and the Ne- 
 ftorians > Reader, believe not this man any fur- 
 ther than fenfe or great evidence conftraineth 
 thee : That which Nicephorus there faith is this, 
 £Severus of Antioch, and Peter of Apamea, and 
 Zooras a Monkey were found to curfe the Coun- 
 cil of Calcedon, and to hold but one nature in 
 Chrtft •, pr&terea anabaptifmos aliaque nefanda 
 obfcxnitatis plena facinora peragere y that is, Q and 
 alfo to have praftifed Rebaptiz.ings, and other vil- 
 lanies full of fitch obfcenity that is not to be na- 
 med. 2 If he rejoyce in thefe Witne/Tes, is here a 
 word of Infant-baptifm ? When fhall I come to 
 a fentence that is true ? 
 
 tf. 48. The next is £ Adrian Bifiop of Co- 
 rinth in the five nth lent my did publicity op- 
 pofe Infant -B apt ifm , infomnch as he would nei- 
 ther Baptise them himfelf , nor fujfer them to 
 be Baptised by others , but wholly denyed Ba- 
 ft ifm to them : Wherefore he was accufid by Gre- 
 gory Mag. Bifwp of Ronu , to John Bijhop of 
 LarifTa, as appears by Gregories Letter to the 
 faid John, in which among others he complains 
 « gain ft the faid Adrian that he turned away 
 children from B apt ifm and let them die with- 
 out it, for which they proceeded againfi him 
 as a great tranfgreffor and bUf?be',ner*~] 
 
 Anfw. Not one true Sentence in all this : 
 1. It's falfe that Adrian publickly oppofid In- 
 fant- 
 
fant-Baptifm. 2. It's falfe that he was accufed 
 for it by Gregory , or that Gregory laid any fuch 
 thing to his charge : 3. Or that they fo pro- 
 ceeded, if my books be true. Reader, the cafe 
 in Gregories Epiftles here cited is this. Adri- 
 an was accufed malevolently of many things 
 ( not by Gregory) but to Gregory : Among 
 others , that through him fome Infants had dy- 
 ed without Baptifm. Gregory writeth to John 
 Bifhop of Larijfa on his behalf ', and faith that 
 [ no one of the witnejfes could fay that he knew 
 any fuch thing by him, but that they were t&ld 
 fo by the mothers. of fome children, whofe Hus- 
 bands had fir their faults been removed ( Irom 
 the Church) fed nee in baptizatos eos mortis 
 tempus profejfi funt occupajfe , ficut accufatorum 
 continebat invidiofa faggeftio -> cum in Deme- 
 triade Civitate baptizatos eos ejfe con flit erit ~\ that 
 is, [_ Nor did ( the witnejfes ) fay, that they di- 
 ed unbaptized , as the envious fuggeftion of the 
 accufers contained^ for it is mamfeft that they 
 were baptized in the City Demetrias. ] 
 
 1 . Is here a word that he was again ft Infant- 
 baptifm ? 2. CouldaBifhop cf fo great a City 
 and Diocefs have been againft Infant-baptifm and 
 none to be able to prove it, even in er.viotu ac- 
 cufations ? Would not every week deled it ? 
 3. Would Great Gregory have thus juftified him, 
 if he had but fufpe&ed fuch a thing, above a hun- 
 dred years after Auftin faid no one Chriftian 
 thought Infant-baptifm vain ? Was this great 
 Pope an Anabaptifl ? 4. Is ir not plain by all this, 
 that it was but the particular children of fome e x- 
 
 com- 
 
2 7O 
 communicate mens wives, who malicioufly accufe 
 liim ( not for being againft Infant -baptifm . no 
 nor againft their Infants baptifm ; but ) for delay- 
 ing it? It is like, to difference them from the 
 children of Church-members : And yet that they 
 were afterward baptized. See here what a wit- 
 nefs he hath brought ? 
 
 £. 49. " The next in his Catalogue is, [ c%y- 
 u ptian Divines ] but after in his book before it 
 u he tells you of one Berinius an eminent learned 
 cc man that profeffed infiruEiion to be neceffary be- 
 fore baptifm, and that without it baptifm ought 
 not to be adminiftred to high or low 3 and ri- 
 
 ce 
 
 c *teh BedaL^ c. 16 
 
 Reader, the paflage in Beda is but this, That 
 Ceadwall having conquered the Ifle of Wight 
 gave it to Bifhop Wilfrid (no friend to Ana- 
 baptifts ) who gave it his Sifters Son Bernwin 
 appointing him a Prieft called Hildila, who by his 
 labour among the Heathens converted and bapti- 
 zed two of the Kings Sons , who were baptized 
 and had a ftrange deliverance. And is there a 
 fyllable in this ftory that Infant-baprifm is concern- 
 ed in ? No nor a word of one Bennus an eminent 
 learned man that profeffed as he faith , though 
 it be nothing to the purpofe : Nor was thebulinefs 
 done as he iaith in Lower Saxony but in the Ifle 
 of Wight j fo little is there that hath the leaft kin 
 to truth in this lamentable Reporter. 
 
 §. 50. His Teftimony of Egyptian Divines 
 he citeth two late Papifts for ( inftead of juft 
 proof) who neither of them ever dreamed that 
 thofe Egyptians were sgainft Infant-Bapriftn. 
 
 That 
 
(■TO J 
 
 That the adult fhould be Catechifed and intru- 
 ded before Baptifm, ail the Chriftian world 
 agreed : Thatiliere were fome Monafterie s of the 
 iEgyptian Monks that would not hold communi- 
 on wuh the Church of Rome , is known • and 
 what a turn was made among many of the Cler- 
 gy after the Council of Cbakedon on Diojloras 
 his account, whereupon a great body of the Sou- 
 thern Churches cut off from Rome^ and difown- 
 ing them are called Ncftorians ( many injurioufly ) 
 to this day. And Fulgent ivu was difTwaded from go- 
 ing to the ftric% Heremites and Monafticks near 
 cs£gy[t , becaufe they were feparated from the 
 Roman Communion, as you may fee in Fu/gen- 
 | tim*% life. But what is all this to Infant-baptifm? 
 
 (. 51. Next he tells us that in the ninth Cen- 
 tury Hincmams Laudunenf. was agafnft Infanr- 
 ; baptifm, and reciteth many words of Hincmarui 
 Rhcnenfis to him. 
 
 Jlnfw. The book is Bib. Tat. SuppL To. Z. 
 'containing 55. Chapters I And if I mult read eve- 
 ry" word of fuch long books to try his Citations, I 
 rfiuft fpend many months to be able to tell you 
 'that a man told you fo many untruths: Ail that 
 ! I can find by a curfory peruiai is but this, about 
 I a Village in the other Pari h , whom it fhould 
 , pay Tythes to, [" habebas tmbreviatos o[not lnfan- 
 ! tes fine baptifmate> & q*ot homines fine Commu- 
 nione inde obierunt^ qua mihi in publicum objicere 
 nolles, ne poflcatibi tmproperarem 5 at f\ alia ma- 
 1 la df me fcires , ilia etiam de me diceres. 
 Reader , is here a Syllable againft .Infant-ba- 
 ptifm ? V/ho was the accufer here ? What is in 
 
 X the 
 
(2740 
 the accufation but as in Adrians to Greg, which 
 plainly proveth the contrary, that he was for In- , 
 fant-baptifm and ordinarily ufed it, when the in- 
 timation was but that he had let fome Infants die 
 without baptifm and fome men without Communi- 
 on ? Hath not many a Minifter among us been fo ac- 
 cufed ? And are we therefore againft Infant-ba- 
 ptifm ? Or was Hincmarm againft adult Com- 
 munion becaufe envy faid he let fome die with- 
 out it ? 
 
 tf. 52. Reader, the truth is I am fo weary of 
 this work, that I cannot perfwade my felf to fol- 
 low it any further, it is fo fad and loathfom a bu- 
 fmefs that is fet before us ; fitter to be wept over 
 than anfwered at large. I (hall yet take notice 
 of what he faith of the Waldenfes , and to that 
 further fay, i.That I have elfewhere vindicated 
 them already from this (lander. 2. That fo do many 
 of their bitter adverfaries, in laying nofuch thing 
 to their charge. Among whom to what is faid 
 elfewhere, I add but the Teftimony of Naucle- 
 rm a Pcpii.h bitter enemy to them, who Vol. 2. 
 pan 2. pag. 265. recitcth their Do&rine as being 
 agreeable with the body of Do&rine held in the 
 Reformed Churches , never mentioning any de- 
 nial of Infant-baptifm, but only that they affirm- 
 ed Water to be'Ht'uthcient without Oyl. 
 
 And 
 
C 2 75) 
 
 AN D Row as to our Tefiimonies for the Com- 
 mon practice of Infant-baprifm from the 
 daks of the ApoflJes, I will not abufe the Rea- 
 der by reciting again the teftimonics long ago re- 
 cited. " Let him but confider what I have there 
 (aid out cf Juftin ^Irenaus, Origen, Tertullian y 
 Cyprian, Naz^ianzene, aAuguCvin and others, and 
 I leave the matter to his Judgement. 
 
 fp 53. And further where they feign Nazjian- 
 z,cn to be indifferent I will add but thefe words 
 but of his Orat. 40. vol. 1. p. 648. Ed. Morel. 
 
 [ N/mJJ/ OCT OVi • .£/.« K&f&TW yjWfOJ/ Y\ H&AA& — 
 
 iC [ Haft thou an Infant? Let not naughtinefs fur* 
 
 lc prize him firft, [_ Let him be fan&ifted from his 
 
 u Infancy : Let him be confecrated to the fpirit 
 
 <c from hislnfancie : But doft thou fear the fcal 
 
 <c becaufe of the weaknefs of his nature ? How 
 
 u weak a minded mother art thou , and of how 
 
 " little faith? But Hannah, &c. Thou haft no 
 
 u need of Amulets and Inchant- 
 
 ic mcnts * with which the wick- t * w, ^j? **E". 
 I <c j 1 • u ' thens ulcd to Chin 
 
 ed one creepetb into the drcn# 
 
 \ <c minds of vain men , fteal- 
 "ing to himfelf the veneration due to God i 
 cc Give him the Trinity, that great and excellent 
 "[Amulet. J 
 
 That all this is fpoken cf Baptifm is paft all 
 doubt : Yet Naz.ianz.en- in fome cafes admitteth 
 
 I of delay till three years old: Bu: took baptifm 
 to be fo neceffary for Infants , that he thought 
 that if any though by furprize and not the Pa~ 
 
 T 2 rent* 
 
(276) 
 
 rents contempt fhould die unbaptized, they fhould 
 noi goe to Heaven ( or be Rewarded ) though 
 he thought they fhould not go to Hell or be pu- 
 nifhed : lb. Or at. 40. His opinion therefore tor 
 delay three years in cafe of faiety confifted with 
 too much apprehenfion of its neceilicy even to In- 
 fants. 
 
 $ c 54. When I read his language of holy 
 Cyprian, I confefs the apparition of fo frightful a 
 fpirir, doth affright me from his doctrine. Firfii 
 The. man ( with greater audacioumefs than the 
 Papifts ufe the fathers, ) dodi firft attempt againft 
 all content of antiquity, and without any proof", 
 to queftion the truth of the fentence of Cyprian 
 and the Carthage Council to Fiditu 
 
 Secondly, And what could he fay more to be- 
 tray the Proteffent Caufe to the Papifts, than as 
 after [_Euher Cyprian had been vilely Ruffmed , 
 or that he himfdf wai a notable Factor for Anti- 
 chrifi , . t in him the my fiery of iniquity 
 
 did very flrongly work^ ] 
 K The man it teems hud never read Jeremy Ste- 
 phens his m of Cyprian de unit, Eccl. and 
 how thofe few words of Peter and the Church of 
 ie were added by Corrupters (though he is 
 willing to believe in the general that his writings 
 were corrupted ) But we have certain Copies at I 
 lea ft of fo much of them , as confute his Caufe* 
 I. remember cur great Antiquary Bifhop Vfljer 
 told me that it was Tertullian and Cyfrianihzxht 
 took for the Chief Records of Church Antiquities,' 
 next a few fmall things which give little informa- 
 tion of matters of fair. And fame of the things . 
 
 that 
 
that this man fo ftarteth at, Cyprian held , and as 
 Epiphanim faith, <ts4ll tbe'Chriftian Churches z 
 And muft he then be a Fatlor for Ant. tire* 
 Who then is this Man a Fa&or for ? Mark, Rea- 
 der, whether it be any wonder if I be abhomina- 
 ble and Antichriftian to him, when Cyprian and 
 the fixty fix Bifhops with him muft come under 
 ( hypothetically ) that fufpicion. i. That Cypri- 
 an who was fo holy and wife a man ^ 2. That 
 lived before Antichrift was born- 3. That died a 
 Martyr for Chrift •, 4. Who is fo, great a part 
 of the pure antiquity • that if youcaft him away, 
 what will the reft be for a great time? 5. That 
 Cyprian who is called by fome the firft Anaba- 
 ptift , becaufe he was for rebaptizing thofe bapti- 
 zed by Hereticks •, 6* That Cyprian who fo ftifiy 
 
 ; oppofed the Bifliop of Ror/e ( though himfelf was 
 
 1 in the error *') 7. That Cyprian whom the Do- 
 natifts boafted of as their predecefTor in rebapti- 
 zing*, and Attftin was put to anfwer ( though with 
 
 ! his honour • ) 8. That Cyprian who lived before any 
 Cbriftian Emperor, when ftrift difciplinc upheld 
 religion without and againft the Magiftrates 
 fword ; and who wrote fo many of his Epiftles . 
 only for the rigor -of Church-difcipline? O wh.t 
 pleafure is this to Papifts ? If we be but fuch An- 
 
 i richriftiams fay they, as holy (jprian and the pri- 
 mitive^ Churches were, we" will prefer it before 
 the Anabaptifts Chriftianity ? 
 
 ' §. 55. And if Cyprian was Antichriftian, where 
 then was the Church of Chrift? It will be hard 
 to anfwer P piit or Seeker about its viability, or 
 
 j Infidel abcut its reality : And what a King do 
 
 T 3 they 
 
they make Chrifh that make him to have no King- 
 dom , that tbey can prove to have been exi- 
 gent 
 
 $. 56. We will eafily grant him thai Cyprian 
 de unit. EccL is abufed by the Papifls, and the 
 very words thruft in are proved fo to be by ma- 
 ny Copies that have them not: Yea, Jeremy Ste- 
 phens faith that there are eight Copies in Eng- 
 land which omit twenty three of the Epiftjes 
 which are commonly received (and it's moft cre- 
 dible by other Copies are Genuine ; J And yet 
 none of thefe leave out the Epiftle to Eidta about 
 Infant-baptifm. 
 
 <. 57. And whereas he faith that Cyprian ur- 
 ged not Tradition, J anfwer, there was.nocaufe: 
 For the queftion was not whether Infants Jhou Id be 
 baptized ^ much lefs whether they were to be dedica- 
 ted in Covenant to God and to be Qmirch-mcmbers • 
 but only whether they jhould be baptized before 
 the eighth day : For Fidus thought that at one 
 two or three days old they were fo unclean as 
 made them unmeet for baptifm, and that the 
 eighth day was the time of their purification ; 
 which Cyprian and the fixty fix Bifhops confu- 
 ted, and fhewed that Gods mercy accepteth them 
 from the beginning without refpedt to legal days, 
 And .what ufe was here for a plea from Traditi- 
 on for Infant -b apt 1 fo^ which was not dented? 
 
 £.58. And it'ieemsto me to be a great evi- 
 dence that the Tradition of the Church' was then 
 for ft, in that. this Council of Bifhops ( before; 
 true Popery was born ) fo unanimoufly deter- 
 mine of the day or tirne^ and not one of them , 
 
 no 
 
~79) 
 
 no nor Fidns himfelf that raifed the doubt , did 
 fo much as raife any fcruple or queftion about 
 Infant-baptifm it felf at all : which fure they 
 would have done on iuch an occafion if any or 
 many Chriftians, or any Churches had denied it. 
 No wonder therefore if Auguftin fo long after 
 fay that no Chriftian takjth it to be in vain ? 
 
 £. 59. Yet again I will confefs, that the words 
 of Tertptllian and N-az.ianz.en , fhew that it was 
 long before all were agreed of the very time^ or 
 of the neceffity of baptizing Infants before any 
 ufe of Keafon , in cafe they were like to live to 
 maturity : For I am perfwaded that the Apoftles 
 and firft Minifters were fo taken up with the 
 Converting of Infidels ( Jews and Gentiles ) that 
 the cafe of Infant-baptifm was fo poftponed and 
 taken but as an Appendix to the baptifm of the 
 adult, as that it was thought left needful to give it a 
 particular exprefs mention in the Records and Hi- 
 ftory of the Church. The Churches made no que- 
 ftion of Infants Church-'memberp)ip y as being un- 
 doubtedly in the promife, and devoted to God by all 
 faithful parents : And they took not baptifm at 
 firft, for their fir ft Covenanting or Confent^ but 
 for the folemm nation of it ; and fo not for In- 
 fants fir ft real fate of relation to Chrift and right 
 to life ( which was before it, as it was to belie- 
 vers before -baptifm -, ) but for the folemn invefti- 
 ture in thofe rights : And fo Greg. Na*zian, 
 Or. 40. giveth this brief definition of baptifm, 
 that it is nothing eljs but a Covenant made with 
 God for a new and purer k$nd of life: And here- 
 upon many who thought Infants fturch-wembers 
 
 T4 fviz.) 
 
( 2 8o) 
 
 ('vifible^ and fafe upon their Parents Covevant* 
 consent , thoughc that the time of f I emni nation 
 was fo far left to prudence as that ( as the Ifra- 
 elites did Circumcifion in the wildernefs^) it might 
 be delayed a few years by fuch Parents as flelirecj 
 it, till children could fomewhat anfwer for them- 
 felves. 
 
 §. 60. Yet after my review of this controverfie 
 ppon their urgencie , I find no proof brought by 
 any of thefe men , {hat ever one Church in the 
 world wus without Irfant-men.bers^ (that had In- 
 fants, ) nor enc perfon in the Church againft In- 
 fant Church-member ftuy and bapifm, from Chrifts 
 days till the Waldenfes ( about eleven hundred 
 or a thoufand years ) except that Tertu!lian y who 
 took them for Innocent and therefore Chnrcb~ 
 members 7 did in (offie cafe advife the delay : I fay, 
 I find not one Chriftian or Heretick againft it ;) 
 (unlefs you wijl impute it to them that were 
 againft allbaptifm, which Infidels alio are. ) And 
 though I verily believe that the Waldenfes were- 
 not againft Infant- baptifm, nor is there full proof 
 that any in their time were, yet becaufe I am loth 
 to judge the Papifts utrerjy impudent lyars , I 
 think it moft probable that in the Waldenfes days 
 and Country, there was a fort of odious Herericks, 
 that denied Infanf-baptifm, and the Refurre'&ion, 
 snd held community of Wives and other abomi- 
 nations reported all together by their oppofers in 
 chofe times, 
 
 CHAP< 
 
CHAP. V. 
 
 Mr. DanversV great Cahimnie of my felf refuted. 
 
 £. i. TV yfR. D. pag. 134. Ed. 1. faith thus 
 XVI [ Tet is not sJMr. Baxter ajhamed to 
 fix fucb an abominable flander upon the Baptifts 
 of this our age of baptising naked: ( which it 
 feems was fo long the real practice of thep&doba- 
 ptifts ) and about which he fiends three whole pa- , 
 ges to aggravate the heynoufnef of their cufiom 
 ( which he is pleafed to father on them. ) And 
 though I am perfwaded he cannot but be convin- 
 ced that the thing is moft notorioufly falfe , and 
 brought forth by him rather out of prejudice 
 ( not to fay malice) rather than any proof or good 
 teftimony he ever received thereof . yet have I 
 never heard that he hath done him f elf , his inju- 
 red neighbours and the abufed world that right as 
 to own his great weaknef and finful Jhortnefi 
 therein, in any of the many Editions of that piece 7 
 which 1 humbly conceive as well deferved a re- 
 cantation as fame other things he has judged wor- 
 thy thereof J 
 
 <. 2. Anfw. To live and die imp enitently in (o 
 unprofitable a fin ( and unpleafing to any but dia- 
 bolical natures ) as is the belying of others ,*is a 
 very dreadful kind of folly. I would heartily vvifh 
 tbar Mr.Danvcrs and I migh.: meet and help to 
 bring each other to repentance, by a willing im- 
 partial examination of each of our guiltinefTes here- 
 in. £.3.1 
 
^ '(l$2) 
 
 $. 3. I never look to fpeakto them thus more, 
 nor long to any man on earth , and in this stati- 
 on and with thele thoughts I muft profefs (not 
 thinking it lawful to belie my felf ) that in the year 
 1647, or 1648. or both when Anabaptiftry be- 
 gan fuddenly to be obtruded with more fuccefT- 
 ful fervency than before, I lived near Mr.Tombes 
 in a Country where fome were, and within the 
 hearing of their practice in other parts of the land : 
 And that in that beginning the common frame of 
 Minifters and people was, that in divers places 
 fome baptized naked and fome did not : And that 
 I never to my bell remembrance heard man or 
 woman contradict that report till this man did it 
 in this writing : And that no An3baptiit contra- 
 dicted it to me that I then or finceconverfed with : 
 And that thereupon in 1659. 1 wrote againfi: both 
 forts , thofe that baptized naked, and thofe that 
 did not : And after all this when Mr. Tombes an- 
 fwered my book and thofe very pafTages, he ne- 
 ver denied the truth of the thing ( though he did 
 not fo baptize himfelf f unlefs he have any where 
 elfe fince faid any thing of it which I never faw 
 or heard of. ) And I appeal to impartial reafon, 
 whether he would not then at the time have de- 
 nied it, had it been deniable: And whether this 
 man now twenty five or fix years after be fitter to 
 be believed in- a matter of fad, than commonxan- 
 fent at the prefent time ? And whether it be law- 
 ful for me to take all forts then living for lyars, 
 rather than this one man that hath written us fuch 
 a book ? and who in a negative 25 years after 
 
 can- 
 
cannot pofiibly be a competent witnefs, no nor if 
 he had written at that time : For who can fay 
 that there was or is no fuch thing done beyonci 
 his knowledge ? 
 
 c . 4. But if Mr, D. would perfwade the world 
 either that I wrote that of all the Anabaptifts,or 
 of moft, or of any in any other age, or that I have 
 fince faid that any continue the fame practice, he 
 would but deceive men : for it is nothing fo. 
 
 5<. 5. I muft confefs I did not fee the per fons ba- 
 ptized naked, nor do I take it to be lawful to de- 
 fame any upon doubtful reports : But when it is a 
 fame common and not denied by themfdves either 
 Minifters or people at the time, I think it is to 
 be taken fo much notice of, as the confuting of 
 the evil doth require. 
 
 £. 6. I know not by fight that there is ever a 
 Fornicator, Adulterer, Murderer or Thief ( as I 
 remember) in England: And yet if I neither 
 Write nor Vreach to call fuch to repentance, left 
 I be a Slanderer in faying that there are any fuch, 
 I think it would be foolifh uncharitable Charity, 
 and unrighteous juftice. 
 
 £.7. Mofl Se&s do in their height and heat at 
 Erft do that which afterward they furceafe with 
 fhame : The Donatift Circumcellians continued 
 not felf- murder ; the Anabaptifts held not on to 
 do as they did at Mitnfter, or in the time of J)*h 
 vtd George : Our Ranters continued not- open 
 [wearing and whoredom long: The fame of En- 
 gland which I never heard gainfayed is that the 
 Quakers at firft did fial>e and vomit and infect 
 Others ftrangely : And is he a lyar that faith ir, 
 
 bec 
 
becaufe they do not fo now ? I was at Worcefter 
 my felf when at the Aflizes one of them went na- 
 ked ( as a Prophet ) before our eyes through the 
 high ftreet, and they laid they did fo in many 
 other places : I know not the mans name now, 
 nor any of the multitude of Spectators, if after 
 twenty years and more I were called to prove it, 
 I know by uncontrolled fame that Miftrefs Safari 
 Tierfdn folemnly undertook to raife the dead ( ta- 
 king up a dead Quaker at dairies and command- 
 ing him ( in vain ) to live. ) But if now after more 
 than twenty years my witnefTes were called for, I 
 muft travel to the place before I could produce 
 ihem. 
 
 <$ . 8. Yea , I never faw any Anabaptift reba- 
 ptize ( or baptize the aged : ) But fame faith they 
 do fo and none deny it. If it prove falfe, I fhall 
 be glad, and will joyn in vindicating them ; And 
 fo I fay of the prefent cafe • And will heartily 
 joyn with any in reforming backbiting , and rafh 
 ungrounded defamations of others. 
 
 HAP. 
 
CHAP. VI. 
 
 Of Mr, Danvers'j frequent Citations of my Words* 
 
 C. i. \X7*^ en * rea< ^ ^ r * Tombes his twenty 
 VV Citations of me as againft myfelf, 
 which Mr. £>. provoketh me to anfwer , and 
 when I find Mr. D. fo often imitating them, and 
 alkdging my words , as juftifyirig his caufe , I 
 have no conviftion on my mind that it is lawful 
 for me to waft my time and the Readers, about 
 a particular vindication of my words, fo triflingly 
 and vainly ufed by them. 
 
 tf.2. Either it is the authority of the Writer 
 which they fuppofe will ferve them, or i\\t force 
 of the arguments • or elfe it is only to make the 
 Reader believe that the Writer is fo foolijli as not 
 to know when he contraditteth himfelf.. The firfi 
 I may well prefume it is not r" If it were, the fame 
 perfons authority would be as much mere againft 
 thenv as his judgement is. Ii it be the fecond 9 
 why do they u(e any arguments of mine , when 
 they are able to form fuch of their own as feem 
 much more ufeful to them than any that I can 
 give them ? And why then do they not infift on- 
 ly on the Argument and fiegled the Author? 
 But feeing I muft believe that the laft is their bu- 
 finefs, I can have leifure to fay little more than 
 this to them, that it is not my bufinefsto prove 
 my fclf no fool but to prove Infants Church- 
 members - 3 nor will it make me fmart if all of 
 
 their 
 
their mind in England fo judge of me \ But ye'' 
 I am not fo fooliln but that I know my own mind 
 better than they do, and can reconcile my words 
 when they cannot* If this fatisfie not them, it 
 fatisficth me. 
 
 £. 3. In fumm, the words of mine which they ; 
 alledge againft my felf need but thefe two things 
 to be faid for them againft fuch filly cavils : 
 1. That moft of them fpeak to the Queftion 
 £ What is the kind of Covenant confent required in 
 baptifm ? Whether a meer dogmatical faith pro- 
 fejfed f Or the profejfhon of a faving faith ? as" 
 to the matter believed and the fincerity of the be- 
 lief and confent ? ] And I prove that it is no other 
 fort of faith, but a true faving faith as to object 
 and alt which is required and accepted of God 
 the fearcher of hearts, as the Condition of his 
 Covenant : And that it is not the Profeffion of any 
 lower fort of faith ( as to object or act ) but of 
 this faving faith, which the Church muft accept 
 to the admiffion of members : A lower profefti- 
 on will ferve for none. 2. But I (till maintain 
 ( and I think fully proved ) that God fo far taketh 
 the child as if he were apart of the Parent (na- 
 ture and grace having committed him to his will 
 and difpofal for his good till he have a will to choofe 
 for himfelf) as that by this fort of faith and con- 
 fent the Parent is to enter his Child into Cove- 
 nant wich God as well as himfelf, and that in 
 Gods acceptance the Child doth thus truly con- 
 fent by the believing Parent, and doth Covenant 
 with God, as a child Covenanteth and confenteth 
 reparative ly amor.g men , who by his Parents is 
 
 made 
 
<*8 7 ; N 
 
 made a Party in a Contract , as in a leafe for his 
 life , or the like. Not that in fcnfn fhyfico the 
 perfon of the Child being the fame with the Pa- 
 rents doth confent in his confent ^ but that the 
 Parent having the treble intereft in the Child, of 
 an Owner, a Governour and a Lover , God by 
 Nature and Grace conjunctly alloweth and requi- 
 reth the Parent to dedicate the Child to God, and 
 to confent that he fhali be a member of Chrifl 
 and his Church according to his capacity , and 
 by that Covenanting confent to oblige the Child 
 to live as a Chriftian when he cometh to age : 
 And this (hall be as acceptable to the Childs Co- 
 venant-relation and rights , as if he had done it 
 hirafelf • and in this fenfe may be faid reputatively to 
 have confented or Covenanted by his Parents , 
 which in proper fpeech, is, They did it for him 
 At Gods Command* 
 
 0.4. He that is not fatisfied with this Gene- 
 ral Anfwer, let him either perufe the words 
 tbemfelves in my Writings, with thofe before and 
 after that explain them , or eife if he will do as 
 this man doth , abufe his own underftanding and 
 his ignorant Readers, by fuch filly wranglings ani- 
 mated by partiality, let him bear the Confequents, 
 and know thar I have fomewhat elfe to do with 
 my few remaining hours, than to write books on 
 fuch infufficient invitations and expectations. 
 
 chap; 
 
<i8<J) 
 
 ■— 
 
 CHAP. VII. 
 Of Mr. Danvers'j many other ace nf at ions of 
 
 me. 
 
 $. i. TT was one of the old Characters of the 
 Jl Hereticks in the Apoftles dayes, To 
 jpeak^ evil of the , things that they underftood 
 not. 
 
 And that may well be their Chara&er in 
 which they contradid the three great conftitutive 
 parts of Chriftianity , and all Religion, and true 
 honefty, ife TRUTH, HUMILITY *nd 
 LOVE, by Falfiood, Pride and Mahgnity y 
 ( called commonly Vncharitablnefs. ) 
 
 (. 2. The Hoot of this is, when Reigning, an 
 unfanSiified heart in which thefe vices remain 
 unmortified , covered from the owners knowledge, 
 by a form of Godlinefs , and efpecially a zeal 
 for the wayes of fome Party, more honoured in 
 the perfons eyes for wifdom, or piety than others : 
 In others there is a great meaftre of the fame 
 vices mixed with true Grace , where an evil and 
 a good caufe are conjoyned as to fome erFe&s : 
 They love God and his Truth, and they hate 
 all that they think againft him, they would pro- 
 mote- piety in the world, and reprefs what they 
 think againft it . And being perfons whofe wits 
 and fludies were not fuch, as exathnefs and large- 
 nefs of knowledge do require , but yet lovers of 
 knowledge, truth, and Scripture, they have 
 
 more 
 
ftiore knowledge than prophane Tots , but tittle, 
 alas , little, in companion of that which is ne- 
 cefTary to a methodical, accurate underftanding of 
 the matters which frequently fall under contro- 
 verfie ^ And fo knowing but little they know 
 not what they are ignorant of, nor what others 
 know beyond them ; And it being the common 
 vice of mans underftanding, to be hafty in judged 
 ing before they hear or know one half that is 
 r-ecefTary to a true and faithful judgement, and 
 fo to be consent before they underftand^ thefe 
 men hereby are led to confidence in many 
 an error : And an erring judgement firft 
 telleth them that Truth is falfhood, and falfhooi 
 truth, that Good is evil, and evil good, that Du- 
 ty is fin , and fin is duty ; and then a good 
 Caufe and a bad , the Love of Truth and a per- 
 I verfe and partial zeal concur , to put them on 
 in the way of error. Ignorance and error fee 
 them on a wrong cmife, and a mixt affitlioft or z.eal^ 
 partly good and partly evil fpurreth them on. 
 And in thefe the Error and Here fie and confe- 
 q jent fins, are no more predominant than the 
 caufe 5 and God will have mercy on thofe that 
 in ignorance, with good meanings, oppofe many 
 truths, and do much evil. 
 
 ^.3. And the great means of nourifhing this 
 fin in Churches is departing from Chrifts 
 Church order, who hath appointed Teaching and 
 Learning to be the fetted way of getting know- 
 ledge -, And therefore required all hisdifciplesro 
 fome to his Church, as little children to School, 
 with teachable humble minds, to Learn, and not 
 U srftfi 
 
with proud wrangling minds to difpute : If all our 
 children fhoufd fpend their time at School in dispu- 
 ting, wich the Teacher and fetting their wits againft 
 his as in a conflict, what would they thus Learn ? 
 
 #. 4. Therefore Paul faith, that thz fervant 
 of the Ljrd muft not ftrive, and oft calleth men 
 from perverfe di fput trigs, and flriving about words 
 which fubvert the hearers, and from fuch con- 4 
 tendings as edifie not but tend to more ungodli- 
 nefs , ( [hough the faith may be contended for, 
 and truth defended, when oppolition maketh k 
 truly neceflary). 
 
 ?. 5. When a man feeketh after knowledge 
 as a Learner, he meeteth it with a willing mind -, 
 he cometh towards it with an appetite, and fo 
 is a capable receiver : But when a man cometh 
 as a difpHtant, he is ingaged already to one fide^ 
 ,and if that be falfe he cometh out to fight a- 
 gainft' the truth, with a / pint of oppofit ion, ha- 
 ting truth as error, and good as evil-, and thinks 
 it his ditty and interefi to deftroy and fhame it 
 if he can, and therefore is unapt to think what 
 may befaidfcr it , but ftudyeth all that he can 
 againft it. And is this loathing , and oppofi- 
 tioaand fighting againft truth the way to know it ? 
 \5. 6. Therefore that which hath undone the 
 Churches peace is, that too many Teachers, be- 
 ing themfelves too forward to controversies, have 
 roo haftily drawn in their people into their quar- 
 rels,' and caft fuch bones before them in books 
 and pulpits inftead of food, which break their 
 reeth and fet them together by the ears inftead 
 of nourifhing them. £nd fo one mans hearers 
 
 are 
 
'are taught to dilute for this fort of Govern- 
 rrient, and anothers for- that fort ; one mans fc*r 
 free^vHl and anothers againfl it - 5 when perhaps 
 neither ihey nor the matter of the quarrel can 
 tell you what it is ? and fo of an hundred more 
 fuch like. The honeft hearers when they fhould 
 be digefting the ancient Chriftian dcftrine, and 
 
 *' learnirig' to inereafe in Love to Gcd and mart, 
 and to pradife a holy and a heavenly life, and 
 prepare for a comfortable deatn, and happy eter- 
 nity by a Living faith and hope, are taught that 
 if they be not zealots for this opinion or that , 
 for Anabaptiftry i for feparation,- eVc. if they 
 pray by a book, or if they joyn with thofe th.->c 
 hold fuch things as they hear called by odious 
 frightful names , they are not then right &e*i*t& 
 Chnftians, but corrupt or complyers or lttkf\varw;$ 
 And thus each Church is made a miferabk 
 Church-militant, and trained up to war againft each 
 oiher. 
 
 $. 7. And this Minifters have done, partly 
 to ftrengthen themfelves by the content and num- 
 
 ! ber of their adherents, as the Captain mud con- 
 quer by his Souldiers t When, they can fetagreat 
 number on hating their adverfaries , and backbi- 
 ting them, and teHing the hearers wherever they 
 come, to make them feem odious , how errone- 
 ous and bad fuch and fuch men are , they tfonk 
 they have done much of their Work ? And while 
 they think it is for Chrift , they know not how 
 notably they pleafe and ferve the DeviL, Eut'l 
 muft remember that I have fpoken of th*s elfe- 
 where, and fodifmifsir. 
 
( 291) 
 
 <• 8. That Mr. Danvers^ and his imitaters 
 Ipcuk^ evil (confidently and vehemently ) of the 
 things tluy kjiow net ( yea very many fuchj I 
 am lore. But from what principle or root, or 
 how far that vice which produceth thefe fruits 
 is mortified or unmortified as to all others, I am 
 neither called nor willing to judge. I re- 
 member how Mr. Tho. Puree once dealt with 
 me : When my Religious neighbour could hard- 
 ly be per (waded to communicate with thofe among 
 them that were of his judgement , faying, they 
 were men that would fwear and lie , and lived 
 fcandaloully , I thought it my duty (to keep 
 up difcipline and yet) to moderate their cenfures 
 by telling them what fins I thought might ftand with 
 fome meafure of fincere piety, and Church-com- 
 munion. And what doth he but hence take ad- 
 vantage to tell the world how loofe my doctrine 
 was , and what finful perfons I thought had 
 grace ? So now if I fhould fav, that notwithftand- 
 ing thefe hard-faced fa.I (hoods heaped together, 
 and confidently obtruded on the ignorant, even 
 about publick and vifible matter of fact , yet I 
 hope the Aiuhor feareih God truly in other re- 
 fpefts, and erreth through Ignorance, paffion, 
 '2nd temerity ; I fhould be told publickly ere 
 long by one or other, that I think themoftbia- 
 7.e*n-fac,d Lyars may be Saints : And if I deny 
 fuch mens Gqodnefs, I look to be told that I am 
 cenfSripus and a reviler of godly men that differ 
 from me. Therefore I am thankful to Chrift 
 that he not, only cxcufeth us from fo hard a work 
 as the Judging of the fincerity of others, tut calls 
 
 w 
 
( 2P3 ) 
 
 ut cjf and faith, who art thou that judge ft ano- 
 ther mans fervant ? to Ins own mafier he ftands 
 or falls : But whoever cenfure me for it, I will 
 fay that my judgement ftill inclineth to the hope- 
 ful and charitable part ! For fiding and error 
 may draw good men into heinous fins. 
 
 tf. 9. That He and I do differ in 'judgement 
 and Pratlice, is not to be denyed : I thought 
 our difference had been but in fo fmall and tole- 
 rable things ( till I fav worfe in his writings ) 
 as fhould neither abate Love or forbid Commu- 
 nion : And thinking fo, I was the likelier to pra- 
 d:ife as I thought , and not to hate him and fuch 
 as he : But I perceive he takes the differences 
 to be far greater , and my errors and fins 
 to be more heinous and intolerable , and there- 
 fore if he hate me (though I know not that ever 
 he faw me or. I him ) it is no wonder •, it being 
 more agreeable to his judgement - 5 And alfo 
 if he would not tohrate me were it in his pow- 
 er. 
 
 0. 10. If he fo greatly differ from me, and 
 be in the right , certainly it is becaufe he is ei- 
 ther a great deal wifer and more knowing in 
 thefe matters, or becaufe he is more c on fc tenable 
 to avoid perverting temptations, and more Godly 
 and fit for divine light. I deny not either : but 
 from the bottom of my heart tell him, that I 
 am fo deeply confeious of the darkjiefs and % f Mai- 
 ne fs of my under ft an dmg , and my Htrle gcodnefs 
 and very ill deferts from God, that did he bring 
 me any confiderable evidence for his caufeymy 
 great fufpicion of my felf would prepare me to 
 U 3 bear 
 
\&%t him j But it muft not be (ucb fluff as hs 
 here obtrudcth on us, And I muft tell hirq, 
 though I acknowledge God to be a free Bene- 
 tas5tor , and may give the Greatefi Knowledge 
 to them that have lead kboured for it ^ yet while 
 diligent fe arching is his commanded means , I 
 {hall doubt whether his eafier and fhorter fearch 
 hath attained to fomuch more than my harder and 
 longer, till the fruit ihall prove ir. 
 
 p. II. He tells us 'f.d. 2. p. 170.. that 1\can~ 
 u net do my [elf were '.right and my offended bre-> 
 Cl thren, than to clear my [elf in theje particulars 
 £C which are indeed fo hein<nu, not only to every, 
 <( one of his Nonconforming brethren, but to mojt 
 $ Fret cfiants that hear them*~\ 
 
 *Anfw. 1. Still fuch untruths ? Po you know 
 what moft Protefiants think that hear them? ancl 
 every one of my Nonconforming brethren I Why 
 fome of the wifeft of them ' that I know did 
 read them oyer , and approved them before 
 they were printed } Others ( many an$ 
 many ) of the molt judicious alfo of my acquain- 
 tance have fince profeffed their confent : Nay 
 more •, I remember not one lidinifer thap hath 
 made me juiow by word or writing to me that 
 he diflentcth from any one of all thefe heinous 
 things; I remember thjt once fome objected 
 what they heard others fay fnot as contenting 
 to the oppfcfers ) and acquiefced in my anfwer?> 
 or rather in the woids o£ the book peruted. So 
 that if every one of my None on forming brethren 
 be offended, and \ known not of one, nor anyone 
 of ihcm would ever vGuchfafe a \yo r d or line v> 
 
 con'- 
 
convince me, you cenfure them for wofu! di(- 
 
 femblers or uncharitable. But I believe them 
 
 of themfelves rather than you. 
 
 $. 12. He addeth, And I dare be bold to fay <+ 
 
 hath given more general offence % and loft 
 
 Mr. Baxter more amongfl his 
 
 Friends * y than any thine: be * N °t fa: much as 
 
 dtd tn all his ljfe.1 Mr. »&?$TS 
 
 I r ^u cc u- u tllc Anabiptifis for 
 
 Anfrv. i. The oiience which writing for Turin! 
 Chrift dreadfully condemneth, Communion, 
 which is fcandalizing the weak 
 *or laying fnares or ftumbling-blocks before them, 
 to tempt them to think ill of Chrift, or Godli- 
 nefs, or to commit any fin, I would avoid as 
 carefully as I can , And to avoid it I have writ- 
 t;en that which offendeth you. But the offence 
 which is but Difpleafing diff enters , yea mi fla- 
 king men y l little regard on my own account. 
 And your talk of my lofs ( or being loft ) doth 
 favour fo rankly of a humane hyper it teal tem- 
 ptation , as maketh me remember what Chrift 
 faid to Peter Alath. 1 6. 23. that would have had 
 him fave himfelf from fuffering , though I will 
 not fpeak out fuch unpleafing words to you : 
 But your words favour too much of the flefh. 
 O Sir, it is but a few moments more, and you 
 and I (hall be in a world , where the thoughts 
 and words of mortals, of us, will be of fmall 
 importance to us ! And themfelves are hafting 
 to the day when all their thoughts perifb. O ceafe 
 from man whofe breath is in his noftrils : for 
 wherein is he to be accounted of ? Would you 
 tempt me to look to the hypocrites reward ? the 
 U 4 a^ pro- 
 
(196) 
 
 approbation of man ? O miferabte ' reward ! 
 Were not that book odious to you , I would 
 refer you for my Reafons to the two Chapters 
 of Man-f leafing and Pride : If Gods approbati- 
 on feem not enough for us, why caH we him 
 our God > 
 
 But if I have lofi fo. much as yon intimate, you 
 would perfwade me that my fervice is more 
 than I take it to be ? I have felt little comfort 
 in any fervice of God which coft me nothing. 
 But you fhall not tempt me to over-value it fo 
 much v I find no lofsatall by it. Whit have I 
 loft Sir > Not one farthing or farthings- worth, 
 that I am aware of I As I lived not on any man 
 before , fo I am never the poorer for that duty 
 flow. Is it mens praife or good thoughts of me > 
 Not one friend to my remembrance in the City, 
 or Land hath once told me his dijfent^ much lefs 
 that I have loft his good efleem : ( Only one 
 young man that heard me Preach came for fa- 
 tisfadion about one of the .particulars, who was 
 fatisfied as far as I could perceive , and I wifht 
 him but to read over all in my btfokf about that you 
 object concerning the Crucifix) and I heard of him 
 no more,) And if I am fo much lofi with my friends, 
 and no one of them in England tell me that he 
 di[fenteth y and wherein, fuch friends are not fo 
 valuable as- to be any of my felicity ! And do 
 yo& call a man [_ loft J that lofeth the thoughts ov 
 the breath of man } As it is their own duty or 
 fin, I regard all mens thoughts or words, and fo 
 would pleafe all men for their good to edificati- 
 on : But as to my own comfort I can fpare; 
 
 your: 
 
1*91) 
 yours and theirs • and if you and "a tfioufand fuch 
 ihould write a Cart-load of Calumnies as yoq 
 have done, I think they would break but little 
 of my lleep. Set thefe arguments n^xt before 
 hypocrites that Hve on man : I live not on 
 them. 
 
 But your words do mind me , how men that 
 are embodyed in little parties, ( far Ms than the 
 Donattfts or Nwatians ) are inclined to take 
 their Cabin for all the Kingdom, and their Seft 
 for the Church, and are affe&ed with their praife 
 or difpraife almoft as if they were all the world. 
 You hear your folks it feems talk againft me 
 ("with whom backbiting is a duty) andyoufeem 
 to dream that it is all my friend*. It God in 
 Chrift will be my friend, I can fpare others. 
 
 And tell me Sir, for what frize or gain do you 
 think I am loft with all my friends ? No man 
 in his wits will voluntarily be loft for nothing. 
 Do you think it is to get other friends that I 
 more value } Who be they ? Is it the Papifts > 
 Enquire what I get by them. Is it iheDiocefdn. 
 party ? What have I got by them but fiiencing 
 and the lofs of all Minifterial maintenance , 
 thefe twelve years ? And ask them whofe 
 writings have more offended them yours or 
 mine. 
 
 If I am loft, it hath toft me more years hard 
 ftudy to be loft , and to be erroneous or a fool, 
 than it hath done you to be feme body and to be 
 wife 5 And I tell you I never yet repented of 
 Co ft or loft (or that Truth and duty, which you 
 lament as heinous error and fin. But nak?d thtth y 
 
 and 
 
(*9%) 
 
 and the faithful endeavours of pleafing God, in- 
 promoting that -Love among Chrifts difciples, and 
 ■peace in his Churches which Church Tyr am i and 
 Setts have fo many ages laboured ( too ■ fuccef- 
 fully ) to deftroy, are [meter than to be forfa- 
 keri either through the perfection of one fore 
 or the ReviUngs of the other, or the lofsofall 
 mens friendfhip upon earth. 
 
 Andyetlwill add, that though being long ago 
 glutted with mens applaufe, as finding it a lufcious 
 but unvpholefome thing, and having voluntarily, cafi 
 up much of it my felf I yet perceive no want of . 
 friends, but take your words of them for meer 
 flanders. 
 
 f&fcf. SaithMr.I>. (Pref.ed. i^)fc c He hath 
 €C fo much abounded %( 'in contradictions) {none 
 u more that Iknow of;) being as y out find, fome- 
 iC time a great oppofer , then a great defender of 
 " Epifcopacy. ~\ 
 
 Anfw. i. Yet I know not that ever this man 
 faw me ( as I faid) or I him. 2. This fal (hood 
 did unhappily overflip him, my writing being fo 
 full a confutation of it, that he can have nothing 
 of fenfe to fay to cloak it. My judgement was 
 for Epifcopacy 1639. by Reading Biihop Dow* 
 name and fome others :-But in 1640. the oath cal- 
 led Et cater a calling us to fwear never to confent 
 to the alteration of the prefent Government by A. 
 Bifoops, "Bifiiops, Deans, Archdeacons, &c. forced 
 me to ftudy the whole caufe to the bottom, fince 
 which time my judgement of Epifcopacy never 
 altered ( which is 34 years ago) having fetled 
 in the Receptibility of crie fort of Epifcopacy, 
 
 ana 
 
and the deftrablenefs ot another, and the diflike 
 t)i another fort : All which I hav* fully pub- 
 lijhed in my Difpute of Church- Government 
 1658. when the Bifhops here were at the low- 
 eft, Either this man knew me and my writings 
 herein, or not. If not, what a man is this that 
 dare talk thus confidently and falfly of what he 
 knew not ? If he did,then how much more flagitious 
 is his practice, thus to tell the world an untruth 
 fo notorious to himfelf ? He faith (as you may find) 
 but never tells you where. Let him tell you where 
 and when I ever defended that Epifcopaoy which 
 I had oppofed ? 
 
 §. 14. |[ Mr. D. [_ Ci Sometime for* Noncon-. 
 cC formtty ( in whofe tents he hath feeptedtqjhel" 
 ic per himfeif in the ftorm^ .and with their Inditl- 
 " gence to come forth of his hole) and yet At 
 €< length fo highly to di [grace the fame, 
 
 Anfw. 1 . Let him (hew you if he can, where 
 or when I have changed my judgement about 
 Conformity , or expreft a change fince 1640? 
 Not that I take it for a difgrace to be mutable 
 by growing wifer ; But neceffity forced me fo 
 long ago to ftudy thofe cpntroverfies fo hard, as 
 fixed me, and I never heard any thing fince which 
 confiderably altered me therein : Which alfo be- 
 ing vifible in the forefaid Difyute of Liturgie y 
 Ceremonies , &c. written 1658. leave no cloak 
 for this mans calumnies. See there whether I 
 faid not more for fo much of Epifcofacy, Litur- 
 gie and Ceremonies which I took to be law- 
 ful , than ever I have done fince Bifhops return- 
 ed i 
 
 2. But 
 
2. But what doth he mean by [faltering my 
 felf in a ftorm in their tents J f I cannot ima - 
 gine what, unlcfs fen fe and truth at once fpr- 
 fook him I When & ftorm fell on the Nonconform 
 mifts-> were f^V £e#fj a likely ^lace for fhelter ? 
 Had not the Conformiftsi tents been likelier ? 
 Did the Nonconformifts fhelter me f From what, 
 and how? 
 
 3. And what hole was it that I came out of, 
 with their Indulgence ? Are fuch men as this 
 the Vindicators of Gods Truth againft the Chri- 
 ftian world , than pour out untruths at fuch a 
 rate , in defpight of the moft publick notoriety 
 of fad > Do I need to tell the Reader ( only 
 for the fake of youths and forreigners) that when 
 the Nonconformifis caufe was at the bar, when 
 fpeaking had any room and hope , they fet me 
 in their forlorn , and engaged me ( with my 
 Confidence and defire to have prevented that 
 which I forefaw ) in the tasks of writing and 
 ( Jpeaking which would moft exafperate and offend 
 the Biihops •, till I was "I -think the firft among 
 them that was forbidden to Preach. I continued 
 after that in London z year, where I never had 
 place or flock, but was a ftranger : ficknefs then 
 forced me to "remove into the Countrey. The 
 Tents I was (bekered in, were Gods protection 
 in my own habitation^ which if a hole I thought 
 good enough for me. I Preacht to fuch as would 
 hear me , till, king near the Church door , 
 "and the people numerous, Clergie^cnvy caufed 
 
 me to be fent to the common Gaol, among malefa- 
 ctors -, As foop as I was our, another warrant 
 
 was 
 
was put into the Officers hands to apprehend 
 me' again, and fend me to Newgate for fix 
 month. -, Upon which I removed my dwelling 
 to the next Village out of the County t Ire^ 
 fitted none there that defired to hear me, of my 
 Neighbours. The writings which he revileth, 
 fhew that I lived not idle ; And I think he could 
 wifli I had done lefs and fpoken ro fewer. 
 I came not out of that bole of many months af- 
 ter the Indulgence was granted : I flayed on 4 
 reafons of Self-denyal, becaufe I would fore-flail 
 no London Minifters , nor hinder their Audito- 
 ries, and therefore refolved to flay till they were 
 fetled : I came on terms of far greater Self- 
 denyal , to the great abatement of my health, 
 ( to fay nothing of my greater coftj ) which now, 
 nath a^ain forced me at prefent to retire. 
 You fee now at what rate thefe men inform the 
 world , and how far they are to be believ- 
 ed. 
 
 As for his talk of [_ Difgracing the Noncon- 
 formifts~] it's true in two fenfes. i. As he and 
 I difgrace Chriftianity by being fo ignorant and 
 bad : 2. Or if he mean not My own Nonconfor- 
 mity but bis, ( even his Nonconformity to a great 
 deal of trntb and Qjrifttan duty and common 
 honefty ( by concatenated falfhoods ) , I have 
 done my part ( when conftrained ) to difgrace 
 ir. 
 
 f. 15. [Sometime a frienjkto Calvin, and then 
 a greater to Arminius j faitWie, 
 
 A'fw. 1. Did he tell the Reader where by 
 vne (in any words ) I contradict the other ? 
 
 1 2. But 
 
C 302'; 
 
 a. But fee the mifery of a Se&arian fpin> j 
 that taketh it for a contradi&ion to be a friend to 
 Calvin and Ar minim both } He would as this 
 inferreth ,- take it ill to be thought a friend to 
 Anabaptifts and Padobaptifts both, to Indepen- 
 dents and Prefoyterians and Epifeopal too. But 
 that is to fuch as I, thegreateft duty, which to him is 
 a fhameful contradidion : When I think none 
 Chriftians but Anabaptifis , I will be a friend to 
 no other as fuch : Men of fo little a Church,- 
 muft have anfwerabiy little Love : Cenforioufnefs 
 is a friend but unto few. 3. But by this your 
 friendlhip feemeth narrower than I thought it •. 
 I thought it had extended to all the Anabaptiftsj 
 But they are divided into [_Frec-v?illers^ and 
 \_J?ret-graccrs~\ as they call them, that is, into 
 Calvimfls and Armenians : and are you a friend 
 but unto one part of them ? 4. But indeed Sir, 
 dae Controverfies intended by you under thefe 
 names, are not fuch as a man of my poor mea- 
 fure can fix his judgement in very young, and 
 promife that it fhail never change, nor that I can 
 take it for a (hame to grow any wifer in them, 
 than heretofore, though perhaps your judgement 
 changed not from your Childhood. And I hope 
 ( if what I have written may be published) to make 
 it appear that foch as you that fpeak evil of what 
 you underhand not, are the grievous enemies of 
 the Churches of Chrift, as to Truth ; Holinefs^ 
 and Peace, by yowi militant noife about Cahi- 
 nifm, and <*s4rminmhifm, itirring up contentions, 
 and deftroying Love, by making differences feerrt 
 greater than they are *, and laying the Churches' 
 
 Con* 
 
Concord and Communion and mens falvatioii up- 
 on fuch queftions, as Whether the honfe fhonidke.- 
 built of Wood or Timber ? And is not this wor- 
 thy of your zeal ? 
 
 £. 1 6. He adds [" Sometimes a great Defin- 
 iC der of the Parliament and their Caufe y and then 
 "none more to renounce them and betray tor them 
 iC for their fains. ] 
 
 An fa. I, Was there never but One Parlia- 
 ment and One Caufe ? Perhaps* you mean that 
 the Parliament called 1640 and. the Rump(& cal- 
 led ) and the Armies Little Parliament, and Oli- 
 ver , and the Army Council and all the reft of 
 the Soveraigns were all One Parliament $ Or 
 that to fwear to the iirft Parliament, or fighc 
 for them, and to fhut out and imprifon them, 
 and to diflblve them , as Ufurpers , and to fee 
 up one chofen by — who knows whom- — and 
 to fet up Oliver and his Son , and to pull him 
 down again, and to fet u& the Kumf again, and 
 to pull them down and fet lipJj Council of State, 
 &c. were all one Caufe - 5 And that one day it was 
 Treafon not to be for oneSoveraign,and another day 
 not to be againftthat, a ijd for another. Your Ar- 
 ray did not betraytor them, when they forced one 
 one part as Traytors firft , and thruft out the 
 major part, after imprifoning and reproaching ma- 
 ny worthy wife and religious men, and when they 
 pulled down all the reft at laft ? Had you* or I 
 more hand in thefe matters ?. Whether you know 
 your felfl know not, but I am fureyou know 
 not me, nor what you talk of. 
 
 fi l 7- ft 
 
(3°4) 
 $. 17. It followeth [Sometime s a great Off ofef 
 of Tradition , and anon a great defender there 
 
 °n 
 
 Anfve. 1 . If you take Tradition equivocally , 
 you calumniate but by equivocation • but \i [there - 
 of 2 mean [the fame. Tradition'] your faifhood 
 hath not the cloak of an equivocation. Prove 
 what you fay by any words of mine > It is be- 
 tween twenty and thirty years I think iince I 
 largely opened my judgement of Tradition, in the 
 Preface to the iecond edition of my book cal- 
 led the Saints Reft, which I never changed fince. 
 If you will deny that your Father delivered you 
 the Bible ( or any other J or that the Church hath 
 ufed both* Bible and ISaftifm from the Apoftles 
 dayes til! now, Let the reproach of fuch Tradi- 
 tion be your glory , if you will ; It (hall be none 
 of mine. But do you write a book to prove the 
 Tradition of Adult Baptifm from Chrifts 
 time to ours, and when you have done renounce 
 and fcorn it ? See Reader, how he valueth his 
 own work ? 
 
 $< 18. He addeth [ " Sometimes a violent im- 
 * c fngner of Pofery, and yet at laft who hath fpokfn 
 u more in favour of it f ] 
 
 Anfw* Here again if by [ Pofery ] and [ it 3 
 you mean the fame thiiig, You hold on the fame 
 courfe : Prove it true , and take the honour of 
 once writing a true accufation. I have not hid 
 my judgement about Popery, having written about 
 feven or eight books againft it in above twenty 
 year? time, by which you may fee in comparing 
 them whether I changed my judgement. If you 
 Cannot, refufe not to blufh. Bur 
 
But I was and am a defender of that which 
 Js Popery and Antichriftianity with you , 
 the Church-member/hip , Covenant-jntereft and 
 Baptifm of Infants, and it's like many more par- 
 cels of the Treafures of Chrift , which you zea- 
 loufly rob him off, and give to Antichrift •, As 
 too many Sectaries do, the greateft part( I doubt 
 more than nine parts of ten- ) of his Kingdom or 
 Church univerfal : And as Divines ufe to prove 
 that carnal minds arc enemies and haters of God, 
 becaufe they confefs , honour and worfhip him 
 both in Name, and in refpeft of many of his At- 
 tributes and relations and works, yet in refpedt 
 of others they are averfe to him - y (o I would be 
 a monitor to you, and fuch like Sectaries, to take 
 heed of going much further, left before you know 
 what you do , while you honour Chrift s name , 
 and cry up fome of his Grace, and doctrines, you 
 fhould really hate, oppugn and blafpheme him, and 
 take Chrift himfelf for Antichrift, and his Chur- 
 ches and fervants for Antichriftian. If you will take 
 him for Antichrift that taketh Infants into the 
 vifible Church, I think it will prove tobe Chrift 
 \ himfelf. 
 
 $. 19. Reader, How big a volume wouldft 
 thou have me write in anfwering fuch fluff as 
 this ? Tears are fitter than Ink, for fuch fearlefs* 
 fafh, continued, vifible falfhoods, to be delibe- 
 rately publimed to the world as truths, by one 
 that calleth himfelf a man, and a Chriftian, and 
 feemeth zealous to new Chriften moft of the 
 Chriftian world. Unlefs I ftiould tire my fdf 
 and thee, I muft ftop, and ceafe this noyfome 
 X work : 
 
work : Only one charge more which runs through 
 much of his book, 1 will anfwer , becaufe iE' 
 concerneth the caufe it felt*. 
 
 0. 20. He oft tells you that when I have cal- 
 led my book^Plain Scripture proof ] I yet there and 
 after comradid my felf , by faying that the con- 
 trover fie ts difficult ] and by faying that in the 
 ancient Churches men were left at liberty to Ba- 
 ptise their children when they would. 
 
 And i. His very words prove that this is no 
 contradiction : For thefe very words I will make 
 plain to a boy of ten years old, and yet the world 
 mud know in print that he is not able to under- 
 ftand them , and that this is worthy the conside- 
 ration of his profelytes. z. My meaning I ope- 
 ned long ago, which he concealeth : The Proofs 
 of Infants Church-memberfhip are Plain : the 
 proof therefore of their right to Biptifm is plain 
 though not in the fame degree ? but there are ob- 
 jections of difficulty which may be brought againfl 
 it, which every weak Chriftian (nor Mincer 
 neither) cannot anfwer. And the hardefi is that 
 which is little taken notice of by themfelves, but 
 I ( impartially ) opened in my Chriftian 'Dire&o- 
 ?y. - And is k a contradiction to fay that a do- 
 ctrine that hath Plain Proof ', may be afTauked 
 by difficult ob^tlions ? Ancl yet fuch as 
 a fober Chriftian ihould not be changed by,. 
 unlets on the fame reafons he will forfake all 
 Chriftianity , and his everlafting hopes : , 
 For I take the do&rine of the Souls Immortali- 
 ty to be fuch as may be Plainly proved : But 
 truly I take it to, be five degrees above the abi- 
 lity 
 
( $97 ) 
 
 l lityof this Writer, to anfwer folidly all that can 
 be faid againlt it. I take it to be Plainly pro- 
 vable that the Scripture is certainly true : And 
 yet I take it to be quite above this confident 
 mans ability well to folve all the, diinculties ob- 
 jected ? were it but thofe poor ones of \Bent- 
 diclm Spinofa in his lace peftilent7rrf$*f/# The* 
 ologico-Yoliticus. I ithink I have plain proofthac 
 God is not the Author of fin, and man is not 
 moved in it and all his ads as an engine by un- 
 avoidable nece'iiitation : But I defpaif that ten 
 years ftudy more fhould inable this Writer, clear- 
 ly to folve the objections of Hobbes or Camera 
 about it. In a word, though we have Plain proof 
 that Chrifi is the Son of (3od i I fhould be loch 
 that the faith of this Nation mould lie upon the 
 fuccefs of a difpute about it , between a crafty 
 Infidel and this felt-conceited man. 
 
 p. 2ii And why fhould my impartiality ia 
 acknowledging the Churches liberty as to the time 
 of Baptifm, at firft, be fo unkindly received ? I 
 meant not, nor faid, that Chrift had\dt it Indif- 
 ferent and to their Liberty , but that they kk 
 one another at liberty herein : Becaufe i. The 
 firffc and great work was in fetling the Chur- 
 ches by converting Jews and Gentiles to the 
 faith : And the Adult who were the active mem- 
 bers,' were they that the Apoftles had moft to 
 do with, ( and therefore whofe cafe is expreffy 
 fpoken of.) 
 
 2. Becaufe it was a known thing thar the In- 
 fants of Church members had ever been Church- 
 members and were in pofTeifion of that Relaa- 
 X a on 
 
( 3 o8 ) 
 
 on when Chrift and his Apoftles fet up B> 
 ptifm. 
 
 3. And it was a granted cafe , that all Sancti- 
 fied perfons devoted themfelves and all that they 
 had to God • and every thing according to its 
 capacity : And therefore their Infants according 
 to their capacity, which God himfelf had before 
 expounded. 
 
 4. And it was never the meaning of Chrift 
 to lay fo much on the outward wathing, as ma- 
 ny Papiits and Jnabaptifts do : But as the un- 
 circumcifed Infants in the Wildernefs were ne- 
 verthelefs Church- members and faved ^ fo when 
 Infants were in the Covenant of God by the Pa- 
 rents true and known confent, their damnation 
 was not to be feared, upon their dying unbapti- 
 zed by furprize. 
 
 5. But yet obedience to God being neceffary , 
 many Parents haftned their childrens Baptifm, 
 ac two or three dayes old. Others {laid till the 
 eighth day : others longer • and multitudes had 
 children that were in feveral degrees entred on 
 the ufe of reafon , when the Parents were con- 
 verted , and it remained doubtful whether they 
 were fas to the Covenant ) at their Parents choice 
 or their own : And to this day there want not 
 thofe that think that Baprifm was not inftituted 
 to be the ordinary initiating Sacrament of the 
 children of Church-members , but only of Pro- 
 felytes -, And that Chriftians Infants took their- 
 places in the Church of cottrfr y but Frofelytes 
 from without only were to be Baptized. Though 
 this be an error, it is probable that there were 
 
 feme 
 
(3^9) 
 
 fome then, as well as now of that opinion. Bu 1 
 nothing more occafioned ( as far as I can find ) 
 the 4elay of Baptifm, than the fear of the danger 
 of fi rtning after it, efpecially of apoftafie. All 
 held that all fin pad was pardoned in Baptifm. 
 And Heb*6. and 10. aniother texts, and the com- 
 mon dodrine of the Church made them think it 
 a very perillous thing to fin wilfully ^fter illu- 
 mination and the acknowledgement of the truth. 
 And therefore abundance delayed their own Ba- 
 ptifm till age, and many were backward to Ba- 
 ptize their children, leftchildifh folly and youth- 
 ful lufts, and worldly temptations, fhould draw 
 them to trample upon the blood of the Cove- 
 nant ^ And on fuch accounts, all were not Ba- 
 ptized at one age. And divers that were Ba- 
 ptized at age upon their own converfion from 
 Heathenifm , were not fuddenly fo knowings as 
 to be acquainted with all the cafes about their 
 childrens rights, but mud have a confiderable time 
 to learn. For it was ( be it fpoken without 
 offence to ftrider men } a General and Nar- 
 row fort of Knowledge which the ApofHes and 
 the Primitive Churches required in the adult 
 as neceffary to Baptifm , yea when they had at 
 laft kept them long under Catechizing. For 
 even in Anguftines time , though all ufed the 
 fare words olBaptifm,fo few had a clear underitaiid- 
 jng of the very Eaptifaial form or words , that 
 (vjrinng(itbifupra)debapt.contr.Donat. ) he faith 
 that as to the Meaning of thofe words not only, 
 the Hereticks , Jed ipfi carnales parvuli Ecclefi<e 9 
 fi poffent firtgult diligentcr imerrogari , tot di- 
 X 3 w- 
 
verfitates opinianum fottaffis , quot homines nuwe*\ 
 rarentur : Ammalis enimhomo non percipit^Q. 
 Annon tamen ideo non integrum facr amentum acr 
 cipiunt ? 
 
 §* 22. There remaineth a Catalogue of my hey- 
 nous errors which he hath put in the preface to 
 his firft edition, and in the end of the fecond, 
 and which he and fuch as he hav£ taught many 
 honeft wrak people in London, both Anabaptifts 
 and Independents to talk frightfully and odtoul- 
 ly of from one another behind my back. What 
 fhould I fay to him and them ? Shall I anfvver 
 them that never fpeak or write to me ? Shall I 
 take this mans accufation for a confutation or con- 
 viction f> Is fo deadly an enemy of Antichrift 
 conceited of a felf-infallibility , or that I muft 
 take my faith or truftfrom Mf\jD^w^though not 
 from the Church, Pope, or General Council ? 
 If nor, what did the man think that a recitation 
 ihould do with me ? Did not I know what I 
 had written till he told me } 
 
 $• 23. But it is others that he tells it to \ 
 Thofe others wilt read my own words or, they 
 will not f If they will, I will not befocenfo- 
 rious of them as to think that tbey need any 
 more to his fruftration : If they will not, muft I 
 write another book to tell them what I have 
 written in the former ? How fhall I know that 
 they will any more read the laft than the firft > 
 If Satan have To much power over them, that he 
 can make them err, and lie and (lander and back- 
 bite as oft as a man profefling zeal for the truth, 
 will be his inftrument and meffenger , ir is not 
 
 my 
 
(itt). 
 
 my writing more books that can fave them* 
 The end muft tell them, whether IortheyfhaU 
 be the greater lofers by it. 
 
 $. 24. I have therefore but thefe two wayes now 
 to take ; 1. Whereas this man fakh, that my 
 doctrine feemeth heynons to every one of my Non- 
 conforming brethren, and moft Trotejiants^ and 
 that I have loft my felf among my friends, I do 
 demand as their duty and my right , the Means 
 of my conviction and reducton from thofe bre r 
 thrcn ( if any ) whom he doth not belie : I pro- 
 fefs my felf ready privately or publickly to 
 give them an account of the reafons of all 
 my doctrine, and thankfully to retract whate- 
 ver they frail manifeit to be an error. And I 
 challenge any of them to prove that ever I re- 
 fufed to be accountable to them, or denyed a fo- 
 
 1 ber anfwer to their reafons, or refufed to learn 
 of any that would teach me, or to iludyas hard 
 
 . to know as they ? or that ever partiality, facti- 
 on or worldly intereft, bribed me to deal falfly 
 with my confeience, and betray the truth. And 
 if after this claim , they will be filent, I will 
 take them for confentcrs , or if by backbiting on- 
 ly any will ftill notifie their diflent, I will take 
 them forfuch as I take this writer, and infone 
 refpeft worfe though not in all. ^, 
 
 <5. 25. 1 1. My fecond remedy is, I will go wil- 
 lingly to School to Mr. D. and having faid fo 
 much for the Learning, againft the Diluting way, 
 I will become his hearer and reader, if he have 
 any thing to teach me, that favour eth of Truth 
 X 4 and 
 
f3iO 
 
 and Mode fly more than this noyfome fardel 
 doth which he hath pubiifhed. And to that end 
 I will here give him a Catalogue of the contra- 
 ry opinions to mine, which I defire him folidly to 
 prove. If he hold not the contrary doEirines^ why 
 doth he exclaim againfi mine, as heynom ? If he 
 do hold the contrary to what I have with due and 
 clear diftindion and explication opened, ( and his 
 Readers after the perufing of all my own words 
 together be of his mind J I then take thefe follow- 
 ing to be their own opinions , and part of their 
 Religion, which I defire them to make good, an4 
 teach them me by fufficient proof. 
 
 CHAP, 
 
(3*3) 
 
 CHAP. VIII. 
 
 ]Ji Catalogue of feme Dottrines of Mr .Dan vers and 
 the reft that with him accufe my Chriftian Di- 
 rectory , if indeed they hold the contrary to 
 wine which they accufe ( as muft be fuppofed 
 by their accujation) which as a Learned lintr cat 
 any of themfolidly to prove* 
 
 OF the Queflion 49. p. 826. as cited by him 
 (The falfhood of his inferring £ in a Popijb 
 Countrey in their way of Baptizing 3 in that cited 
 place which fpake only of the Lutherans, I pafs 
 by as weary of anfwering fuch : But 
 
 I. That it is a fin for any man ( fuppofing In- 
 fant Baptijm a duty ) to offer his child to be Ba- 
 ptised where it will be done with the fign of the 
 Crofs, or fuch ceremonies as the Lutherans ufe, 
 though he frofefs his own dijfent and diffallow~ 
 ance of thofe ceremonies , and though he cannot 
 lawfully have it done better, but muft have that 
 cr no Baft if mat all ? 
 
 I I. That in the ancient Churches of the /?- 
 cond, third, and fourth ages, it had been better 
 to be unbaptiaed than to hfe a white Garment in 
 Baptifm as they did , or to be anointed as then, 
 cr to tafte Milk and Honey, though the Terfoti 
 offering his child to fuch Baptifm, had profejfed 
 his dijfent as aforefaid ? 
 
 III. That 
 
(314) 
 
 III. That all the Churches of (lirift in thofe 
 fecond, third, and fourth, and following ages, 
 who were Baptised thus ( Infant or adult, ) had 
 wo Baptifm but what was worfe than none : 
 ( Though Church hiflory certifie m that this ufe 
 was fo univerfal , that it's hard to find any one 
 Chrifiian in all thofe or many after ages that 
 ever was againft the lawfulnefs of it, or refufed 
 
 in) . . • 
 
 ( By the way, it was but one of your tricks 
 
 which you know not how to for- 
 * p. 572. edty bear, * to foift in [Peril of 
 
 Law 2 when I had not fuch a 
 word or fenfe as Peril : As if you knew of no Obli- 
 gation thexe but from Peril* ) 
 
 . IV. Tour fag* 373. ed. z»\That anointings 
 fifing the white Garment , Milh^ and Honey, 
 were Blafphemous rites, and Popifh beforePopery 
 was exifient $ or if otherwife , that jlll Chrifts 
 Church was Popijh then ? 
 
 V. Tour Pref. ed. 1 . [ That Chrifts Mlnifters 
 rightly ordained and dedicated to God in that fa- 
 cred- office * are not fo much as Relatively holy 
 asfeparated to God therein ? 
 
 VI. That Temple's , and Church Vtenfils de- 
 voted and lawfully feparated by man to holy ufes , 
 either are not juftly Related to God as fo fepa- 
 rated, or though fo feparated and Related are in 
 no degree to be called Holy 2 
 
 V 1 1. Tour 
 
- 
 
 VII. Tour Pref. 16. [That no Reverence is 
 due to nJWinifters and Church utenflls ? ] 
 
 VIII* Ibid. [ To be uncovered, in the fiurcb; - 
 and ufe reverent carriage and ge ft ures there, doth 
 riot at all tend to preferve due reverence to God 
 and his'worfloip ? 
 
 IX. Ibid. [That the unjufl alienation of Tern' 
 pies, Vtenfils, lands, dayes, which were fefara-. 
 ted % by Cjod him [elf, it no facr Hedge : no not ta 
 have turned the Temple of old, and the facred, 
 things to a common ufe unjuftly : nor the Lords 
 day now. ( But thou that abhorreft Idols, doft 
 thou more than commit Sacriiedge ? Even teach 
 men fo to do, and fay It is no Sacriledge ? no 
 not when God himfelf is the feparater and man 
 the unjufl alienater £ And yet is Infant-Baptifm 
 a fin?) 
 
 X. Ibid. [That it's no facr Hedge unjufl ly to 
 alienate things juflly confecrated and feparated 
 to God by man (as sjltmifters, Lands , Vtenflls, 
 & c. .) ( Remember Ananias and Saphira. ) 
 
 X I. Ibid. [ That it is a fin to call a nJMinifler 
 a Fneft, though it be done in no til defign,, nor 
 With any fcandal or temptation to error, and 
 though he that uftth the Word profcfs that he 
 doth it but as a tranfiation of the Greeks word 
 [ Presbyter ] and as God himfelf doth Rev. 
 I» 6. and 5*10. and 20. 6. and 1 Pet. 2. 
 
 5- 
 
5. 9. ( Queftion. Whether it is finfully ufed in 
 Scripture ? ) 
 
 XII. lb. [" Accordingly it is fin to ufe the 
 word [Altar J for £ Table] or the word[ Sa- 
 crifice J /or [ worfhip j (as thanksgiving &c. ) 
 though with all the forefaid cautions ^ and though 
 Cod fo ufe them in the Scripture, 1 Pet, 2.5. Heb. 
 13. 15,16. Phil. 4. 18. Eph. 5.2. Rom. 12. 1. 
 Heb. 13. 10. Rev. 6. 9.and 8.3, 5. and 16. 7. 
 And that all the ancient writers and Churches 
 finned that fo (pake f j 
 
 XIII. That no fober Chrifiians fhould allow 
 each other the Liberty cf fuch phrafes without 
 cenforioufnefs or breach of Charity and peace^ 
 lbid.pref. 
 
 XIV. Ibid. \_It is a finto fet a Rail about 
 the Communion Table though it be not done to any 
 ill defign nor with fcandal , but only to keep dogs 
 from pijftng or dunging at it, and boyes from abu- 
 fing it. 
 
 XV. That in fuch cafe, yea though fcandal be 
 removed by the publick. profejfion of the Church, 
 it is a fin to come to fuch a railed table to com- 
 municate ; even when no finfuldi fiance between tho 
 Clergie and Laity is intended. 
 
 XVI. Ibid. £ Chrifiians ought to cenfure and 
 condemn each other , if one come to fuch a Table, 
 or Receive kneeling, fuppo fing it a lawful thing.~^ 
 
 XVII. 
 
XVII. Ibid. [ That it is a fm to keep a thank^ 
 ful remembrance of Gods mercy to his Churchy 
 by an anniverfary day of folemnity , in giving 
 them any Apoftle; Martyr, or extraordinary in~ 
 ftrument of his bleffing,at fame keep their birthday s, 
 or vpedding-dayes,or dayes of fame great deliverance, 
 and England the fifth of November h Though it 
 he not terminated in the honour of a Saint, but 
 of (jod, nor made equal to the Lords day, nor 
 kept otberwife than jpiritualiy andpioufy? 
 
 XVIII. Ibid. [ That for a man that is again ft 
 commanding the Ahflinence of Lent, and againjb 
 obeying fuch commands as an Imitation ofChrift's 
 forty dayes fafting , and in all cafes of injury 
 to our fouls, bodies, or others ^ 
 
 yet to fay that he is not a- Read Rom. 14. and 
 hie to prove it a fm to obey judge. 
 by meer abftinence, when the 
 Magi fir ate peremptorily commandeth it , meetly 
 in Commemoration, and not Imitation of Chrift f s 
 faft , is a fin in him that faith it, though it be 
 true : zAnd confequently though it would do no 
 harm to my felf or others , I ought rather to 
 die than to forbear fie jh in Lent, if the King com* 
 mandit ? 
 
 XIX. Ibid. \That Church Alufick, (and con- 
 fey next ly finging which is the prime Mufick.) 
 is no help to any wan in the fervice. of 
 Cod? 
 
 XX- 
 
( 3 iS) 
 
 X X. lb. [That though he find it a help, it is 
 Jin for any man to ufe it .<* 
 
 XXL That either Chrift did not joyn with the 
 jews in worfiup whichihad Mufick. ( in the Tem- 
 ple ) or elfe he finned info doing ? 
 
 XXII. That the experience of prejudiced fe If - 
 conceited men, that know not what melody is, 
 trntft be fet againfi the experience of others fo 
 far as to deprive them of all fuch helps and mer- 
 cies, as the other find no benefit by , ( As ftnging 
 is now cafi out of many Churches.) 
 
 XXIII. That it is no wrong to Ignorant 
 Chriftians to put fuch whimfies and fcruples into 
 their heads f 
 
 XXIV. lb. [It is a fin to Vow Chaftity for 
 any man in the world, though it be with this ex- 
 ception or condition, [ Unlcfs any thing (hall 
 fall out which (hall make it a fin to me not to 
 marry]. And though under the mofi extraor- 
 dinary neceffities of avoiding marriage , he find 
 fuch confirmation of his Refolutions need- 
 
 0t 
 
 XXV. lb.[That it is in no Cafe lawful tokeep a 
 Vow of Chaftity, at le aft among the Papifls ? And 
 confequently whereas Chrift faith , He that can 
 keep this faying, Let him, It is every mans du- 
 ty te breaks Chaftity that hath once vowed it , 
 
 though 
 
though it were no duty , but a fin before* For 
 doubtlefs <L?ldarriage U a fin accidentally tofinr,e y 
 though not in its own nature , and far from be- 
 ing a duty to all ? But according to thia dotlrine^ 
 if a man were eighty years old, and utterly impo- 
 tent, and unable to breaks his vow of Chaftity 
 if he would, he is bound to do it , which he can- 
 not do, and to break, his vow when he cannot 
 breaks it ? or if an old mans marriage that hath 
 no nee e [fit y^ would undo him f elf and his (former) 
 children , he is bound to marry , if he have but 
 once vowed that he will not -, cr at leafi he 
 way do it? (For which of the contraries you 
 chufe \_ May or Muft 3 / am uncertain, ) 
 
 X X V I. lb, [That either it was a fin to put 
 TiLlures in the Geneva BibleSy and a fin to have 
 our Dutch Chimney bricks which contain all the 
 hiflory of the Go/pel, or any other Image of Chrifi 
 crucified wherever , or once to fee fuch a Pitlure ; 
 or elfe it is a fin to have any holy ajfeclion fiirrd 
 up in our hearts by feeing it : fo that though ail 
 things are fantlified and pure to the pure, and I 
 may excite holy affections when I fee but a worm 
 or flower, or any creature , or a houfe, or any 
 wori^ of man, yea when I fee the fins of the wick- 
 ed y 1 may ftir up thankfulnefs for grace 9 
 yet if I fee in a Qmmney piece y or a Geneva Bi~ 
 ble, or elfe -where y the Image of Chrifi crucified, 
 it is a fin to excite holy affettions thereupon -, Though 
 the twenty one Cafes which I have named as un- 
 lawful to ufe an Image in, be every one obferved 
 ( astht Cafes of danger y fcandal and all the refl.) 
 
 XXVII,' 
 
(32°; 
 
 XXVII. The Image of Chrifl Crucified in the 
 Imagination or mind of a Believer is a fin; 
 Therefore it is a fin to thinks of a Crucified Chrifl 7 
 or to k^ow Chrifi crucified^ or to love Chrifl cru- 
 cified as finch : Tor it is impojfible to think, on 
 btm, know him or love him as crucified, without 
 the Image of him on the mind : Therefore Paul 
 determined to do nothing hut fin, when he deter* 
 mined to know ?Jothing but Chrifl and him crucified : 
 and inflead of anathematizing them that love 
 him not , he fliould have anathematized or repro- 
 ved all that love him s as crucified* 
 
 Do you and your Companions know that you 
 are renouncing your Baptifm, and Chriftianity, 
 and the Crofs of Chrifl:, while you would reba- 
 prize us all ? I charge it not on you as your 
 meaning ; But if it be not the downright confe- 
 quence of the words of all my Religious backbi- 
 ters, who fay that the Image of* Chrift crucified 
 hefitteth not our minds or imaginations , but is a 
 fin there , I have loft all my reafoning faculty , 
 and know not what Man or Reafon is. 
 
 XXVIII. Ibid. &Ed*2. p. 372- [That the 
 Ordination and ^JMinifterial Office received by 
 any that live in Communion with the Qhurch of 
 Rome, and confidently all their baptizing! and 
 other miniflrations are not only lins but nullities : 
 ( Though they were fuch as Bernard , Malachie , 
 Patrick, Gerfon , Ferus , Kempis , Gerard Zut- 
 phanienfis, &c. ) And fio none of the Enghfh Na- 
 tion had true baptifm from their firfl Converfi- 
 
 §n 
 
 liT 
 
C3.*0 
 
 tnVy Auguftine till the Reformation , bat all di- 
 ed unbaptizcd and Jhould have been baptised 
 again : And fo ftiould all baptised by them in any 
 Kingdoms of Europe or the World: and fo Luther, 
 ^uinglius. Martyr^ Mufculus, and the reft of onr 
 fir ft Reformers, were never Chriftned, but all dyed 
 unbupti^ed perfons , and Jhould have been bapti- 
 zed after their converfion. 
 
 XXIX. lb. That it were better have all Eu- 
 rope unbaptiz^ed ' ( Infants and adult ) than fuch 
 as Bernard, Ferus , Callander , &c . ftjould ba- 
 ft ine them, though they had leave to prote ft again ft 
 a/1 that is finful in it, and were put upon no fin-> 
 ful promifesy profejfions, or atts them fe Ives* 
 
 XXX. lb. That it is a fin for thofe in any 
 Country that can have no other , to confent that a} 
 Papift Prieft do teach a Child to Speak^or to Ready 
 or to Write, dr teach him Mufick^, Arithmetic^ 
 Geometry, Latme, Greeks or Hebrew, Logick^y or 
 Grammar , or any Art, though but fuch as Labou- 
 rers get their daily bread by, 
 
 X X X ft lb. That it is a fin for thofe in Italy, 
 or any Kingdom that can have no other , to let 4 
 ; Popip Prieft teach their Children the Creed y 
 Lords prayer and Ten-Commandments which all 
 Chriftians are agreed in: but it's better that tlyy 
 never learned a word of the Bible, or Chriftian- 
 Faith, than learn it of fuch a Prieft : fo finfully 
 did Biftop llfher make the motion to the Prieft $ 
 in Ireland, that P rote ft ants and they might joyn 
 
 Y in 
 
(322) 
 
 in teaching the barbarous people the Creed and- 
 camj.on principles of Religion, 
 
 XXXII. lb. That it is a fin to hear a Po- 
 fijh Vrieft read Gods word or any good book > 
 though it were a Protefiants, or one of the Anci- 
 ent fathers : or to hear him Jpeak^ the truefl Do- 
 Urine , though in a Country where it can no other 
 vpay be heard or learned, 
 
 XXXIII. lb. That in fuch a Country where 
 v ps no other , it is a fin to joyn with one of 
 
 them in any Prayer how good foever , though cra- 
 ving a bleffing on our meat, or in a family , or 
 elfewhere •- even in the Lords Prayer % 
 
 XXXIV. lb. That it is necejfary to Salva- 
 tion to believe that the Pope is Antichrift, and fo 
 no man , woman, or child can 1oe faved that belie - 
 veth it not. And fo fine e Antichrifi arcfe , we 
 have a new Article in our Creed: Even for thofe 
 that know not what the Pope is y whether male cr 
 female, fefi or fijh. 
 
 XXXV. lb. That it i* a fin to read any good 
 book^ m the Church be fides the Scripture,any Chapter ■ 
 in the Apocrypha, an) Homily or Sermon, though 
 written by an Anabaptifi, and though we dec: 
 what it is , and mention it for no other end but 
 what it is written for, as we cite Authors as wit- 
 ?:effes : ( And yec ir is lawful for Mr. D* ro pubf- 
 m many ( falfly ) inPrinr.) 
 
 XXXVI. 
 
• v 
 
 (3*30 
 
 XXXV I. lb. That it is a fin to read a' Pray. 
 in the Church, though it were the Prayer of Chrift 
 John 17. or of Moles or others in the Pfalmes, or 
 any others. 
 
 X X X V I T. lb. That if one pray <JUr. Dan- 
 vers to pray for htm, it is Idolatry , or if the peo- 
 ple or fick^ pray the Mimfter to pray for them , 
 or Children their Parents - 3 or if one jhould do fo 
 by an Angel that foould appear to him • or to a 
 Saint or Angel unfeen^ imagining that he were 
 preftnt ^' this is not only Super ft it ion andfo ftnful^ 
 bat alfo Idolatry •, which is giving Gods proper 
 War flip to a creature : And confequentlyi it is the 
 proper werjhip of God only , to pray him to pray 
 for ns to himfclf 
 
 XXXVIII. Ib» That it is a fin to bow thi 
 kyee at the naming of Jefm y though we renounce 
 all in it that is fuperftitioits and fcandalow, arid 
 bow equally at the name of God, Jehovah, 
 Chrift, &c. 
 
 X X X I X< lb. That it is a fin to ft and when 
 the Gofpel is read, 'though we be never fo weary of 
 fittings and ft and equally at the reading of all the 
 reft of the Scripture^ or at Sermon without diftin- 
 tlion -, fo heynoiijly did the Vntverfal Church ftn 
 for many hundred years in their long ftandings • 
 and fo finful a shing it is to hear in a Church 
 or Meeting-place that hath no feat s 7 unleft we ft 
 an the ground* 
 
 Y a XL 
 
(3H) 
 
 XL. lb. That it is a fin to kneel while the 
 Ten~fimmandments are read, though it he by wo- 
 men whofe cuftom that pofture is ( upon a bofi ) 
 through the rift of the dates exercife ; and though 
 it be never fa openly declared that we take them 
 not for a prayer , nor do it to any ill figmftcati- 
 on or intent. 
 
 X L I. lib. That he finneth who doth not con- 
 demn the Univerfal Church of Chrifi for many 
 hundred years ( of the greateft antiquity that we 
 have any records of fine e the Apo files) for their 
 Worfiupping with their faces towards the Baft y 
 Though he jhould himfelf diflike that practice and 
 never ufe it, nor con fen t to have it ufed. 
 
 X L 1 1. lb. That it is a fin to fay , that any 
 
 children of any wicked men in the world, have any 
 
 guilt of any of their nearer Parents fins, but on~ 
 
 ly of Adams : ( And confequently it muft be held 
 
 that God unjufl'ly threat ned and punifiied any fuel) 
 
 children for their Parents fin , from the dates of 
 
 Cain, Cham, Pharaoh, Ifhm-tei , Efau, Achan , 
 
 Gehezi, till the dales of that Generation threat- 
 
 ved Matth. 23. And alfo that no man receiveth 
 
 any pravity from Adam neither , becaufe it muft 
 
 pafs to him through his next Parents and be 
 
 their s y and he receiveth none that is theirs: And 
 
 fo all Nations are juftified againft all guilt of any 
 
 Parents fin but Adam, and warranted to deny ta 
 
 confefs any fuch gut It , or to be beholden to 
 
 Chrifi or wtrcy for the pardon of it , ihm^h 
 
( 3*5? 
 
 David , Daniel and Nehemiah did othewife.) 
 I fay again , cither Mr. D.and his likedore- 
 aHy hold the contraries of the a/Tertions of mine 
 which he thus notifieth as hey nous errors, or not: 
 If not , he raileth agairrft his Confcience in hy- 
 pocrifie : If yea, then thefe propofitions which I 
 have named to you are the contraries to mine. 
 And it is fo curfed a thing to add two and four- 
 ty New Commandments to the Law of God , 
 that I who think them to be no better, do again 
 and again defire him , to give me the full proof 
 of all thefe ftrange Commandments, and tell me 
 where they are written ( if I have overlook! 
 them. ) 
 
 If this cannot be obtained, I call to his imita- 
 tors and my backbiters to let me know, whether 
 really they will own all thefe, and give me leave 
 to tell the World, and the Ages to come , that 
 thefe were their Do&rines, for the love of which 
 they whifpered or clamoured againft me. 
 
 But here he flops and pittieth the Reader, and 
 referreth them to my Book it felf : And I will 
 joyn with him and add, that the Reader that will 
 think that he knoweth what I hold or wrote, by 
 this and fuch like mens citations or reports , and 
 will not read the Book it felf, and all in k to- 
 gether that concerneth the queftioned fubjedt, be- 
 fore he judge > I take not my felf bound to write 
 more books to tell him what I wrote in the far- 
 mer, nor do I think that I am orherwife obliged 
 to rectifie his Error,. than by Prayer or Coun- 
 fd, endeavouring to bring him to fome tendernefs 
 of Confcience , fear of God and fobriety of 
 mind. Y 3 But 
 
( mi 
 
 But his flrength tieth in frightful exclamation?*, 
 £ O was ever the like yet heard, dec. to palliate 
 abominations 3 and reconcile us to Idolatrous Vopifii 
 names, as Altar, Priefis, Sacrifices, &c. and their 
 baptifm. ] And yet he might have known' that 
 all thefe words are oft ufed by the ancicnter lort 
 of the holy Paftors of the Churches after the 
 Apoftles, and I remember not that ever one 
 Chriftian was againft it , Or fcrupled the ufe of 
 them : And I before (hewed that they are ufed 
 by the Holy-Ghoft in Scripture, whom I dare not 
 accufe of Idolatrous names , or reconciling us to 
 them. Whether all the Papifts.baptifm admini- 
 ftred and received be nullities, and all Papifts to b.e 
 rebaptized,and ail Proteftants that were baptized by 
 Papifts? are queftions which I will not be fo vain 
 as todifputewith one that talketh at thismais rate. 
 
 But yet we have not done with the high char* 
 ges of his Preface : He faith ." [_ Oh ! were not 
 ic thofe twenty Queries., fo much againft the felf- 
 cc evidencing authority of the Scriptures, in his 
 u Admon. p. 142. in favour of Tradition a hey- 
 cc not* provocation? to fay no more of them . ? 3 
 
 <iAnfw. It feems they were fo to you. But re- 
 ally , did you read that book and the other to 
 Mr. Bag flaw, and yet not fear to follow him and 
 ouf-do him in notorious untruths, after fo full a 
 convidion and warning as was given him ? Think 
 On it, and again cry out f But alas! whereto mill 
 not men run left to themselves? ~\ I there profef- 
 I'd and proved to your friend Mr. Bagfhaw that 
 I was for, and wrote for the fclf-evidencing au- 
 thority of the Scripture, audit is untrue that thofe 
 
 twenty 
 
(3*7) 
 twenty Queries or any one of them is againft if 
 But feeing you think otherwife , if indeed, you 
 held the contrary to the aflertions implied in thofe 
 twenty Queries, I am not at the end of the Ca- 
 talogue of your ftrange Doctrines : If you and 
 my revilers own them, fo will not fober men : e. g. 
 
 X L 1 1 I. £ Every Chriftian muft fee the Co- 
 fies of the Scripture written by the Prophets and 
 Apoftles own hands : Or at leaf muft under f and 
 theTranfcripts tnthe Original tongues* \ 
 
 XLIV. \_ God hath promt fed unerring infal~ 
 libility to all Scribes in the world that write out 
 the Bible, and all Printers that print it : Or at leafl 
 to fome of thew 7 and we may be certain who thofe 
 are.2 
 
 XL V. £ Though the fever at Copies have a 
 multitude of differences, it is certain none of them 
 are erroneous, or miftaken*~\ 
 
 X L V I. £ Thufe men and women that Under** 
 
 .ftand not Hebrew or Greek may be certain only 
 
 by feeing a Hebrew and Greeks Bible, without a 
 
 Tranftators help , that every word in it is jhe 
 
 Word of God, 3 
 
 • 
 X L V I T. £ Either he that will be fire which 
 Copy is without mi f writing-, mufl: fir ft fee all the 
 Copies in the world that jfffer -, or elfe if 
 he never fee but one (or few ) he may be cer- 
 tain i hat it h * right in* the wftds in which it 
 Y 4 differ ah 
 
(>8) 
 
 dtffertth frpm nil the reft which he never faw.J 
 
 X L V 1 1 1. [No corrupt or mif-written fipy 
 of the Scripture can come to a true Believers 
 hands : Or if it do, he can infallibly tell tu the Er- 
 rata, 2 
 
 X L I X. A true Believer that newer faw the 
 
 Originals can by feeing a tranflation judge of all 
 the dtverfe readings in the Originals* 
 
 L. The. Tranflators are either all infallible in 
 translating •, or elfe a true 'Believer is certain 
 which of them is , and which not , and which, 
 tranflation among many faulty ones is fault lefs. 
 
 L I. He that never faw all Tranflations , but, 
 perhaps but one , can by that one tell that it is 
 truer than all the differing ones, which he never 
 
 Jaw. 
 
 LIL <zAll this of Copies and Tranflations is 
 known to Believers either by Prophetical Revela- 
 tion from Heaven , or by the f elf -evidencing de- 
 pionjhation of the Copy and Tranflation which he 
 Jccth, 
 
 L 1 1 1. [Every true Believer without being ever 
 told it by man, can ted by the fe If ^evidencing de- 
 monffiration of the words , that the Canticles and 
 the B.ooks of Judas , Ruth , Chronicles, Jonah, 
 are Qanonical^ anoTthat the wifdom of Solomon, 
 fearuck, Pauls Epiftle to the Laodiceans , Cle- 
 mens 
 
puens wlj Corinthians, &c. Are not Can6ni« 
 
 gal. 
 
 L I V. Either God will giitt faith to no one 
 that cannot read ( among ail the illiterate King- 
 4oms of the world where the Gojpel is to be preach- 
 ed, ) or elfe all that cannot read, may without ever 
 reading a word be certain by f elf -evidence which 
 readings in the differing Copies, and which Tran- 
 fations are true or falje, and which books and 
 verfes and fentences are Canonical and which 
 not* 
 
 L V. Either God hath promifed that every illi- 
 terate Chriftian ( that cannot read ) Jhall hear 
 feme one elfe read every word of the Bible to him 
 ( in Originals and Tranjlations, or one ) that he 
 may judge • or elfe by the f elf -evidence that per- 
 fon that cannot read,nor never heard half the Bible 
 read, can certainly teU what words are truly or 
 falfly written, or Tranflated 7 without ever hear* 
 ing them* 
 
 L V I. When the greate ft s Learned Linguifls dif- 
 fer about a Letlion , or Tranflation , ( as the 
 Septuagwt, &c. ) ( fuch as Lud. Capellus, Ufher, 
 Buxtorf, Bootius, De Dieu, 1/ Empereur, Wal- 
 ton, &c. ) or when fuch a* Luther, Althames, &c. 
 differ about a Canonical Book^ ( as James ) it is.be- 
 caufe they fee not that fe if -evidence, which every 
 Chriftian may fee, that car^fbt read nor was ever 
 told it, that one fart, (if not more ) do herein 
 err, wfcile their judgements are contrary. 
 
 None 
 
Clio) 
 
 None of thefe fifty fix are Articles of^By Faith, 
 nor Gods Commandments ( that I can find. ) I 
 fay not that thefe ignorant Revilers hold all thefe • 
 but I fay that He -£ and They) that will openly ex- 
 claim againfl the contrary affertions as beynous er- 
 ror j, or tell about among the receivers of falfe 
 reports, that I bold dangerom errors for fayingthe 
 contrary to thefe, doth either perfwade men that 
 all thefe are his Opinions, or elfe that he is an 
 impudent Hypocrite , in reviling known truth as 
 heynous error; or elfe a raft) CalHn.m at or that: 
 dare reproach "or fpeak evil &T that which heun- 
 derftandeth not , nor will not , fo much as by 
 reading my plain words , be at the labour to un- 
 derftand. 
 
 Perhaps fome better minded perfon will fay, It 
 cafleth poor Chrifiians into perplexity to hearfuch 
 doubts aboift the Scripture readings and translati- 
 ons, were they not better concealed ? Anfw. They 
 are not to be talkt of unfeafonably to unapable 
 perfons : They are not to be told the ignorant in- 
 ftead of a Catecjhiun : But they are ail publick- 
 ly known to the learned world long ago, and 
 told the ignorant people by the Papifts to ill 
 ends : And if any one will perfwade you to hold 
 the contrary , and make you believe that all or 
 any of thefe abfurdi ties and falfhoods are the 
 true Proteftant Religion, or any part of it, and 
 that they that hold the contrary are Popifh , it is 
 time to vindicate the Proreftant Religion and all 
 fober godly Proteft^s, from the fcorn of fucli 
 imputed douiges. 
 
 But 
 
But this is the unhappy fruit of overdoing : 
 There are fome men among us, fo overmfe and 
 over righteous in ckkixiing die fafjiciency of the 
 ScYiftnreSy that they would perfwade'us, that it 
 is fHjficient to expand it felt without a teaching 
 Expolltor, and to preach it felf without a Preacher, 
 and ( by confequence from their generals ) to 
 Write and Print it felf without a Writer or 
 Printer, and to bring it felf down from the Apo- 
 ftles to every man without the hand or tongue 
 of man , and to preferve it felf from corruption 
 without the care of man, and to tranflate it felf 
 without a Tranilator •, And that all Printed Ser- 
 mons, or books of Divinity, all Catechifms, all 
 Sermon notes for memory, all forms of Prayer , 
 yea- the dividing the Bible into Chapters and Ver- 
 ies, and Printing Contents, and Citations or Re- 
 ferences ( much more the Geneva Notes and Pi- 
 ctures ) are all finful additions to the Word of 
 God. As if i\\z fufficiency of the Statutes of the 
 Land lay in Keeping , Printing , Tranfcribing , 
 Pleading and Expounding themfeives, without the 
 life of Scribes , Clerks , Lawyers, Law-books or 
 Judges. 
 
 I am well aflured that God needeth not oar 
 Lies to his Glory, and that truth and falfhood do 
 fp ill agree , that though falfhood may ileal a 
 cloak from truth, yet truth will never be IjehoU 
 den to falfhood for friendfhip and defence •, And 
 if ever Lies pretend any kindnefs or fervice to the 
 truth, it is but treacherouilv. to fupplant it , and 
 will turn to its differvice ana injury at laft. 
 
 In 
 
f 330 
 
 In a word, All the Devils in Hell, and all the 
 Confiftory at Rome, could not eafily find out a 
 more effe&ual way ( as far as I can underftand ) 
 to turn multitudes to Popery , than i. By calling 
 truth and fober Principles Antichriftian, Popery 
 and Idolatrous.: 2. And by defcribing the Religi- 
 on of the enemies of Popery, as made up of Lies 
 and Dotages : 3 . And by falling all together by 
 the ears, and breaking into a multitude of Sedfo, 
 and condemning each other as unmeet to be com- 
 municated with ; and fo making men believe that 
 they muft be Papifts or diftra&ed Dotards, whofe 
 feif-conceitednefs in Religion haih ma4e them 
 mad : I fay , nothing that I know of doth tend 
 more to multiply Papifts, than this . ( unlefs I 
 may except the way of fenfuality and violence , 
 murdering fome and drawing others by flefhlyand 
 worldly motives :) Nor do I know any thing in 
 the world, that more quieteth the Consciences of 
 Perfecutors and Scorners , in all that they do and 
 fay againft us , and hindreth them more from all 
 convidion and repentance. 
 
 Mr. Danvers endeth his book, Ed. 1. with a 
 fmart reflection on Mr. WiUiam AHen and Mr. 
 Lamb for forfaking the caufe of Anabaptiftry and 
 Separation which they had written for : And I 
 will end mine with a few words concerning them, 
 concluding with a free and faithful Admoni- 
 tion to' Mr. Danvers y to confider whether He or 
 They (hould be moft earneftly called to Repen- 
 tisicQy and moil fpeedily praftife k. 
 
 CHAP. 
 
(333) 
 
 CHAP. IX. 
 
 REader, having the following vindication of 
 Mr. Allen put into my hand, I think it not 
 unmeet upon this occafion to undeceive fome who 
 to render his example in receding from the way 
 of Separation wherein he was fometime engaged 
 upon the account of Infant- baptifm, the lefs imita- 
 ble, and his endeavours to draw off others, the lefs 
 fuccefsful h have given out that he did but turn 
 with the times for worldly ends when the King 
 came in. Whereas I can bear him witnefs that 
 that return was made by him the year before the 
 coming in of the King, as did fufficiently appear 
 to me both by Letters which then pafTed between 
 him and my felf about that affair, and alfo by 
 his book called A Retrattation of Separation, pub- 
 lished by him that fame year. Which Book I 
 would entreat the fober Reader to get and lend 
 to fome of the feparating mind : they will find no 
 temporizing or formality in it , but a fpirit of 
 Cbriltian love and peace. And if the reafons in 
 that Book and in his pcrfwafive to peace and uni- 
 ty fince publifhed, be fuch as none of the Sepa- 
 rators can confute or {land before, they will have 
 no reafon to impute the Authors change to car- 
 nal reafon or worldly intereft. I queftion not bur 
 experience after trial, which is wont to make teach- 
 able men wifer, pin him upon reviewing the grounds 
 of his practice, and fohad a greac hand in that al- 
 teration which he made. And I-woutd have thofe 
 
Cm) 
 
 who account it a difparagernent to a man to alter 
 bis Judgement at any time, to tell us at what age 
 we come under that law, when we muft grow no 
 wifer nor no better. 
 
 And what I fay of Mr. Aliens alteration of his 
 judgement,! muft % alfo of Mr.X^kr,whom thofe 
 that eaflly judge before they know , have accufed 
 alfo as turning with the times, when as on my 
 knoivledge his change was in 1658. or the begin- 
 ning of 1659. For by letters I did foliicite him 
 to that alteration and received his anfwers, foontr 
 than I knew of Mr. Aliens change : And I -per- 
 ceive that Mr. Lambs words and example are 
 flighted by very many , upon two accufations , 
 1. That he is run into the other extream of over- 
 much conformity: 2. That he is over hot. As 
 to the firfl, my diftance irnketh me a flranger to 
 his mind and pra&ice. ' But as long as he con- 
 formeth hot as Minifters do , but to that which 
 belongeth to a private man, what doth he more 
 than Mr. Tombes hath largely written for ? And 
 Mr. Nye hath written to prove it lawful to hear 
 Conformifts in the Parifh Churches, and for the 
 Magiflrates to appoint publick Teachers for the 
 people. 2. And as to the fecond ( not juftifying 
 rny own earneftnefs , much lefs others which I 
 am not acquainted with ) ro calm the minds of 
 the offended I may well fay, i.That it is no 
 wonder if a man that is naturally of a warm and 
 earneft fpirit, do fhew it mofl wfcen he thinks that 
 he fpeaks for God, and Truth, and the Church, 
 and mens Souls. 2. That it is no wonder if a 
 man that was drawn himfelf fo deep into the 
 
 guilt, 
 
dm) 
 
 guilt, as to be a Teacher of an Anabaptifts Church 
 and to write for them, be an earneit exprefifer of 
 his Repentance when he is recovered , and ear- 
 neftly defirous to fave others from the fnares in 
 which he was intangled, and to do as much for 
 Truth, Unity and peace, as ever he did againft 
 
 • What followes are Mr. Aliens own words* « 
 
 Worthy Sir, 
 
 1 Having fome intimation that you are about to 
 make fome return to the Author of a late Trea- 
 tife of Baptifm , do apprehend that if you think 
 fit to Print this following Paper at the end of 
 your Book, you may do the good office of remo- 
 ving a (tumbling-block , at which fome are too 
 apt to dafh their foot , and thereby alfo further 
 caution men againft being milled by giving too 
 much credit to the quotation of Authors , as ma- 
 naged by that Treatifor. 
 
 In reading a Treatife of. Baptifm of the Hrft 
 Edition, Penned by H. D. I obferved that in the 
 two laft pages of his Poftfcript, he mentions two 
 difcourfes that were publi led about one and twen- 
 ty years ago the one by my felf and the other by 
 another ; and faith that both of us are gone back to 
 that which therein we call will-worjhip and Idola~ 
 try. 
 
 Indeed I am forry that that author fhould put 
 me upon any neceffity of reflecting fo much up- 
 on dim in vindicating my felf, as to tell the world 
 
 that 
 
t|iac upon this occafion I having twice reviewed 
 that: Book of mine, did not find io much as the 
 mention of either of thofe two words will-worfiip 
 or idolatry y upon any occaflon whatfoever. Nor 
 am I confeious to my felf of ever being fo abfurd 
 as once to think that to be idolatry , which he 
 mod untruly faith I call fo in that Book. That 
 caufedoubtlefs whatfoever it is, is little beholding 
 to fuch an Advocate as thinks to reconcile men to 
 it by abufing difTenters. 
 
 As for the alteration I have made , I gave the 
 world an account of the reafons and grounds of 
 it, in my Retractation of Separation, publifhed in 
 the year 1659. which was before the turn of 
 times, and in my perfwafive to Peace and Vnity y 
 fince publifhed. And if this Author could have 
 folidly dilcovered the infufficiency of thofe rea- 
 fons and grounds to juftifie fuch an alteration and 
 my prefenc practice , he would have, done his 
 caufe better fervice in my opinion, than he hath 
 done in his Treatife by labouring to fupport it 
 by a mifreprefentation of perfons and their opi- 
 nions. As for me, I can truly fay I have had 
 great fatisfa&ion and peace in my own mind, 
 touching the alteration I have made upon thofe 
 grounds, not only at other times, but even then 
 alfo when I have been near unto death in my own 
 apprehenfion, As for the other perfon he men- 
 tions with me, I fuppofe he may e're long give 
 the world an account of that alteration he alfo is 
 charged with as a great faulr. 
 
 Will. Alknl 
 
(537) 
 
 An Admonition to Mr. Dangers, 
 
 SIR, 
 
 YOur vehement importunity having greatly 
 injured me, by occasioning the lofs offomc 
 of my time (who have none to fpare ) upon this 
 writing, which elk would have been needlefs • 
 ^ou muft bear with me while I defire you, fome- 
 time alone , to anfwer thefe Queftions ferioufly to 
 your Confidence* 
 
 Que ft. i. Whether the untruths in matter of 
 fad which you confidently publifh , be not of fo 
 ftupendious a magnitude, as fhould have affrighted 
 the Confidence of a Turk or Pagan? When no 
 lefs than four whole Bodies of men are fo flander- 
 ed by you, the Donatifts, the Novatians, the Old 
 Brittainsy zndthzWaldenfes, each containing, it's 
 like many hundred thoufands : And when fo ma- 
 ny whole Books (not particular fentences only) 
 are falfified accordingly ? 
 
 2 . How great a number would your untruths ap- 
 pear,were they all gathered and enumerated to you? 
 When in all the lines which J have examined I have 
 met with fo ky that are not guilty of them ?'■ 
 
 3. When yon accufe my Admonition to Mr. 
 Bagfraw , and thereby fhew that you read it , 
 fhould not the evidion of fourfcore undeniable 
 untruths, in matter of faft, have been a warning to 
 you to avoid the like ? 
 
 2 4vWfa- 
 
(338) 
 
 4- Whether you do not more by fuch notori- 
 ous fcandal to difhonour your felf and all that are 
 fuch, and hinder your own fuccefies, than many 
 writings againft you could have done? 
 
 5. Whether you do not • fcandal oufly tempt 
 men to juftihe the contempt of Tender Confciepces^ 
 and what is done and faid againft them by many 
 publick Revilers on the other extream, when your 
 Confcience pretending tendernefs can fwallow fuch 
 Camels, while it cannot endure our Infant- blef- 
 fings ? 
 
 . <5. W nel ^ cr ^ e n can judge it probable thai" 
 fuch voluminous notorious Forgers and Slande- 
 rers , have fo much more illumination than all 
 other Chriflicins, as to be meet men to call all 
 the Chriftian world almoft to be new Chriftned, 
 and to unchriften almoft all for about thirteen 
 hundred years ( to leave out the controverted 
 time ? ) 
 
 7. Would you be believed in other things that 
 can deliberately, in two Editions, do thus ? 
 
 8. Is it like that God will blefs fuch unmanly 
 fcandals, to the Churches good ? ( unlefs as fin 
 by overruling providence may occafion good.,) 
 Arethefe likely means to propagate trifth ? 
 
 9. Wbn is the matter that men that can do all 
 this, cannot Conform I What durft I not jubfcnbe 
 to, if Tdurft do all this? 
 
 io. Is it not a difhonour to your rebaptized 
 Churches to be fo polluted, and to have fo loofe 
 or pmial a difcipiine, as tofufler fuch publick 
 fcandajj as thefe ; and to retain fuch a member as 
 you 7 ajid not brin^vou to repentance or excom- 
 - ^W& municatc 
 
- (3390 
 municate you ? Have our worft Parifli Churches 
 many greater fcandals ? 
 
 If pride, partiality and paffion will not let your 
 Confcience work upon thefe things, but you wjll 
 turn them into gall inftead of repentance, atleaft 
 I offer them to the Confederation of others, to 
 prevent or remedy their infection. 
 
 And remembe* ( which you have told the world 
 now in Print J tfiat you fent your Bookfeller to> 
 me, to know what I had to fay againft your firft 
 Edition, before you published the fecond ^ And I 
 have here partly told you what : I was not fo idle 
 as to anfwer your Reafons, knowing how little 
 a part they are of what Mr. Tombes hath faid 
 more largely : And that I anfwer him at all^ is 
 long of you, who would not let me hold my 
 peace, I heartily defire your Recovery from the* 
 unthankful error , and your Repentance for the 
 finful means of propagating it , and for your in- 
 jury to our early Rights and bleffings. 
 
 Z 2 
 
J I 
 
The 'Third Tart : 
 
 OBSERVATIONS 
 
 O N 
 
 M r ' Danvers 
 
 R E P L Y 
 
 M r - WiLlES: 
 
 Detecting his impenitent proceeding infalfe 
 Accufation, in hope of his Repentance, and 
 the undeceiving ot others, and to warn this 
 Age to take more heed of the common 
 fin, of HASTY RASH JUDG- 
 ING of things which they have 
 not throughly examined, partial- 
 ly taking them on their Lea- 
 ders truft. 
 
 By (Rjcbard Baxter. 
 
 LONDON, Printed for Nevil Simmons 
 and Jonathan Robwfon. 1675. 
 

 ■ 
 
 n 
 
(343) 
 
 APr 
 
 R 
 
 E MONITION. 
 
 Eader, there are two ftumbling-blocks to be 
 taken out of thy way, which I had; rather 
 have had no occafion to mention. The firft is the 
 Name and Authority of that very worthy and ex- 
 cellent man, Doct. T. "Barlow , S.Tb. Prof, in 
 Oxford , which Mr. D. over and over cketh as 
 for his caufe. Of which tilt he think meet to 
 fpeak for hhnfelf I only mind thee that, 'i. It is 
 -a fecret Letter to Mr.T. which they cite. 2. That 
 it is unlikely that he that fuhfcribeth the Articles 
 find Liturgie of the Church of England, is againil 
 Infant-baptifm, when the Art. 27, faith, TbeBd- 
 ftifm of Young Children it in any wife to be re- 
 tained in the Church at mofi agreeable with the 
 Infiitiition of Q°rift.~\ 
 
 1 1. There is another worthy and eximious Do- 
 dor of the fame llniverfity ( Doct. 77?. Tullie ) 
 who having thought meet in a Latine Treatife of 
 Juftiflcation to endeavonr at large fin a zeal for 
 Orthodoxnefs no doubt ) to confute ray fuppofed 
 errors (in my Aphorifms about twenty two years 
 ago revoked ♦, taking no notice of the many 
 Treatifes fince written by me on that fubjecr, but 
 only of a late Epiftle to Mr. Allent Book, ) he 
 hath alfo thought good to warn young men to 
 Z 4 take 
 
(344 ) 
 take heed that they do not rafhly receive my 
 Theology as bringing forth novel paradoxes, be* 
 caufe I hold fome guilt in Children of their nea- 
 rer Parents fins : exclaiming £ O c&cqs ante The- 
 ologos quicpmcjue nnqaam fhijits ! ] It feemeth that 
 this Famous Learned man knew not, that this was 
 Auguftins judgement ( and many another ancient 
 and modern Writer's, ) and that he is lefs for the 
 tetany than I (that fybferibe or cjeclare not full 
 afTent) who heartily pray, Remember not Lord 
 our offences , nor the offences of our fore-Fa- 
 thers, Sec. This having fome refped: to the fub- 
 jed of this Eook , I thought meet here to give 
 you notice , that if God, will I hope in time to 
 give the world yet fuller fatisfa&ion on both thefe 
 fubjefts , ( Justification , and fecondary Original 
 fin : ) Though I thought my unanfwered Difpu- 
 tations of Juftification , and other Treatifes had 
 fully done the firft : And the publifhing of fome 
 old Papers of Original fin, I think will fully do the 
 ptlier* 
 
 OB 
 

 UdxpuKflW cpuxp ,; 
 
 Observations 
 
 O N 
 
 M r ' drivers Reply 
 to 
 
 M" Wills. 
 
 CHAP. I. 
 
 The frightful Afpetf of his Reply. 
 
 $* l * HV JW ^ Anfwer to Mr. Tombes and 
 
 l\ / 1 Mr. Danvers being written 
 
 I \/ 1 about the fame time as my 
 
 L ▼ -A. Epiftle to hit. Wills his book, 
 
 fcath fince then beeH detained in the Printers hand, 
 
 whofe delay hath allowed me the fight of Mr. 
 
 Panvcrs Reply to Mr. Wills, and the opportu- 
 nity 
 
nity of animadverting on it, before mine is come 
 abroad, And upon my moft impartial confide- 
 ration it reneweth the grief of my heart to think 
 of thefe evils which it fets before me. 
 
 $.2. i. That the fouls of poor Chriftians fhould 
 be under the Temptations of fuch writings and 
 teaching as here we find : Where fuch untruths 
 in matter of fad are ftill juftified with fuch a 
 face of confidence, and divulged as for God, and 
 for the fouls of men,* that moll ignorant perfons 
 may be tempted to think that Modefly and Cha- 
 rity require them to believe, thar trrey are real 
 truths, it being a harfh unmanly thing to judge 
 that fuch a perfon can poffibly be fo hardened, 
 as to ftand fo boldly to all thefe things, which 
 have fuch publick hiftorical evidence, if they were 
 all downright falftioods. 
 
 And it is a hard task for a writer to be put 
 to anfwer a Chriftian and a Gentleman as Mr. 
 Danvers doth Mr. Wills^Repl. fag, 120. [_ cc Know 
 x ^that hence you have a further difcovery of the 
 ic great unfaithfulnefs and -want of confeience in 
 " the Author, for daring" thus to abufe the world 
 Cc with a Cheat, and that which he knoweth to be 
 ct a meer forgery of his own] And fag. 122. 
 cC [Let it be judged whether he hath not injuri- 
 <£ oufly belted Oftander, belied Cluniacenfis^ beli- 
 " ed Peter Br his , belied th6 truth, which by this 
 "forgery he would cover and hide • abufedthe 
 
 "world, belied and abufed me But much 
 
 u more fear his own confeience by this piece of 
 a folly rmdTaUhood.J Tovbe thus at [_Tho» U- 
 *ft ~} and [ Thou lie ft ] . is an uniavoury work ; 
 
 Yea 
 
Yea in fo few lines to give the Lie five times 
 at leaft. But for an ignorant Reader to believe 
 what this Author hath done till he needs mufi y 
 is yet far harder. Though we fay, He that will, 
 fa/ear, will lie, and therefore we hardly believe 
 a fwearer ., yet ifa man with many hundred H ly 
 oaths fhould alien r^any particulars of pubiick 
 cognifance, we arte ■ ready..- to \ think it inhum 
 to fufpeft that the man'isfo inhumane as tht^j 
 to fwear if fome of them were not true. Ala 
 for the poor Church of Chrift, that muft have 
 fuch fore temptations / How ihall theybewkh- 
 ftood ! 
 
 £. 3. 2 f And how fad is it that a Chriftian 
 man profefling not only Truth and Godlinefi, but 
 fo much of thefe as to be above Communion with 
 fuch as we , fhould ever degenerate into fuch a 
 thing as his prefent writing doth discover 1 O 
 what need have we to lay to heart that olVaul y 
 Rom. 11. be not high-minded but fear I and 
 to learn over and over, Jam. 3. and ChrifFs 
 words to the Sons of Thunder, ye know not what 
 manner offpirit ye are of ? 
 
 $. 4. And alas, that ever the bitter volumi- 
 nous Reproaches of the zeal of the prefent age, 
 fhould have fuch a fcandal or (tumbling block 
 laid in their way , to harden them in the ju- 
 ftification of their reproaches 1 as if our Zeal 
 were the Caufe or Cover of fuch heinous fins : 
 Woe to the world becaufe of offences, and woe 
 to them by whom they come I 
 
 tf. 5. 4. But what a tremendous warning is 
 tbis-againft the fpirit of unwarrantable /^vtf/0#> 
 
 or 
 
(3tf) 
 or true Schifm, when the fame perfon ffial] ven- 
 ture upon all that is here written by him , who 
 yet taketh our Infant Baptifm for a meer Nnl~ 
 lity> and the Chriftian world that hath no other 
 to be uncapable of the Church-Communion of 
 fuch as he ? Me-think this is a Pillar of Salt. I 
 well remember that one of the means of keeping 
 my ancient Flock in Concord, was the terror 
 of thefc horrid opinions and wayes which the two 
 or three that deferred us, fell into. 
 
 CHAP. 
 
(349) 
 
 CHAP. II. 
 
 HU impenitent falfe allegation of 'mtnejfes again jh 
 Infant Baftifm : Tertullian , &c, fiecially 
 WickiifF. 
 
 £. i.T have before faid, that I have faid Co 
 X much out of Scripture and Anti- 
 quity, for Infants Church-member (hip and Ba- 
 ptifm, to which I have yet feen no Anfwer that 
 fhould fatisfie an impartial man, either from Mr* 
 Tombes, Mr. Danvers, or any other , that I will 
 not lofe time and labour in replying to their 
 frivolous exceptions. And here I meddle -dire- 
 #ly but with the matter of fad: , becaufe by o- 
 ftentation of hiflory , Mr. D. would feduce the 
 ignorant into the belief of grofs untruths, I be- 
 gan with Tertullian, who is his firft witnefs, 
 in his Catalogue , reprinted here in his re- 
 ply- 
 
 $. 2. And why have we no fatisfa&ory an- 
 fwer to thefe things fo oft repiyed ? i. That 
 Tertullians words prove that Infant- Baptifm was 
 then in ufe : And it is the matter of fatt that 
 we are fearching after ? 2. And doth he think 
 that Antichrift was before Tertullians time ? 
 3. The opinion of Tertullian feemeth not at all 
 to be againft the Lawfulnefs of Infant Baptifm, 
 in general 5 but againft the eligiblenefs of it in 
 cafe of no apparent danger of death. For I have 
 oft proved that the judgement of that age, and 
 
 feme 
 
fome following was, that none fliould be compel- 
 led to be Baptized, or to Baptize their Infants, 
 but they fhould themfelves be chufers of the 
 time. For the conceic of the abfolute neceffity 
 of Baptifm to falvation, came in afterwards. And 
 when the feed of the faithful are Holy, .and in 
 Gods Covenant or Promife, upon the Parents 
 Mental dedication of them to God, and foin a 
 ftate of falvation, no wonder if they were not 
 fo hafty and peremptory for the fudden Invefti- 
 ture into the Chriflian Church ftate, when they 
 took it to be but the publick folemnizution of a 
 Covenant , really made and valid before. And as 
 Naz.ianz.ene is for Infant-Baptifm ( long after ) 
 in cafe of danger, but elfe for flaying three or 
 four years, till they can fpeak : fo Tertitllian 
 . feemech to prefer delay for fuch conveniencies 
 as he mentioneth. 4. And if Mr. D. doubt of 
 this, let him tell me why he faith, cuntlatio Mi- 
 liar, $. And giveth the reafon from the incon- 
 venience to the Sponfors. 6. And why he alfo 
 perfwadeth the unmarried zx\$ young Widdowes 
 to delay their Baptifm , till they are married^ 
 or grow corroborate to continencie, left tempta- 
 tion carry them to fin ; And maketh this cafe of the 
 like reafon with that of Infants. Did he think that it 
 was flatly unlawful for maids and young widdows to 
 be Baptized ? or only lefsfafe^and eligible, except in 
 danger of death ? The cafe is plain. 7. And whether 
 he like his other reafon, Quidfefimat innocensa- 
 tas adremifftonemfeccatorum t And whether Ter- 
 titllian here do not tell us that he took thofe Infants 
 that were Baptized to receive thereby folemn Remif- 
 
 fion 
 
f350 
 fion of iin, if they had 'any fin ? If he thought tliey 
 had none, we have little reafon to follow his opinion. 
 8. Whether his own words plainly (hew not what 
 i have faid of him, that it was (as Conftantine , and 
 multitudes delayed Baptifm)for fear of falling after- 
 wards, which they thought mod dangerous \_ftqni 
 pondus intelligent £aptifmi } magis timebunt confe- 
 cutionem qaam dilationem : Fides Integra fecura 
 eft de faint e ] 
 
 And lib. de Anima Tertullian faith, Apoftolos 
 ex fantlificato alter utro [exufanftos procreari ait y 
 tarn ex feminis prtrogativa quam ex inftitutionis 
 
 difciplina— Omnis Anima in Adam cenfe-* _ 
 
 tur, donee in Chrifto recenfeatur : See the reft 
 there for Infants birth holinefs. 
 
 £. 3 . His renewed reproaches of Cyprian, as ha- 
 ving Antichriftian do&rine , and his renewed 
 queftioning whether there were ever fuch a 
 Council as that at £arthage mentioned, are things 
 fo audacious and grofs that they need no further 
 anfwer. pag. 90. 
 
 £. 4. And his citation of An ft in pag, 94, 
 L that which had not been inftituted tn. 
 Councils, &cj is nothing againft this authority, 
 or to difprove its Apoftolical traduction •, For 
 it is eafle for him to fee, 1. That it was not 
 whether Infants fhould be Baptized that was the 
 qneftion, but whether it fhould be done before 
 the eighth day ? 2. That this Council was fo 
 far from Inftituting Infant Baptifm, that it was 
 never brought into doubt or queftion among them, 
 buttaken as the^unqueftiolied practice ofthe Church. 
 
 But O that fuch as Mr. P, would give over 
 
 ho- 
 
(i?*) 
 
 honouring AntichrHl fo far ( and rejoicing and 
 hardningthe PapiftsJ as to make fuch as Cyprian 
 teachers of Antichriftian do&rine ; and Antichtift 
 to have been the Author of Infants Chriftening 
 before Cyprian and Tertullians time ? The Papifts 
 owe fuch adverfaries thanks. 
 ' (• S* ?*&• I0 4* He boafts of forty more 
 againft Infant Baptifm cited by him, as not yet 
 humbled for his abufe. And becaufe Mr. Willi 
 by miftake granted him Adrian and Hincmare y 
 he feemeth to believe himfelf the more confi- 
 dently, as if they had indeed been againft Infant 
 Baptifm : of which before. 
 
 £. 6. Pag. 105. He reciteth his falfe ftoryef 
 BcrinuS) of which before. 
 
 $. 7. Pag. 106. He reciteth his fabrication 
 of the Bifhop of Apame*. And turneth us for 
 his proofs to fome book oft called theDutch Cen- 
 tury Writers, and the Dutch oJWartyrologie : I 
 fuppofe both Novel and Anabaptifi Authors . ? 
 And he may as well turn us over to -our neigh- 
 bour Anabaptifls to tell us what is written in 
 the ancient Hiftorians and Do&ors , when we 
 have the books themfelves before us. 
 
 <$. 8- Pag. 106, 107. He impenitently repea- 
 ted) his flander of Wto jy^referring us to his profs 
 p. 283, &c Where having before falfly told us 
 that he wrote another book^ called Trialogia be- 
 fides his Dialogues (when it is the fame book that 
 is called Trialogus in the M* S. and Dialogue 
 in the printed Copy, as he may fee by many citations 
 out of the Irialogm in Bifhop *V(her, de fuccejf, 
 Ecclef. which are all in the DiaUgus Jhe tells 
 
 us 
 
(353) 
 us ot a great many of Wickfiffes words to other 
 purpofes , ajid cannot bring one line or wordn 
 which he denyeth Infant- Baptifm : But only i. 
 The lying accufations of his adverfaries to that 
 end ^ and 2. His own words which deny two 
 Popifh tenents. i. That Baptifm faveth all^ ex 
 cpere operato $ When he proveth contrarily (of 
 young and old ^that where Grace concurreth, it 
 faveth, and el fe not. 2* That Infants unbaptized 
 are damned 5 which in charity he. thinks is to 
 be denyed : And what's this againft their Ba- 
 ptifm ? ' 
 
 $* 9. Yea Wickjiffh exprefly afferteth Infant-Ba- 
 ptifm, Dialog.- U. 4. c. 1 1. Iwill give the Reader 
 Mr. Danvers words and his together. 
 
 Mr, D. Reply, p. 106, 107. " That Wickliffe 
 cc denyed Infant- Baptifm, I produced fo much 
 <£ evidence to prove it, from pag. 283. 10289. 
 cc demonftrating that he not only affirmed that 
 <c Believers were the only fnbje 'U s of Baptifm , but 
 " withal that children are not Sacramentally to 
 cc be Baptized : and what can be more exprefe 
 Ct evidence in the cafe ? 
 
 "And Treat, ed. 2. p. 283. That Believers 
 u are the only fubjett of Ba;tifm, as' appcar- 
 u eth in his eleventh Chap, of his Trialog* 
 "And p. 287. as a Lollard he denyeth Infant* 
 "Baptifm. 
 
 Whether Mr. D* ever faw his cited tfook 
 I know not : But judge of the mans credit 'by 
 the words : He cites the eleventh Chap, not tel- 
 ling gs of which book. But it is the fointh 
 A a book 
 
U50 
 
 book where the matter is handled as follow- 
 ed!. 
 
 Wickliffe Trialog. I. 4. Cap. 11. Et primo 
 videamm ubi baptifmus in Evangelio fiabtlitw : 
 Nam lege Mat, ult. quomodo Chrifim manda- 
 vit fuis t j4poftoJis , he j docete, &c. et hinc Phi- 
 lippic baptiz^ans Eunucbum AH, 8. prius infirnxit 
 
 earn in fide et propter banc for mam verbo- 
 
 rum Cbrifii Mat nit. Ecclefea no fir a adducit 
 fideles pro Infante qui difcretionem non attigerat 
 refpondentes : et tales compatres communiter fa* 
 ciunty quod filii fui quos de bapiifmo elevantj 
 fnt in Oratione domwica et fymbolo inflrutli : 
 et alii qui difcretionem attigerant , dum in fir u- 
 untur in fide Chrifti \ ante fiutm baptifmnm 
 vocantur Catechumen* .* Hoc ant em facr amentum 
 efi tarn neceffarium viatori , quod Chrifipts dicit 
 Nicodemoy Job. 3. Nifi quts renatns f Merit 
 ex aqua, &c. Ex tanta itaque authoritate fidei 
 Scripture funt fideles generality baptiz^ati : et 
 crdmavit ecclefia quod qu&libet perfona fidelis 
 
 $4 neceffitatis articnlo poterit baptizari Nee 
 
 refert Jive immergantur femel vel ter ; five 
 aqu<z fuper capita fua effundantur : fed facien- 
 dum efi Jecundum confuetudinem loci quern quis 
 incolit , tarn in uno ritu legitimo quam in alio : 
 Quia ccrtum efi quod corporalis vaptiz.atio five 
 lotio modicum valet , nifi adfit lotto mentis per 
 fpiritum fanllum^ a peccato originali'irel allna- 
 li. Hoc efi enim Principium in hac fide, quod 
 quicunque rite b apt mat us fuerit , baptifmm de- 
 let quodcunque peccatam invencrit in bomine ba- 
 
 ptiz.anr 
 
ft&iando. Et quia ad delationem peccati rcqui- 
 ritur fatisf actio , et , non pctefl fieri fitisjatiio 
 pro peccato nifi per mortem Chrifli , ideo dkit 
 Apoftolus RottU 6. Quicunqus baptiz,ati fumm 
 in Chrifto Jefa) in morte ejus baptizatt fa 
 mm. 
 
 A L I T H. Sed die rogo clarim quomodo 
 Chriflm qui tantum odivit figna fenfibilta , tan- 
 tarn necejfitatem falvationts pofuit in hujufmodi 
 lutione : Vidttur enim derogare divina libcraU- 
 tati at que potentix, quod Deus non poffet inter ~ 
 cedere toto mcrito [ho atque pajfione , falvare In- 
 fantem^ vel adult urn fidclem, nip vctula vel alio 
 viante baptiz^etur communiter inftdeli : fimiliter , 
 delato Infante fidelium ad ecclefiam^ ut fecundum 
 Chrifli regulam baptizjCtur P et deficient e aqua vel 
 requifitis aliis , flame pia intentwne totiui popu- 
 li , interim mortuo naturaliter^ mttu Dei , vide- 
 tur grave damnationem Infant is hujufmodi defi- 
 nire jpecialitcr y cum nee in fans ifle y nee populus 
 peccavit ut taliter damnaretur. Vbi efl ergo 
 mifericors liberalitas Qorifli Dei , fi talis proles 
 fideliltm propter illud quod non eft in poteflate 
 eorum damnabitur^ cum Dem fecundum prwci~ 
 pia Theologize communis fit pronior ad pr simian- 
 dum homines quam ad dammandum : et fpeciali- 
 ter merito et pajfione Chrifli t ant urn fua tentori- 
 al dilatante f 
 
 Which is thus Engltfhed. 
 
 And firfl let tufee where Baptlfm is flablfijfd 
 
 in the Gojpel. For read Mac 28. how Chrifl 
 
 commanded his Apoflles, (fo Teach Sec. And 
 
 A a z heme 
 
hence Philip Baptizing the Eunich, fir fi inftr li- 
 lted him in the F-iith, A&. 8. And becaufe cf 
 this form of 'Cbrifis words Mar. 28. Our Church 
 brwgeth Believers an fwering for the Infant who 
 had not attained to discretion 1 And fitch God- 
 fathers commonly make the children whom they 
 take from 'Baptifm, to be infiriiil'cd in the Lords 
 Prayer, and the (freed. And others that had at- 
 tained to difcretion, while they are infir titled in the 
 faiihofChnfl before their Baptifm,are called Cate- 
 chumeni : And this Sacrament is fo necefjary to a vi- 
 ator that Chn ft faith to Nicodemus, Job. 3. Except a 
 man be born again of w iter, &(?. So that by fo 
 great authority cf Scripture belief, the faithful 
 are ocnirallf£aptized:And the Church hath ordain- 
 ed that in the point of nee ef^- 
 * that is of death; ty * 7 every faithful per) on 
 may be Baptized. Nor U it 
 material whether, they be dipped once or thrice , 
 or the water be pQiired on their heads : but it muft be 
 done according to the cuftom of the place where 
 one dwelleth , as well in one as in another law- 
 ful rite : Fur it is certain that corporal Baptifm 
 or waf.uvg little availcth unlefs there be awajh- 
 ing of the ALni by the Holy Ghoft, from Ori- 
 ginal or AtiuA fin. For this 'is a principle in this 
 belief, that whoever is rightly Baptized ^ Baptifm 
 blutieth out whatever fin it fa: dcth in the man to be 
 Baptised. And becanfe f^t is f alii on is necefjary to 
 the blotting out cf fin, and fat is fail ion for fin 
 cannot be made but by the death of Chrift,therc- 
 . faith the Apoflc, that as many of m as are 
 '■ized in to Cirri ft, are Baptized into his death. 
 
 ALITH, 
 
I" C 357> 
 
 A L I T H. But tell me plain Her I pray you } bow 
 Chrift who fa much bateth fenfible figms 5 hath 
 put fo great necefftty of fahaticn in this wafting* 
 
 i For it feemeth to derogate from Gods liberality 
 and power, that God cannot by all his merit and 
 paffion intercede to five an Infant or an adult bc- 
 liver , unlefs he be Baptized by an old Wowan or 
 fome other viant, commonly an Infdcl: fo alfo , 
 when the Infant of believers is brought to 
 the Qmirch , that ((& ) according to Chrifis Rule 
 he may be Baptized , and for want of water or 
 other re qui fit es , the peoples pious intention 
 continuing , he is dead in the mean time 
 naturally by the will cf God y it fecmeth hard to 
 define that fuch an Infant is damned •, fpecially 
 when neither the Infant nor the people have fin- 
 ned that he fiioitld fo be damned : Where then is 
 the merciful liberality of Chrift-God if fuch a 
 child of believers fiallbe damned for that which 
 is not in their power ? when God, according to 
 the common Principles ef Theolcgie, is proner to 
 reward men than to damn the h , and fpccially 
 when the merit and paffion of Qbrifi have fo jar 
 
 • fit etched cut their tents ? 
 
 To this Wickjtffe anfwereth, i. In this Chap, that 
 
 I ome things he fpcaketh afTertively, and fome things 
 rcputativcly^and forevieweth the cafe. And i. faith 
 that Ghriil approveth outward figns bur noc the 
 abufe of them. That is, i. When the (igns of tl e old 
 'jewijh Law are kept. 2. By an inmodeft efpOL- 
 iing iliem, and preferring them before Gods De- 
 calogue. 5. By hunhtning the Church with 
 A a 3 • them 
 
(3*8) 
 
 them which Chrift would have free ; even more 
 than the Jewifi) Church was bunhened : And thus 
 the Religious now (faith he } abufe thenuhetwo 
 laft wayes. 
 
 And in the Twelfth Chapter he proceedeth to 
 anfwer the reft |" Vtdetur mihi probabile quod 
 Chriftw fatis poffet fine lot tone hujm^ infantes fpiri- 
 tualiter baptiz,are , et per conftquens falvare ; 
 unde dicitnr communiter quod triplex eft baptif- 
 mm Ecclefu y viz,, baptfmm f-nrnmu , baptfmm 
 fanguinis , baptifmm ftamintt, ct quilibct eonim 
 
 companbm fufticit ad faint em ■ — Nee audeo 
 
 ajferere quod Infantes occifi pro Cbrifto fiat 
 damnati — ^aptifmm autcm fiaminvs eft bapt. 
 ff>. fanfti , qui eft fimpliciter neceffarim cmli- 
 bet homini fi falvetur. Idea duo baptifmi priores 
 funt figna antecedents, et ex fuppofitionc neccf- 
 faria ad i ft urn tertium bapt if mum fiaminu* 
 Jdeo abfque dubietate , fi ifte infenfibilis baptif- 
 mm ad f Her it, baptiz.atns eft a crimine munda- 
 tm. Et ft ifte defuerit , quantumcunque adftnt 
 fr tores ., bapttfmm non prodeft animtz ad falutem* 
 Jdeo cum relic fit infenfibilis , &• lantum nobis 
 ignotiUy videtur mihi imprudens pr&fumptio tali< 
 ter fahationem hominis vel damnationem ex ba- 
 ptifmo definire, Reputamiu tamen abfque dilbietat e 
 £/*Quod Infantes rede baptizati flumine^ywr ba^ 
 ptizari tertio bapt if mute , cum habent gratiam 
 
 kapiifmalcm. Non enim licet fidelibm 
 
 fupponendo bxpttfinuw flaminis y bapt if mum fin- 
 wmvs om?iino relmqucrc , fed neccfje eft data, op- 
 po-ftunitate circuwjhinti& ipjum dcctpsrc. Et 
 
 cum 
 
(359) 
 
 turn omnia qua eveniunt de nee e flit ate eveniunt, 
 dici potefi quod talis homo non potefi falvari ft* 
 tie tali baptifmate. Thus Englifhed. 
 
 [] It feemeth to me probable that fhrifi can 
 Efficiently Baptize Infants- fpiritually without 
 this wafhtng , and by conference , can Jave them. 
 Whence it vs commonly faid, that there is a three- 
 fold Baptifm of the Church , that is, the Ba- 
 ptifm of water , the Baptifm of blood , and the 
 Baptifm of the Spirit : zsind every one of them 
 to* the meet > fufjiceth to falvation — Nor dare 
 I affert that the Infants Mat. 2» killed for Chrifi 
 are damned. But the Baptifm of the fpirit is 
 the Baptifm of the Holy Chofi, which is (imply 
 neceffary to every one that he be faved. There- 
 fore the other two Baptifms are antecedent figns, 
 and fuppofitively neceffary to this third Baptifm 
 of the fpirit. Therefore without doubt where that 
 infenfible baptifm is, the Baptized perfon is clean- 
 fed from his fin : and if that be wanting, let 
 the former be never fo much prefent, Baptifm pro- 
 fiteth not the foul to falvation. Seeing therefore 
 this is infenfible , and fo much unknown to us, 
 it feemeth to me imprudent prefumption fo to define 
 mens falvation, or damnation by their Baptifm. 
 But yet we hold without doubting, that Infants 
 rightly Baptized with water, are Baptized with 
 the third Baptifm , when ( or feeing ) they have 
 
 Bavtifmal grace. For it is not lawful for 
 
 the faithful, on fuppofnion of the 'Baptifm of tht^ 
 fpirit, to cafl off the Baptifm of water, but it is 
 neceffary to reteive it , when the opporntoity 
 A a 4 of 
 
cf c ire nm fiance is offered. And feeing whatever 
 comctb to pafs, doth\come to pafs of necejjityjt may be 
 fad that fitch a one cannot be Javed without 
 JuchBaptifm. ~\ 
 
 And to the queflion of an old woman Ba- 
 ptizing children in neceflity,he faith, [ cc Credtmus 
 " tarn en quod quae un que Vetula vel abjetra per- 
 IC fona rite lav ante homrnem cum verbis fiicra- 
 tc mentalibtu B Apt if mum flamims Dew com p let. ]] 
 The Reader mull pardon the Latine to the Au- 
 thor or Printer, which may thus be Engjifhtd. 
 \_ u But we believe that what old woman foevcr 
 "or abjed perfon rightly wafheth one with the 
 <c Sacramental words, Gdd fulfilletluhe Baptiftn 
 cC cfthe fpirir.J 
 
 It feemeth that whereas Tertullian ( Mr. D.'s 
 firft witnefs ) was for Lay-mcns Baptizing in ale 
 of neceffky , but not for womens, that IVickltjje 
 wasforwomens alfo. 
 
 And to the next queflion , Whether Infants 
 wibaptiz^edwhen r Bapi(m could net be had, be all 
 damnedfhc anfweteth(i;f per h<zc refpondco ad Sec,) 
 thaf is [ lc And by this Ianfwer your third ob- 
 cc jedion , granting, that God if he will, may 
 "damn fuch an Infant, and do him no Wrong, 
 c ^ and if he will he can fave him ; And ] dare 
 " not define ekher part : nor am I careful. about 
 "reputation , or getting evidence in the cafe ; 
 f* but as a dumb man am fifcnt, humbly confef- 
 
 cc ing my ignorance , ufmg , 
 * ufc If he will, "conditional word* * -becante 
 "u is not yet clear to me , 
 whe- 
 
MO 
 
 t* whether fuch an Infant fhall be faved or damned : 
 <c But I know that whatever God doth in it will 
 " be juft and a work of mercy, to be praifed gf 
 u all the faithful : And let not them like pre- 
 " fumptious fools, pour out themfelves, that of 
 "their own authority, without knowledge, de- 
 
 " fine any thing in that matter. J Qui 
 
 " autem dicit, &c. But he that faith that in this 
 Ci cafe put , an Infant (hall be faved , as it is 
 " pious to believe, he doth fuperfluoufly uncertain 
 " himfelf *, more than will 
 "♦profit him. But there are * That is, determine 
 ' c fome things in Parents pow- an uncertainty. 
 ic er though lapfed into z thing 
 cc Paji 7 lor which it is necelTary by Gods juft 
 cx judgement , that fo it (hould come to pafs : 
 " Therefore he that defineth, that neither Pa- 
 " rents nor people fo finned, that it ihould ^o 
 u come to pals, doth fpeak as a Pie on the head 
 "of his own knowledge. But we believe it as 
 " a point of faith , that nothing befalls a man 
 <c after the firft grace, unlefs fome part of man- 
 a kind either merit or demerit, that this flail come 
 " to pafs. ~] 
 
 In the next (thirteenth ) Chapter, he proceed- 
 ed to anfwer the queftion \_ Qmmodo anima ta- 
 lium Infamiwm fine peccato altuaU decedemiim 
 punicntHY ( Having before fpoken of Infants dy- 
 ing unbaptized unavoidably ) that is, How the 
 fouls of JhCh Infants flail be punifled ? whether 
 all finally. or unequally f and whether only with 
 the pamjhmentof lofs, or alfo of fenfe fj An<frhe 
 
 con- 
 
( 3 6i) 
 
 eoncludeth contrary to the greater part of the PaJ 
 pifts, that they (hall have both the pnniftment 
 of Lofs andSenfe^ and f Note that ) that [ Necef- 
 fe eft peccata originalia hominnm effe intqualift^ 
 ficnt decedentes in originalibHs funt propter iUa 
 inaqualiter condemnandi : Nam jttxta ditia omnes 
 condemnati pro originalibm funt condemnandi tarn 
 poena damni quam poena fenftis : fed impojfibile 
 eft quod condemnemur aqualiter omnino Hits poenis : 
 ergo relinqmtur quod peccata quibu* HUu poena* 
 demernerunt, in&qualia funt dicenda. ~\ That is, 
 |[ " It muft needs be that the Original fins of 
 c<: men are unequal, as thofe that die in Original 
 <c fins are unequally to be condemned for them : For 
 cc as is faid, all that are condemned for original fin 
 €t are condemned both with the punifhment of Lofs 
 "and ofSenfe -, But it is impoflible that they 
 " fhould be damned altogether equally with thofe 
 cc pains. Therefore it remaineth that the fins 
 " by which they deferved thofe punifhments be 
 <c faid to be unequal J. 
 
 Reader, I have been the larger in tranfcribing 
 and tranflating the words of Wickjiffe , becaufe 
 an Author is not fo well underftood by a line 
 or two difmembred from the reft , as by whole 
 difcourfes : and fo that his fenfe may be pall 
 all controverfie .• Here it is vifible that Wickiijf 
 was fo far from denying Infant-Baptifm , that 
 i. He exprefly afferteth it, 2. He never fo 
 much as noteth it for any controveriie, nor maketh 
 anv doubt or queftion about it. 3. Yeahetaketh it 
 to oe bold preemption for any to take upon them to 
 
 know, 
 
know, whether an Infant that dyeth unavoidably 
 unbaptized be faved or not, but only faith God 
 can do it if he will , and he can damn him, 
 4. And to thofe that fay that the Parents are 
 not in the fault, nor the people , feeing they 
 intended his Baptifm, he faith, that many things 
 come to pafs for paft fins of Parents, and people, 
 and therefore that cannot be concluded •, and no- 
 thing after the firft grace cometh to pafs unme- 
 rited. 5. And he concludeth that thofe of them 
 that are damned for original fin, are punifhed 
 with pain of lofs and fenfe , but unequally, ha- 
 ving unequal original fins. <>• But Baptifm he 
 afferteth doth put away all fm in the rightly 
 Baptized. 7. And that when Infants are right- 
 ly Baptized with water, they are Baptized with 
 the third Baptifm having Baptifmal grace. 
 8. That it is according to Chrifts rule that 
 Infants be brought to the Church to be Bapti- 
 zed. 
 
 And now Reader, Judge what a fad cafe poor 
 honeft ignorant Chriftians are in, that muft have 
 their fouls feduced, troubled and led into Love- 
 killing alienations, and feparations and cenfures 
 of Chrifts Church, and of their particular bre- 
 thren , by fuch a man as this ? And whether 
 they that dare ufe fouls at this rate , are fo 
 much better than us , as to be above our com- 
 munion > Nay whether thofe that lately revile 
 the Zeal of dilTenters , as cheriiVing the mod 
 .odious crimes , be not too much fcandalizcd and 
 hardened by fuch dealings ? When a man as plea- 
 ding 
 
0*4) 
 ding for Chrift and •Baptifm dare not only print 
 fuch things , but ftand to them in a fecond edi- 
 tion, and defend thenfby a fccond book, and Rage 
 and be Confident in reviling thofe that tell him of 
 his untruths ? 
 
 $. 10. But he hath many pretended reafons 
 to prove- that Wickjijf was againft Infant-Baptifm, 
 and fome of them out of the very Chapters 
 which I have tranfcribed : Ct i. Saith he, He 
 "afferted two Sacraments. 2. That believers mull 
 <: be baptized in pure water, (And what are thefe 
 cc to the purpofe ?) 3 That believers are the 
 "enly fubjetls of Baptifm (A grols untruth ) 
 " ( But he giveth you the words that prove k 
 £ Ideo abfqne dubitatione fi ifte infenfibilis ha- 
 Jtifmus affuerit, bapti^atm a crimme eft mun- 
 datm : & fi tile defuerit, quantumcunque effent 
 fr lores , baptifmus non pr 'ode fi anima ad faint enf\. 
 I gave you the words before. And did the man think 
 that this is any thing to his purpofe ? Wickliff faith, 
 £ Water Baptifm favcth no fold ( young or old ) 
 without the Baptifm of the Spirit. ~\ Therefore 
 faith Mr. D. Wklzliff faith , that Believers are 
 the only fubjetts of Baptifm. 2 Will he make 
 the Church of his mind by fuch palpable falihoods 
 as theft > 
 
 But he adds, [ He faith, that perfons are firfl 
 to be Baptised with that he calls the infenfible 
 Baptifm, before water, &c.l Anfw. I. Utterly 
 falfe : It is his own forgery. WicklijfCiuh no 
 fuch thing that it mull: be firfl : Nay I doubt 
 he faith quite contrary as \ have re cited. [ Idea 
 
 duo 
 
(3*5) 
 
 dm baptifmi priorcs fmt figna Ant ece dent ia, & 
 ex fuppofitione neceffaria ad iftnm tertiitm baptif- 
 mum flamimt. 3 See ^ iere now fortius man is, 
 to be believed. 2. But though Wickjff called Wa- 
 ter-Baptifm an antecedent fign, yet moft Prote- 
 ftant Writers I think hold that believers In- 
 fants have by virtue of Gods Covenant the Ba- 
 ptifm of the Spirit, ( that is, a feed or difpofiti- 
 on to future gracious a&s if they live) h and thac 
 they are in a ftate of falvation before they are 
 Baptized, being the children of the faithful by 
 them dedicated to God, by heart-con fent, and 
 that Baptifm is but the publick folemnization of 
 the fame Covenant, and delivery of the blefUngs 
 by way of inveftiture. Let Mr. D. read but aft 
 the testimonies cited by Mr. Gataker in his book 
 of Baptifm, againft Dr. Ward., and Bifhop Dave- 
 nant, and he will fee this is no opinion proper 
 to the Anabajtifts : And I fcarce believe that 
 he can prove me and all Proteftants that hold 
 that opinion, to be therefore againft Infant-Ba- 
 ptifm : How then would it have proved Wick^ 
 Uffio ? 
 
 4. He faith that Wick Iff faith that Baptifm 
 doth not confer , but only fig ni fie grace given. ] 
 Anfw. 1. And what's that to prove, that he was 
 againft Iniam-Baptifm ? 2. And how proveth he this? 
 Why, Fuller out of Cochlem faith fo. 
 
 Anfw. 1. But Cochlewis one of the moft no- 
 table Lyars of all the Papifts that oppofed Luther^ 
 and hath left his Calumnies to pofterity \ And 
 mud he be believed againft Wick Iff} 2. And 
 
 Ful- 
 
C 3*0 
 
 Fuller wrote but about twenty years ago : And 
 muftoneof our neighbours tell us what Cochleud 
 faith was the opinion of Wkklijf, when we can 
 read his words our felves ? 3. But fto make this 
 like its fellows ) even this much is untrue, Fuller 
 tells us no fuch thing out of Cochlens , but tells 
 us that Gregory charged Wickliff with eighteen 
 Errors ; Tho* Arundel with twenty three ^ the 
 Council of Conftance with ^.Tho.Waldenfis with 
 80. DtiLucke with 266. and Cochlens with 303. 
 and then he reciteth 62.out o$Waldenfis> where the 
 words are. 4. And Waldenfis is known to be a falfe 
 accufer of him in many particulars, though a learn- 
 ed Papift. 5. And even this Waldenfis that faith 
 his worft, and fought to make the moil of his 
 errors, never here accufeth him as denying In- 
 fant-Baptifm : And would he not have done it, 
 had it been true } 
 
 But Mr. \D. ( that by this trick which he is fo 
 ready at , can make Herefies and Hereticks al- 
 fo too eafily ) tells us of a popi(h ' Here fie ^\z« 
 for Baptifm £ to take away all Jin , to confer 
 grace , to worker e generation and fave the foul, 
 as flill held by them that teach young children 
 to fay 7 that by their Baptifm they were made 
 children of God , members of (fhrift , and Inhe- 
 ritors fthat is, heirs) of the Kingdom of hea- 
 ven. ]. 
 
 Anfw. 1. By this it feems the Englijh Pro- 
 teftants and all the reft that take this to be true 
 do&rine , hold a Popifh Herefie. 2. Let the 
 Reader perufe Gataker againft Davcnant of Ba- 
 ptifm;, 
 
( 3*7) 
 ptifm, and he will find almoft all the ancient 
 Fathers Latineand Greek of the fame judgement : 
 And what a pleafure is this to the Papifts to be 
 told that almoft all the ancient Writers held their he- 
 refie ? And then indeed Where was our Church 
 and the Kingdom of Chrift before Luther ,or rather 
 before thofe whom he oppofed? 3. It is unqueftio- 
 nabletrue do&rine that as Marriage-confent in pri- 
 vate, layeth the firft ground of Marriage rights, 
 which by folemn Matrimony are openly and regu- 
 larly delivered by inveftiture, which perfe&eth the 
 title: even fo, the Heart-Confent orCovenantingfof 
 the perfon,or parents for Infants^ doth lay the firft 
 ground of Chriftian right, which is folemnizedand 
 perfected regularly by Baptifm, which by the way 
 of tradition or publick inveftiture , doth take 
 away all guilt of (in y Sacrament ally regenerate , 
 and fave, and make us children of God, mem- 
 bers of Chrift and his Church, and heirs of hea- 
 ven , who were fo before by a Private initial 
 right, of which the Church did take lefs cogni- 
 fance : And one- would think that no Anaba- 
 ptifl ftioulddeny this,(called Herefie)as to the adult. 
 
 5. He next addeth from Wickliff-, They are fools 
 and prefumptuous which affirm fitch Infants not to 
 be favedy which die without Baptifm J fo fuller 
 words it out of Cochleus, 
 
 Anfw. 1. Falfe ftili : It is not out of Coch- 
 lear , but Waldenfu. 2. And what's this to the 
 queftionof Infant-Baptifm ? 
 
 He adds, f And Wicklijfs own words as c. 2. 
 de Trialog. Quod definentet parvulos fdclium fi- 
 ne baptifmO) &c. J 
 
 . Anfw*. 
 
(36S) 
 
 Jjifiv. Still falfe : i I have before transcri- 
 bed the words out of the Printed book which 
 are far otherwife. 2. It is not defmentes but qui 
 quicquam defimwt. 3. It is not of all children 
 dying without Baptifm y but of thofc that could 
 not have it , being prevented by death , when.it 
 was defired. . 4., He faith this of thofe that de- 
 termine that they are fived alfi. 5. And inftead 
 of c. 2. this is lib. 4.1-. 12. 
 
 6. He faith , ["That ail xruth is contained in 
 cc the holy Scripture , and that which is not ori- 
 ginally there, is to be accounted prophane • 
 "And that we are to admit of no fcience or 
 "conclufion that is not proved by Scripture 
 tc teftimony, and that whoever holds thecontra- 
 " ry opinion cannot be a Chriflian but flatly the 
 tc Devils Champion ] with more fuch cited parr- 
 cc ly out of Cochlem by Fuller , ( falfe again ) 
 "and partly^ Verit. Serif t.~]& book of Wicks 
 liffs which I have not , and I conjecture he ne- 
 ver faw : For 1. I told you before the very 
 words of Wickliffihn condemn only fuch abufes 
 of outward figns y as fhew him to be of a contra- 
 ry opinion. 2. Will any fober man believe that 
 he damned ail as no Chriftians , but Cham~ 
 fions oftheDevily that thought that fome Conclusi- 
 ons Phyfical, Mathematical, Metaphyfical, Medici- 
 nal , Logical , &c. may be true that are ?jot 
 proved by Scripture xeflimony ? and fo that 
 almoft all Chriftiansin the world are no Chri- 
 ftians ? 
 
 7* Saith 
 
7. Saith he " [That he (lighted the Authority of 
 "General Councils, as Fuller out of Cocble- 
 */#, &c. 
 
 Anfvr* i. Falfe again as to the Author, 2. But 
 what is that to Infant-baptifm } 
 
 But his direct proof is out of Waldenps faying 
 that Wicfyiff faith that children are not ftcra- 
 mentally to be baptized* 
 
 ts4nfw. 1. IhwenotWaldenfts at hand, but 
 have little caufe to believe Mr. D. 2. And Ful- 
 ler who undertaketh to recite Waldtnfis charge ^ 
 hath not a word of any fuch fenfe. 3. If bitter 
 Papifts fo accufe him, is it therefore true ? Judge 
 by his own words* Indeed Wickltff held that fa- 
 cramental baptifm faveth none ( young or bid ) 
 without the baptifm of the fpirit ; and that it 
 may be feparated from it : And hence was the 
 Papifts noife againft him. 
 
 8. Sauhhe "[As a further argument that he 
 cc denied Infant-baptifm, may appear, becaufe. he 
 a did fo vehemently impugn Confirmation, &c* 
 
 Anfxv. u Here We have Fuller out oiCochle^ 
 m falily again. 2. Are all Proteftants againft In* 
 iant-baptifm , that are againft the Popifh Sacra- 
 ment of Confirmation? What a prover is this 
 man? Is DalUm that hath written fo large a difpu- 
 Uiion of Confirmation, an Anabaptift ? And the 
 Englifti Nonconformifts too > 3 . But in very deed^ 
 Mr. D.'s falfhood and Wickliffs opinion for In- 
 fant-baptifm, may very probably be gathered from 
 that ( not fifteenth as he, but ) fourteenth Chapt. 
 of Confirmation : For , 1 . He reprehendeth the 
 
 B b BifhopS 
 
Biftiops for adding fo many Ceremonies to In* 
 fant-baptifm, never blaming their baprifm it felf. 
 2. He argueth againft confirming children, as 
 fup^rfluous, becaufe the fpirit is given in baptifm 
 it felf \_& confirmatur ex hoc quodbaptiz^atos no- 
 ftros dicimui rcguUriter Spiritum Santtam acci- 
 pere to ipfo quo legitime baptiz,antur , that is, 
 "And it is hence confirmed , in that we fay that 
 " our baptized ones do regularly receive the Holy 
 " Ghoft , in that for by that very thing) that 
 Ci they are lawfully baptized. ] And he had before 
 faid that they are offered to Baptifm in the Church 
 according to Chrifts Rule. 
 
 a. ii. After all this Mr. D. addeth Wicklifs 
 opinions againft Popery to the number of 29. 
 But what all this is to the cafe of Infant-baptifm, 
 what man belldes himfelf can tell ? But let me 
 teU him that I would not have him too eafily be- 
 lieve bitter adverfary Papifts, left he forfeit the 
 little reliefs of his own credit : And that it is 
 not like-that Wicklijf was againft enjoyning the 
 Lords- Prayer as foe citeth : Yea , I would not 
 Tiave Mr. D. come Co near the Papifts yet as 
 IVickJiff d\d* How doth he like fuch words as 
 thefefTrialog.li-4. c. 22. fol.138.-Ef talis eft tri- 
 plex Ecclefia j Ecckftafcilicct Afilitans, Dormiens y 
 & Triumph an s —--- Ecclefia Dormiens eftpra- 
 
 defiinati in Vurgatorio patientes that is , 
 
 " There is fuch a threefold Church : The mili- 
 tant Church, the fleeping Church, the mum- . 
 
 c< phant Church : The ileeping Church is 
 
 "the Predeftinate fuffering in Purgatory. ~]- 
 
 And 
 
f 370 
 
 Arid lib. i.e. 10. fee what he faith oF Angel* 
 ind adoration of theiru And c. u. of Angels 
 offices , and their being virtually every where. 
 And what he faith of Kings, and Marrimony 
 '^cjxvd exc edit Mia Sacrament a, &C.J li.4. Ci 1 9, 
 zo. fol. 13?-; 133. Nor would I fay that omnia qiu 
 •veniunt de ncceffitate evenuint , as fol. 120. a, 
 3r that Dem pot eft ejfe Afinus fi velit^ut fol. 90. bi 
 
 One of the worft things I like in IVickJrff is , 
 .hat he plungeth himfelf into the deepeft School- 
 Pubtihies, or difficulties, with lefs fubtilty or di- 
 ligence than the cafe reqir'reth, and than Schod- 
 "nen ufe. And indeed I like not divers of his 
 rondufions •, as lib, 2. c. 14. fol. 41. \_OnodDc- 
 « necejfitat creaturas fingnlat aUtvat ad queml'i- 
 'ret a£hnm fnum r ] It is iuppofed that Hobbs by the 
 "ame Dodrineoverthrowethall theChriftian faith : 
 And I believe that his do&rine there fioL 41 s and 
 Hfewhere, for merit, and how temporale fit caxfii 
 Trxdeflmationis aterna, will difpleafe fome. And 
 Jiis diftinftion of Mortal and Venial fin, as Hi 3; 
 :. 5. fioL 52. And that he raaketh final impeni- 
 tence the fin againfiv the Holy Ghoft ; And that 
 lone can know what fin is mortal in ns 9 and 
 ttbat not ? And cap. 6. Co?:cedi pot e fit quod mnl~ 
 \i pr&ficiti [iint in gratia feciindum pr&fientem jiU 
 ftitiam : It may be granted that many reprobates 
 pre in ( 3 (late of ) Grace , according to their 
 
 frefient right confine fi Vr&ficiti ant cm rnrn- 
 
 quam funt in gratia finaiis perfieverantia : The 
 Reprobate are never in the grace of final perfie- 
 xtrahxa So that he held that prefenc true grace 
 
 Bb i wa$ 
 
(37 2 ) 
 was loft by fome , as Anftin did , which he ex- 
 plaineth cap. 7. And cap. 8. again he is at his 
 Omnia evenium necefjltate abfaluta reviewing 
 what he had (aid , and concluded! that [ no nun 
 can do better than he doth - y but he could if God 
 would ~\ and denieth not fin to be hereby ncceili- 
 tated, &c 
 
 tf. 12. Pag. 115. He again impenitently re- 
 neweth his flander of Berengarius, as being againft 
 Infant-baptifm : Concerning whom faith Vjlxr 
 de fucccfi. Ecclef. cap. 7. p. 207. " £ Author 
 " Aciornm, &c. The Author of the Ads of 
 " Bruno ( found in the Library of the Noble Ba- 
 <c ron Carexv of Clopton) who faith he was at 
 €c this examination, faith, that they f fome of Be- 
 c< rengaritu followers ) faid that baptifm profi- 
 led not children to falvarion,as alfo DeodviniuLc- 
 u odienfts firft from common fame, and then Guit- 
 <c mundm Arch, Aver [anus on the credit of Leodi- 
 <c enfis report that Bruno Andegavenfis & Beren- 
 <c garim Turonenfis |~ quantum in ipfis erat ba- 
 ct ptifmum parvuiorum evertij[e~\ did as much as 
 <c in them lay overthrow the baptifm of chil- 
 ic dren ; But we find no charge ever brought 
 <c 2Lg\w\&Bere?igariu4 concerning Anabaptifm,in fo 
 u many Synods as were held againft him : Nor 
 <c do they feem to have denied any thing elfe , 
 <c who are faid to deny that baptifm profiteth lit- 
 " tie Ones to Salvation, but that Baptifm confer- 
 <c reth Grace ex opere opertto : As gathering 
 " from the Apoftles words , He that planteth and 
 " he that watereth is nothing , but God that gi- 
 
 <( veth 
 
(vf) 
 
 "veth theincreafe: So Alan hs li.i.cont. bxrct. 
 li fui temp, takeththem as if they had faid [ Ba- 
 <c ptifm hath no efficacy either on young or old • 
 " therefore nun are not bound to be bapii- 
 " zed.] 
 
 And that this was the plain cafe is proveable , 
 in that it was juft the cafe of Wkkitff and the 
 Waldenfes , who were faid to do as much as in 
 them lay to caft out Infant-baptifm, becaufe they 
 thought that every wicked Prieftdid not fan&ifie 
 them ex of ere operato, and infallibly convey Gods 
 grace to the unprepared. 
 
 But his proofs are " [ i. The Magdeb. tell us 
 * c that Berengarim maintained his herefies, which 
 "they fet down to be denying Tranfulftan- 
 cc tiation, and Baptifm to little ones, under five 
 "heads, which Lavfranh^ Arch- Bill. op of Gan- 
 " terbury anfwers at large in his book called 
 " SciMillans : and as to that of denying Infant- 
 " baptifm he anfwers by faying, he doth thereby 
 u oppofe the general Dodrine and univerfal Con- 
 <c fent of the Church. 
 
 jinfw. i. I have not the Ma^deb, at hand, but 
 he hath little to do that wiilask Illyricus^ and Gal- 
 hu and Amfdorfius what Lanfran\ writeth, if he 
 have his book before him. The publisher ofchan* 
 frankj book againft Berengarius giveth us notice 
 of no other, Trithemim de fcript. Ecclef. knew 
 of no other but this, which is in Bibl. Patr. lom % 
 6. p. 190. And I have iookt over every line of it 
 (fuch labour dothefe men put us to ) and I find 
 not one word where any fuch thing is mentioned 
 
 B.b 3 by 
 
f374) 
 ty J^anfrmK: bvjt only his accufations of Bet* 
 about Tranfubftantiation : He never oncechargeth 
 him. as denying Infant-baptifm, nor mentioned it t 
 See, Reader , into what hands the poor feduced 
 ones are faflen. 
 
 tf . 1 3 , His fecond proof is this, u Caffnndra in 
 f c his Epiftle to the Duke of Cleve faith , that 
 cc Guiimund Bifhop of Ayerfc doth affirm that 
 f c he did deny baptifm to Little Ones, &c. 
 
 Anfw* 1. Caffander in neither of his Epiftles 
 to the D/uke of Cleve mentioneth any fuch mat- 
 ter. But in his Preface to his Book for Infant- 
 fcaptifmto the Duke of Cleve r he faith that Gait- 
 r/iiind faith \_ Quod inter cateros errores y parvuhr 
 rum bapttfmum everterit, quern Uimen errorem in 
 publicum non produxit, quod tarn blafyhemiam ut 
 Guitm* Icquitur , ne pejjlmorum (juidem bominum 
 aures toleraturas fciret , & in Serif tuns [car Li 
 locum ejus erroris tuendi pemtus non vidcret. j 
 
 Mark here Reader , 1 , Berengarius is not faid 
 to deny Infmt-baptifm, but to overturn ir, (that 
 is, by fome confequence it's like. ) 2. He did ncj 
 puMtfl) this his opinion, but held it unpublifhed : 
 And how then did GuUwund know it? 3. Was 
 Berengarius as honed or as ftout a man as he is^ 
 fuppofecj, and yet when Infants were daily bapti- 
 zed, would never fpeak out his thoughts of the 
 evil of it? 4, Either he baptized Infants himfelf ? 
 or rfot,' if he did, was he againft it then > Whar 
 a Knave do chey make him. 'that fo fay J> If not, 
 bk opinion muft needs be publiflied by his pra- 
 
 --' y when they whofe csrs could not tolerate ir, 
 
 would 
 
( 375; 
 
 • would lefs tolerate the refuting of 'their Chil- 
 
 \ drens Cbriftning. 5. Was that an honeit man 
 
 :. that would fecretly hold an opinion which he 
 
 . knew he had no Scripture for ? 6. Note that 
 
 even Caffander there tells us, ihat indeed the W*l- 
 
 io denfes though agreeing mLch with the Catharifts % 
 
 at did yet both approve and ufe Infant-baptifm, 
 
 3i p. 671. and that this error flept till his age when 
 
 St$rk and Mmtz.tr raifed ic. 
 
 c. 14. 2. But what need we ask Caffander 
 what Gaitmund faid ? What childifh play is this? 
 His own book is as common as Caffander s in BibL 
 Patr. To, 6. p. 215. And Gnitmundi words are 
 thefe c< £ Berengarius opened thofe things by 
 " which he might pleafe worldly men, that love 
 " always ( if they may do it unpunifhed ) to (in ; 
 " to wit, deftroying as much as in him lay Law- 
 u ful Marriages, and overturning Infants baptifm ; 
 <c So that in one the Devil by his mouth perfwa- 
 u ded the word men that it was lawful to abufe 
 u all women 3 and in the other [_ Caffato baptif- 
 mate lnfantia, in profundum omnium malorym, nt- 
 pote poflmodum baptiz,andis, impnne mere : Lsge 
 Epift. Leodienfis Epifcopi contra fterengar* ad 
 Henr. Reg, Franc. & eifdem pens verbis eadem 
 ipfa ibi fcripta reperies ] that is , cc [_ making void 
 " the baptifm of Infancie, they might rufh unpu- 
 <c nilhed into the depth of all evils , as being af- 
 " terward to be baptized. Read the Epiftk of 
 l< the Bifhop of Liege to//. R. of France againfl; 
 u fierengarius, and there you (ball find thefe fame 
 " things written, alraoft in the fame words, 3 
 
 B b 4. And 
 
(376) 
 
 And now, Reader, judge further, i. Whether 
 this Papift who never knew the matter himfelf , 
 and whofebook fheweth him a filly bitter fellow 
 profefllng to transcribe or take his words from the 
 Bifhop of Liege who took it from fame , be to 
 be believed in his accufations of fuch a man, when 
 Lanfrank^ihdi difputed with him before the Pope, 
 nor the Pope himfelf, nor any of the many Sy- 
 nods that examined him, and conftrained him to 
 recant, ever mention fuch a thing? Were thefe 
 Perfecutors think you blind or merciful herein?. 
 2. If he be to be believed in this u why not in 
 the firft article , of the lawfulnefs of abufing all 
 women commonly? 3. Do not the very words 
 [ quantum in fe, and evcrterit J and [" cajfato ba- 
 jtifmate^ open the cafe, that milice gathered this 
 as a forced confequence only of feme words of 
 Bcrengarius ? It is like becaufe he defined a Sa- 
 crament to their diflike, which Lanfrank^xt^xo- 
 veth him for. 
 
 And fo fottifh a fellow was this Gmtmund that 
 his fellow Papifb are put todifown him for fay- 
 ing that their Euchariftical Hoft cannot be cor- 
 rupted or putrifie , or be eaten by Mice, or any 
 Bruits, but only feemeth fo to be: ib.'f. 230. 
 /. 2, 
 
 i. 1 J, His third proof is u £ In the BibU Patr, 
 
 "Pans j>. 432. it is recorded that Durandm 
 
 * c writes — the denying and as much as in them 
 "fay the deftroying the baptifm of Infants, &c. 
 
 Anfve. 1 . Did this man ever fee the Bogks he 
 dteth, who citeth fag. 432. of the $ibL fat. as. 
 
 if 
 
(377) 
 if were but one Tomb or Volume, that long ago 
 was eleven great Volumes, and now many more? 
 It is like zJWarg. le Bignes Edit, is that he mean- 
 eth. The Epiftleis Tom, 3. p. 319. of the Bigne 
 Tar is 1624. The Author, faith V flier de fuccef, 
 Eccl. p 196. is falily called Durandus y and is 
 Deodmnus or Dietwinus. His words are [_ Fama 
 fupremos Gallia fines pratergrejfa totam Germani- 
 am pervafit, jamtjue omnium noflrum replevit au- 
 res y qualitcr Bruno <L/4ndeg % Epifc, item Beren- 
 garius Turonenfis ajfruant Corpus Domi- 
 ni non tarn Corpus ejfe cjuam umbram & figuram 
 Corporis Domini " ? Legitima conjugia deflruant, & 
 quantum in ipfls eft y baptifmum parvulorum ever-. 
 tant. ] This is it that Vfiier cited : 1 . You fee 
 here is nothing but a Papift Prelates tale to a 
 King , upon far fetcht fame, 2. Charging him 
 equally, 1 yea more with deftroying marriage, 
 
 3. And faying but [quantum in [e~\ ofbaptifm; 
 
 4. And part of the fame is that the King had cal- 
 led a Council to examine thefe things . which 
 Council never taking notice of any" fuch matter 
 confuteth the fame. And doth Mr, D. the great 
 enemy of Antichrift perfwade poor Anabaptifts to 
 believe fuch fellows and tales as thefe ? 
 
 5f. 16, In his Reply he addeth fourthly \Thu- 
 anus witnefTeth that Bruno Arch-Bifhop of Tri- 
 ers did perfecute Berengarius for denying Infants 
 baptifm, as p. 242. 
 
 jinfw. 1. Again he tells us of Thuanus, and 
 tells not where, as if we muft read over five vo- 
 lumes in folio to be able to difprove fuch a Tale- 
 teller 
 
C378) 
 teller as this ? But he faith Vjher faith fo de fuc~ 
 cef. Eccl. fag. 252. But all ftil] is falle : my book 
 there hath not fuch a word. Vfierj words are 
 fag. 207. and them alfo he moft horribly falhti- 
 eth. They are but thefe \_Bmnontm qnoqne Trc- 
 virornm Arch. Uiceceft fua expulijfe qiiofdam ex 
 Berengarii Setlatoribus qui illim Dolhrinam in 
 Eburombus At Hat ic is & aliis Belgii populi< dtf- 
 feminabant , narrat Tbuanus. "] That is, £ Thna- 
 nus faith that Bruno Arch-Bifhop of Trevers ex- 
 pelled out of his Diocefs fome of Bersngarius's 
 followers, who fowed his dodrine, &c. ~\ fo that 
 here is no talk of perfecuting Berengarms , but 
 fome of his followers, nor a word of Infant-ba- 
 ptifm. Was ever fuch a reporter as this man 
 before taken for a credible perfon ? I contefs I re- 
 member not that ever I read the like, among Pa- 
 pifts or any other Sed. 
 
 In Thuanus the words are found in his Epiftle 
 to the King before all his works, excellently dif- 
 fwading him from blood and perfection , and 
 there is not one fyllable of Infant- baptifm y but 
 only that which Vjher cited : yet durft this man 
 jiiftifie thefe horrid iaifhoods in a fecond Edition 
 and a Reply, 
 
 CHAP, 
 
(379) 
 
 CHAP. III. 
 
 pTKr. D.'s J 'unification of his flander of the Wal- 
 denfes, Confuted more largely. 
 
 $. i. TN his Reply/?. ioS.hereafTumeththisCa- 
 JL lumny. And firft he reciteih their Con- 
 frflion to prove it : as if he wanted matter to fill 
 his Book, not having one word againft Infant-ba- 
 ptifm in, that which is by himfelf recited : But it 
 rnuft be inferred, it fuch a man as this be to be 
 believed, becaufe faith is required fin the adult, 
 and them that Covenant for Infants ) and becaufe 
 Traditions and Inventions are difclaimed , and 
 .fuch like, Had the man dealt by the Waldenfes 
 but as he doth by me, when citing my words he 
 will prove that my words are for him while I am 
 againft him, (as if I underftood not what I fay ) 
 it had been much lefs. But to face down the 
 world that the WMdenfes denied Infant-baptifm 
 for fuch filly reafons , is intolerable. It is not 
 worth the labour to (hew him how the Prote- 
 ftants agree with the Waldenfes in all the points 
 where he feigneth adifagreement, f.112. 
 
 $. 2. Yet doth the man break out into admi- 
 ration that he having with exa&nefs given a 
 tarticnlar account of all thofe Confejfwns word 
 
 fir 
 
for wordy and proved by ample dewonflra- 
 
 tions , i # That none of them were extant till the 
 fix tee nth Century^ &c. 
 
 Anfw. Wonderful I That fuch a man fhould 
 talk of exattnefs and demonfiration. Stay Reader 
 a, little, and tell me whether it call not for (hame 
 and tears that one fuch Book fhould be written 
 by a Chriftian ? Much more that this calumny 
 fhould be thus over and over audacioufly jufti- 
 fied? 
 
 £.3. In Roger Wendover four chiefeft ancient 
 Chronicler, and one that he ofr citeih himfelf, 
 and therefore fhould have read ) In Hen. 2. fol. 
 $19. b* You have a Confeilion of the Tholoufians 
 called Boni homines in which are thefe words 
 c< £ Credimm etiam quod non falvatur quis , nifi 
 <c qui baptiz,atur - 4 & parvulos fidvart per ba- 
 iC pttfma. ~} That is, [_ We believe alfo that none 
 " is faved but he tpat is baptized , and that little 
 <£ children are hved by baptifm] ( For we find 
 that it was the denial of the laving virtue of 
 wicked Priefts baptifm ( to voung or old ) as 
 working ex opere operato^ fvhjch occasioned their 
 accufations : ) would you have a fuller proof? 
 
 Vjher de fticctf. Eccl. c6. p. 1 5 5, &c. giveth 
 us the Catalogue of their opinions as reported 
 by zALneas Sylvius ( after Pope Pius the fe- 
 cond ) ; where there is fomewhat of theirs againft 
 Confirmation . Chrifm, Extream Un&ion, &c. 
 but not a word againil Infant-baptifm • adding 
 the confent of Jacob.. Picolomin. Anton. Bon- 
 fn. Bern. Lutzenburg* Another Catalogue he 
 
(Ta«0 
 
 giveth out of the Magdeb. hift. Centur. 12. c. & 
 co/. 1206, 1207. as taken out of an old zJVf.S. 
 where is not a word againft Infant-baptifm : Yea 
 reciteth Will. Reynolds a bitter Papifts Catalogue, 
 where there is no fuch thing: Yea, mentioneth 
 nine poinrs more in which Parfons, Sanders ^Coc- 
 cins fay they differ from us , but none of this. 
 And ptg. z<\.i. c. 8. he tells you of Gretfers own 
 confeiiion that they were nene but the Waldenfes 
 that Hove den fpeaketh of, that made the fore-' 
 faid Confeflion, though accu fed of ArUnifm* Sec 
 more teftimonies of many others, fag, 306, 507, 
 308- 
 
 Tbuanus ( falfly cited by him as before of Be-. 
 rengarius) lib. 6. an. 2550. reciteth their opini- 
 ons, fag. 185, 186. not mentioning a word of 
 this ^ nay , telling us that fome falfhoods were 
 reported of them , doth not fo much as number 
 -this among the iidions. And fag. 188. he tells 
 you of an inquiry made into their Original and 
 Do&rine by GnL Bell. Lang<tns 7 commanded by 
 Authority thereto, wherein no fuch thing is men- 
 tioned of them, but their avoiding Popifh fuper- 
 ftitions. 
 
 In the fir ft Confeflion recited by Per in (f. 6?.) 
 they own baptifm, but fay not a word againft In- 
 fant-baptifm. 
 
 The fame is true of the fecond Confeflion re- 
 cited by him, /\ 62,63. 
 
 In the eivi ; f ftftn you have their Catechifm, 
 and the ttimm of their Do&rine out of feveral 
 of their ; id ; herein not a word againft 
 
 In- 
 
(352) 
 
 iftfent-baptifm , but exprefly they afTert it : Cap± 
 6. p.41, 42,43. in their Doctrine of the Sacra- 
 ments , they fay <c [_ And for this caufe we pre- 
 " Tent our Children in baptifm ; which they ought 
 "to do, to whom the children are neareft, as 
 "their Parents, and they to whom God hath gt- 
 u ven this chanty. 2 Juft as Wicklffi Judge 
 now of this mans words ? 
 
 <$. 4. " But his fecond Demonftratiort is from 
 "the wkne(s born againft it by fome of their 
 " moft eminent leading men , viit Berengarins , 
 cc Peter r Brtiis y Henricns Amoldtis — — - 
 
 jiifw. Berengarius is not ufed to be reckoned 
 as one of the Waldenfes i but if you will fo call 
 him, I have confuced the (lander of him be- 
 fore. 
 
 His proof againft Brais is Peter Clttniacenfisi 
 of whom I have faid enough to Mr. Tombcs which 
 I will not recite. 
 
 tf. 5. It is true that fome Papiils do raile at 
 the Waldenfes with abominable calumnies, as 
 guilty of the moft odious herefies, £ denying the 
 rdurre&ion, and the falvation of Infants, afTerting 
 the common ufe of women, and abundance fuch .* J 
 Infomuch that it is become a hard queftion whether 
 really there wereanv fuch people, or whether all 
 were ilanders : and among other things they 
 charge them With denying Infant-baptifm. And 
 the Authors go fo much on fame , and fliew fo 
 much falfhood, that many think that all are ficti- 
 ons. But Bilhop Vjlier ( de fnccef. EccL ) and 
 fome others bring many teftimonies to prove that 
 
 to 
 
(383) 
 
 in that age there were abundance of Mankhees 
 that came into Lombardie , and from thence came 
 into the country of the Waldenfes • and that for 
 their fakes the Papifts accufed the V/aldenfes of 
 all thefe villanies and herefies with Anabaptilm, as 
 if they had been all of a mind. And though I 
 confefs that the horrid lies of abundance of Pa- 
 pifts of Luther , Calvin , ZuingUns and other 
 fuch, and fome experiments in" this age, have gi- 
 ven men occafion to queftion whether all were 
 not meer forgeries, and that nothing is to be be- 
 lieved that they faid of thofe times ; yet I am 
 ready to think that there were fome fuch per- 
 fons as they defcribe that were againft the Re- 
 furre&ion, and for common uncleannefs, and de- 
 nied Infants falvation and baptifm, even fuch Ma* 
 mchees and Arrians as aforefaid : Not that I think 
 it any whit ftrange that fame among fuch world- 
 ly persecutors fhould belie others as much as this 
 comes to ; but becaufe of the hiftorical reports of 
 fuch Manic hers recited by Vjher ttbi fup. fag. 
 225, 226, dec. cap. 8. & Vignier Hi ft, Ectlef, 
 an. 1023. And that they falfly took thzWalden- 
 fes to have been of the Manichees'mmd , as li- 
 ving among them , is all the cloak that any rea- 
 fonabie charity can afford to thofe old ones that 
 falfly accufed th^n: : And to the later flanderers 
 (Conffordits, -."ifjer^ Sec.) this will be n© cloak, 
 much lels l» Mr. Danvers if in his zeal for his 
 Seel and way, he will own the (landers of blinded 
 Papifts, when he crieth them down himfelf, and 
 hath had time and means to know their calumni- 
 ation. To 
 
C3*4) 
 
 To all this, let the Reader add but the pertr* 
 fal AY the grofs contradictions of their accufers 
 againft each other, ( yea the fame Author as re- 
 ported by Coujfardus faying one thing , and as 
 published by Gretfer faying the contrary, I mean 
 Raynerius* ) And let him confider of the tefti- 
 hiony of Vignier concerning an old Copy of their 
 Doftrine fhevved to the great and excellent Chan- 
 cellour of France, Mich. Hofyitalius , wholly 
 agreeing with the doctrine of the later Walden- 
 fes, and renouncing only the Popifh fuperftiti- 
 ons : And the teftimony of Poflinerins that by ma- 
 ny old fragments and monuments which he had 
 feen, in the language of their Country, and by 
 the Ads yet kept of the Difputation between the 
 Bifliop of Jpamca and Mr. Arnolt, and by their 
 own Confclliqns which many afTured him they 
 had feen, the old Albigenfes doctrine was altoge- 
 ther conform to the P tare ft ants do£tri??e y Vjhc,- , 
 p. 308. cio. And then judge whether the charge 
 of Anabaptiftry, and all Jld*nichtan abhominatt- 
 ons be credible. 
 
 d . 6. ** But ( faith Mr. D. ) Cajfander teftifieth 
 <c in his Epiftle to the Duke of Cleve that Peter 
 " Briths and Henrkns denied baptifm to little 
 "ones, affirming that only the adult fhould be 
 <c baptized. 
 
 Anfw* Read but Cajfanders Trcf. and judge 
 of the Credit of this mans accufations. 1. Cap 
 jander faith , that it was the <L?Wanichees and 
 Prifcillianifts ( who were Gnoftickj faith ShI* 
 fit, Severn* who lived in- Trifcillians time ) 
 
 that 
 
- (385) 
 that brought in the errors aftef mentioned s by 
 him, which twarmed in Bernards daies - 9 Mid 
 that this Herefie bred them that were called 
 Catharifts^a. name belonging to one of the three feds 
 of dManichees : but in France they were called 
 Albigenjcs, from the place , and mat it was td 
 thefe Mankhean and PrifcilUan errours, that 
 they added the denyal of Infant-Baptilm. z\ 
 He faithj Peter Bruis^ and Henry ', feem to have 
 been the chief Authors of this addition - 3 but in 
 a far differing fenfe from the later Anabaptifts ^ 
 For Peter and Henry equally denyed Baptifm 
 and falvaiion to Infants, or any but actual belie- 
 vers. 3. And for the furmife of Peter and 
 Henry he taketh the word of Peter the Abbot 
 Qmiacenfis : fo that Caffander doth but what Mr. 
 D. doth, even report Qumaccnfh. 4. And he 
 . profeflfeth that the Waldenfes called Picards ■; 
 whofe relifts were in <dMoravia and Bohemia 
 to that day , |~ did approve and ufe Infant -Ba- 
 ft if m as confentaneom to the Gofpel^\zs I before 
 cited him. 
 
 t . 7. His next proof is [ u E)r. Prideaux faitfi 
 " in his Lot. Councils, that Peter Bntis and Ar- 
 " nold of Brixia, were in the fecond Laterane 
 " Council cenfured for the herefie of rejecting 
 u Infant- Baptifm, &c. ] 
 
 Anfw. I have feldom real an Author whofe 
 Proofs are liker one another : 1. Why 'mutt 
 we be told what Dr. Prideaux faith of the 
 ads of an old Council, as eafily known by us 
 as by him ? 2. Reader, there is not the leaft 
 C c proof 
 
( 3 86) 
 
 proof of any (uch matter medled with in thar 
 Council : Peter Crab doth not fo much a9 name 
 that Council : Jsiwjsi only tells you that thi 
 Alls of the Council are not extant , but that Ab- 
 bot Vrjpcrgenfis , and Otto frifutgenfis give us 
 fome account of what they-did, whole words 
 have not a fyllable about any fuch fubjeft, but 
 only that they condemned the Schifmaticks ; 
 who adhered to Peter Leo, an Antipope. 3. But 
 how came Dr. Prideaux fo to miitake ? Anfw. 
 Thofe Papers of Dr. Prideaux were pofthu- 
 tnous fhreds, which whether he would have own- 
 ed we cannot tell. But that which he faith , is 
 that there were thirty Canons lately publifhed 
 as that Council's, which Bellarmine himfelf reje- 
 deth as falfe : And feeing I never faw that for- 
 gery 1 cannot fay whether any fuch thing be in 
 it^ which Prideaux j words recite : But it muft 
 be from that or from nothing. And is this a 
 good proof for Prideaux to tell you what a for- 
 ged writing faith , which Crab and Bimiu and 
 Bellarmine ejtd or take for falfe ? 4. Buc what 
 if that Council had io accufed B>his and Ar- 
 nold, are they to be believed of them ? But 
 there is no fuch thing proved. 
 
 0. 8. His next proof is from Bernard, of 
 whom I need to fay no more than what Caf- 
 fander^ Vfier and others have oft faid , that it 
 was the forefaid Manicbean Hereticks called C*- 
 thanfls that Bernard defcribeth by the name of 
 A?oftolick> And that he went by fame (zsLeo- 
 dienfs did ) which falfly accufed the Albigenfcs 
 
 among 
 
among them as guilty of the fame hereiles • And 
 that the fame Bernard accufeth thofe that he 
 fpake of, of other heinous things ^ If you be- 
 lieve from him that the Aibigcnfes were guilty 
 of tb e one, you have the fame teftimony that they 
 were guilty of the other. 
 
 c 9. His next proof is the report of a. late 
 Papift 'fcf f- r tcecomes , Li.c. 1. Whom he.alfd 
 after, mtntioneth in his Reply , who as truly 
 numbreth Luther, Calvin, and Bez.a with the ad- 
 verfaries of lnfant-Baptifm. If fuch witnefiTes be 
 his proof, he could not have chofen better for 
 his turn than him and Cochlew , and fome fuch 
 calumniators, of which fort I could name him 
 more. 
 
 £. id. "His laft wicnefs is, Dr. Hammond 
 "confeffcth that Peter Bruit and Henry his 
 " Scholar and the Petrobrnfiani and Henricani 
 "that fprung from them bppofed Infant-Ba- 
 u ptifm. 2 
 
 Anfw i. Not a word of Dr. Hammonds 
 books is cited to prove this , but Mr. Tombes 
 nis Review. And muft we know of Mr.Tombes 
 what Dr. Hammond held ? No wonder then if 
 I and the world muft learn what I hold my felf, 
 and what I have written, from fuch asMr.D^- 
 vers and Mr; Tombes* And why not aifo from 
 all the reft that have written againft m§ } 
 2i I think it nut worth my labour to fearch 
 over Dr. Hammonds books to fee whether he 
 hath faid this or not : feeing I know that he 
 was my neighbour and lived fo lately that he 
 G c % had 
 
(388) 
 
 had no other means to know what thefe two 
 men and their followers held, than whit we and 
 others have as well as he. You mud give us 
 elder proofs than this. 3. And if ic were af- 
 ferted by him or proved by others, it were no 
 proof that the Waldenfes denyed lnfant-Baprifm ^ 
 but it would only follow that Bruis and Henry 
 were Mamchees and not Waldenfes, which feem- 
 eth to be the mi (lake of their later accufcrs at 
 lead. 
 
 tf* 11* Pag. 120. He proveth Mr. Wills 
 guilty c&unfaithfulrufs, want of confciencc, chea- 
 ting, forgery > and aiter, pag. 122. of manifold Ly- 
 ing. Becaufe, 1. He knoweth that Cluniacen- 
 fis — hath given no fuch wicked and falfe teftimo- 
 ny,&C And how proveth he that? [For both Oftan- 
 der and the Magdebt from whom he had it, 
 give an account of Fifteen particulars &c.] Anfw. 
 
 1. Doth that prove that Cluniac. hath no more? 
 
 2. Do they f t y that thofe fifteen are all ? 3. 
 And doth that prove that Mr. Wills knew it, 
 who never faith, that he ever faw Cluniac enfis 
 book > as it feems Mr. D. did nor. 4. Doth 
 Mr. £>* himfclf know ir, of a book never read ? 
 See how this accufer proveth Lyes ? For my part 
 I have not at hand either Cluniack^ or ofiander, 
 or the zJJfagdeb. and will not be at the labour to 
 get .and fearch them for nothing. 
 
 0. 12. Pag. 121. he faith , VHcknowesthat 
 thefe particulars he mentions, were not charged 
 on Peter Bruis 'but on tin Albigeo's tn the fol- 
 lowing Century by other hands than Bernard 
 
 and 
 
and Cluniacenfis who were dead long be- 
 fore. 
 
 Anfw. i. How know you another mans know- 
 ledge > 2. Long before what ? Before any ftich 
 accufations on i\\t Aibigenfis ? Read Bernards 
 Serm. 66. in Cant, Saith VjJier ( than whom 
 few men ever knew fuch matters better, or more 
 truly reported them) de fucccj. c. 8. p. 232. 
 Bernard Serm. 65. & 66. in Cant, mentioneth 
 their opinions -partly common with the Manichees, 
 partly with the Orthodox. And that the Mani- 
 chees were before among them he before prov- 
 ed at large, and that they ( called ^athari ) 
 were by ordinary error miftaken for Waldsnfes 
 and Leonifts. And p. 236. faith he [_ Sic £r 
 Apofiolick Bernards Clareval. Catharis Eckc 
 bertus Schnang. Popelicanis Cjuido Armorican. 
 at que Albigenfious Regordus Regu Franc. Chro- 
 nograph us y hare fin attnbuit quam Apofiolm prx- 
 
 dixerat deteftantem nuptias , gr cmnem 
 
 comedere prohibentem. (Which in Bernard and 
 Ecbertus are commonly to be feen ) Quod ut 
 de Manichetsin terra Albig. commorantibus tid- 
 mitti potefi , it a de toto Albig. genere dillum 
 falfijfimum effe conftat , five cum Thuano a Pet. 
 Valdo five cum Papir* Majfonio a Pet. Bruifio 
 
 eorum originem placeat repetere And p. 237, 
 
 238. he faith, A Petro Brufio & ejus fuccejfo- 
 re Henrico qui ( ut ex Pet. Cluniacenfi intelli- 
 
 gitur) per annos viginti dol}rmam fuam 
 
 dijfeminarunt Albigenfium fetlam deducit P. 
 
 AfaJfonitiSj Apoflolicos etiam dequtbus Serm. 
 
 Cc 3 66. 
 
(39®) 
 
 $6. in Cant. agit Rcrnardus, eofdcm ejfe tpiru~ 
 tnrTb>m* Waldenfis cum Publicanu. 
 
 $. 13. Pag. 123. he proveth that the Wal- 
 denfes did deny Infant-Baptifm , from the De- 
 crees of 12. feveral Princes, and Popes. For proof 
 of that he referreth us to his former book. When 
 I look there I find as cited p. 248, &c. his evi- ' 
 dence is as fqllowetli. 
 
 i. <c Dr. Vfher out pfihe Fragments of Aquit. 
 4c by P. Pithxm tells us, that in the time ofRo- 
 lc bert King o^f ranee, they of Aquit and Tbo- 
 " loufe, (principal places of the 'Waldenfe s ) did 
 "deny Baptifm ( for fo they called denying 
 " Baptifm to little ones ) &c. 
 
 Aafw. Mark Reader the truflinefs of this 
 man. 1. He maketh denying Baptifm ( to fig- 
 nifie ) only denying it to Infants , without a 
 word of proof • 2. He leaveth out the deny- 
 ing of our Redeemer , denying Lawful Marri- 
 age , and the eating of fiefo, dec, though con- 
 joyned in the teftimony. 3. He feigneth this 
 to be (kid of the Waldenfes, which is exprefly 
 (aid in the hiftory to be fpoken of the Adani- 
 cbees ? Is not this an excellent Prover ? The 
 words of Pitham hiftory cited by V[her de fuc- 
 cef. p. 229. are thefe, Ewerfijfe in Gallia Ma- 
 nich&os^ &'C. Pith, j Evcftigio exorti funt fcr 
 
 Aquitaniam Adanich&i feducentes fuadebant 
 
 negarc baptifmum , fignurn cruris, Ecclefiam, & 
 ipfum Redemptorem feculi , honor em SanBorum y 
 conjugia legit im a , efum carnium fimili mo- 
 de apud Tholefam inventi funi Afanichai, & 
 
(39i) 
 
 ipJJ igne crcmati funt : & per diver fa* Occi- 
 dents partes flfanicbai y exorti Of the real 
 
 prefence here is nothing. 
 
 $. 14. 2. Saith Mr. P. [ « Dr. Vfier a\Co 
 " tells us out of Pap. Maffon. that 14. Citizens 
 u of Orleans, were convict of the fame herefie, 
 li for denying Bapiifrnal grace , and the real 
 £C prefence, annd burnt alive, Herbert , Lifms and 
 cc Stephen — 
 
 Anfw. Here note, 1. The liiflory cited 6y 
 Vjlicr ( Johan. Fhriacenfis , referente Maffon.) 
 fasth, Q abnegabant facri baftifmi gratiam \ but 
 not a word of Infants : And it was known that 
 the Waldenfes opinion was that Priefls" did not 
 ex opere operato give the Holy Ghoft , norBa- 
 ptifm without the Holy Ghoft, fave any ( young 
 or old ). 2. It addeth that they denied pardon 
 of fin to be received, Marriage, meats which God 
 created, and fat. 
 
 f. 15. .3. He addeth, [Dr.Vfier telJs us, 
 . — Many of this Sect, were about Milan , 
 &c, 
 
 Anfw. Vjhers words are out of Chron. Her- 
 man. Contrail:. [] Quofdam htreticos, dec. certain 
 hereticks among other opinions of ill error , of the 
 Manichean S*#, execrating the eating of all Ani- 
 mals — were -hanged — J. j. He proveth by 
 this , that they were not the Waldenfes, but Ma- 
 nichees. 2. Not eating flejh is charged on'them, 
 3. But not a word there of Ttaptifm of young 
 or old. 
 
 Cc 4 f. 1$. 
 
( 39* ) 
 
 f. 15'. 3, He addeth, [ sAlfoout of Radulph. 
 Ard. - that fever al whom they Called the 
 
 Manichean Sett denyed c Baptifm, &c. J 
 
 Anfw. Note 1. Ardens words cited by Vjh- 
 er arc, | Tales [nut &c. Such are the Maniche- 
 
 an hcretickj at this time who faljly fay 
 
 they keep the life of the Apoflles •, faying that 
 they lie not y nor fwear at all j and on pretence 
 of abftinence , and continence , do damn eating 
 flefh and marriage : They fay that it is as hei- 
 nous a crime to go to a Wife^ as to a Mother ^ 
 or Daughter : They damn the Old Teflament : 
 of the New, fome they receive ^ and fume not : 
 and which is worfe y they predicate two Makers 
 of the World^ believe thatG od made Irnjifibles and the 
 Devil vifibles. So that they fecretly adore the Devil y 
 who they thinkjnade their bodies* The Sacrament of 
 the Altar they fay is meer bread rBaptifm they de- 
 ny : They fay none can be faved but by their 
 hands .; They deny the Refurretlion of the bo- 
 dy ~) 
 
 i. Here is not a word of Infants •, 2. They 
 are defcribed and called fully Manichees. 3 . If 
 this teftimony be true , believe it : If not, truft 
 it not , or at leaft forge not fuch words as are 
 not here. 
 
 $* 16. He addeth, [Tope Leo the Ninth in his 
 Deer etc to Bifbop Aquit. zbout 1050. commandeth 
 that young children be Baptized, becaufe of ori- 
 ginal fin ]. 
 
 Anfw» I will not turn to fte whether it be 
 (0 : but what . s this to the purpofe ? The Pope 
 
 bid§ 
 
(393) 
 •bids Baptize Infants ; Ergo not only the Marti- 
 chees hut the Waldevfcs denyed it ? I deny that 
 confequence. 
 
 c. 17. He adds, [ ^ Greg. 7. decreed 1070, 
 ct that thofe young children whofe Parents 
 "were abfent or unknown , fhould according 
 iC to the Tradition or the Fathers be Baptized.]] 
 
 Anfw. If this prove that the XValdenfes were 
 againft Infant- Baprifm , it will prove that Pa- 
 pifts, Proteftants and all are fo } what proving 
 is this }. Of Bernard (next cited) we fpake before. 
 
 0. 18. His next witnefs is, \_Ecbertm a great 
 DoElor againfl the Cathari^ dec. 
 
 Anfw. Note Reader, that this Great Dotlor 
 was a Monk , and after an Abbot - who faith 
 that cc the Catharifis againft: whom he wrote, 
 tfx* Deny and damn Marriage. 2. And all 
 eating of flefh , becaufe it comes by copulati- 
 on. 3. That they fay that the Devil made all 
 " flefh. 4, That they do not only fayBaptifm 
 " profTteth not' Infants, but more commonly 
 ^though more privately, that no water Baptifm 
 
 11 profueth any one to falvation And 
 
 * c that Chrift was not truly born of a Virgin , 
 <c nor had humane flefh , but a (hew of it , nor 
 <( rofe from the dead , but feemed to dkj and 
 "rife. They are Manichees : They keep the 
 " feaft of Manicheus death : That they hold 
 " that mens fouls are nothing but the apoftate 
 ? c Spirits caft out of heaven , which by good 
 4C works here may procure falvation : ~\ If all 
 this be true, werethefe thcWaldetifrs ? and is this 
 
 Mr. 
 
Mr. JU. proof — ** Bibliot. Pat. To. 4. p. 2. p. 
 
 79. £7"C. 
 
 9. 19. His next proof is, £ Erbrardus anothtr 
 great i o£lor 7 <kQ.2 
 
 Arfw. This Erbrardus profcfTeth to confute 
 in the hereticks that he dealeih with, 1. That 
 the Law is not of faith , but is to be repro- 
 bate 0>fo 2. He proveth it againft them that the 
 Prophets and Patriarchs are faved. 3. That 
 it was the true God that gave Mofes the Law. 
 5. That God made all things, and that they falfly 
 held a Good and a Bad Maker of the World. 
 6. That children fhould be Baptized. 7. That 
 it is lawful to marry. 9. For the Refurre&ion, 
 and foon. And are thefe Waldenfts and this man 
 to be believed of them too? 
 
 d. 20. PLrmingtnAm another great Writer is 
 his next ptocf. 
 
 Anjw. This Ermtngardus alias Ermengandus , 
 ( we pardon him the mi manning ) writeth a- 
 gainft Hereticks that hold, 1. That an evil God 
 made the World. 2. That there are two Gods, 
 a Good, and a Malignant. 3. That it was 
 not the true God that gave Mofes the Law. 4. 
 That Mofes was a Magician. 5. That Marri- 
 age is unlawful, and fo on as the reii, even to 
 the denyal of the Refurredion. And about 
 Bapcifm (Cap. iz.pag. 1249. BibLPat. To. 4. Part. 
 1. ) that Baptifm profits neither young nor old 
 without the impofition of their hands. J Is this 
 a good witnefs that the Waldevfes were againft 
 Infant-Bajtifm ? 
 
 Rea- 
 
(325) 
 
 Reader, I am almoft at the end of his proofs 
 hare , and yet Inve not patience thus to lofe 
 preciou,s time , in openinig the reft of his 
 abufes : The few remaining are like the reft I 
 Yet here he foundeth his proot of Twelve Decrees, 
 and endethwithan inlultaacn againft me and e> 
 thers. 
 
 $. 21, In. his Kef ly^ f. 125. he adds Rei- 
 neruts - y which giveth me occalion "to tell the 
 Reader, that if he will perufe this one Author, 
 he will better understand the truth of the whole 
 bufinefs , than by reading many confounders 
 that fpc'ak upon fame they know not what. 
 This Rbeixhcrus tells us, that he was one of 
 the Arch-hereticks, and among them feventeen 
 years ; that is the Catbarifis : He tells us up- 
 on his own knowledge, not only how many 
 forts of them there were , whom ( being then 
 ?n Inquifitor ) he calleth hereticks , but alfo 
 how majiy Churches the Catharifls had , 
 _and what number each Church had , and 
 where they were , and what every Se& 
 held , as different from the reft. Whereas ma- 
 ny ignorant writers of thofe times confound 
 them. From him we have diftinct notice that 
 the Manribecs. and Catharifls then held the 
 horrid herefies charged on the Waldenfes, and 
 that the Liomfls or Pauperes de Lugduno 
 (the true Waldenfes and Albigenfes ) were in- 
 deed free from them ^ and abouiW^r/fop and Church, 
 Government, they differed from thzPontificians as 
 the Protectants do • But for dodrinals (about Fre- 
 
 defti- 
 
(196) 
 
 destination, Free-will , Mans Power , Venial 
 fin, Juftification , Merit, &c. ) there is no re- 
 gardable difference charged on them. Cap. 5. 
 he giveth you a Catalogue of the Leomfis opi- 
 nions, of which twenty are againfb the Papal 
 Government : Then he faith, they damn the Sa- 
 craments of the Church : And here come in 
 the words cited by Mr. D. Where note, j. 
 That he maketh them fay that [Catcch>f,-n Xs 
 nothing^} 2. Item quod ablatio, qu& datnr In- 
 fantibm nihil profit. J That the wafhmg which 
 fs given to Infants, profits not. •£ 3. That the 
 Godfathers underhand not what they (l?onld an- 
 fwer to the Friefi. ] 4. That they rejefi exor- 
 
 cifrr.es , and the bcnedillions of Baptifm- 
 
 that a Prteft in mortal fin may not confecraie 
 the Sacramenty &c. _} And let the Reader note 
 thatthePopifh doctrine then was, tha: all Baptized 
 Infants were certainly faved, becaufe Baptized, 
 how wicked foever the Parents , Pweft , and 
 Godfathers were : And that all thefe (Triefts, 
 Parents, and Godfathers J were then (0 often grofly 
 ignorant and wicked, as became tie fcandalof all 
 good people. And note that here Rcinhe- 
 rus faith not that they rej cited Baptifm of In- 
 fant s y nor held it unlawful, but that, 1. Ab- 
 lutio, the outward waging. 2. Qua datur y 
 which- de fatlo was then giien Infants, 3. Ni- 
 hil profit y profits nothings plainly meaning no 
 more but that the children of wicked igno- 
 rant Parents, prefented by Godfathers that know 
 not ^o much as what to anfwer the Prieft, and 
 
 Ba- 
 
Baptized by Wicked Priefts who tell them that ex 
 opcre operato ihey are now certainly in a flate 
 ofr falvation , are not faved by this wafhing , 
 unlefs they have alio the Baptifm of the ipi- 
 ric , which is not this way afcertained to 
 them. 
 
 And accordingly they meant of Catechizing ^ 
 that is, of the Popiih Catechizing only • And 
 of the other Sacraments , as under the Popifh 
 notion of a Sacrament which giveth grace ex * 
 cpere operato. And when he faith that £ Sa- 
 cramentum Con'jugii damnant ~\ he openeth the 
 rnyftery of that accufation. i . They denyed Mar- 
 riage to be a Sacrament, 2. And he faith [Di- 
 ce ntes mortaliter peccare conjuges^ fiabfque fpe 
 frolis conveniant. J It feems they were too ri- 
 gid for Chaflity , but not againft Marri- 
 age. 
 
 c. 22. And that this is the true meaning of 
 Reinherm appeareth, 1. By the phrale of the 
 contexr. 2. In that he never cfrcreth to con- 
 fute any fuch error of theirs, as the denyal of 
 the lawfulnefsof Infants Baptifm. 3. Andfpeak- 
 i g Cap. 6. of the Grtbibtpfcshi further expound- 
 ed all £ Paw tills vero non predeft niji fuerint 
 pcrfetti in fell a ilia ~] the words before being 
 £ De baptifmo dicnnt^ cnod nihil valeat 5 n'tfi 
 ^quantum vale ant merit a •Daptiz.ant'n. ~] §P that it 
 is not Antiy&dobaptifm that he uccufeth them of, 
 but thac Baptifm profited! no: Infants unkfs th: 
 Baf timers ( or Parents) be good-, that is, as afore- 
 said, when done by wicked Priefts to the children 
 of the wicked* £-23. 
 
C. 23. And for further evidence , the next 
 Hiftorian added by Gretfer, ( Bibl. Patr. Tc. 4. 
 Fart. 2. p. 776. ) Pet. Piitchdorf feemeih one of 
 the molt learned and acquainted vviih what he wro:e 
 ok any other that have then vvritten agairrft the 
 IVaUenfes, and he refutcth their opinion of the 
 invalidity of Sacraments, when adminiftred by 
 wicked Preifts, c. 16, 17* But never faith a word 
 of their denying Infaut-Baptifm , even when 
 he accurately and copioufly in Thirty fix Chap- 
 ters reckons up and confutcth their differences 
 from the Papal Church. And can we think fuch 
 a man ( and almoft all that confound them not with 
 the Catharifts that were Manichees ) would over- 
 look this, in fuch a p^rfecuting bloody time - 
 when they racked every word of the poor diffen- 
 ters to make a herefie of it ? 
 
 $• 24. To Pilichdorf is added another accu- 
 rate confuter of their opinions , that hath not a 
 word of any fuch charge. 
 
 And next is added an exad Catalogue of theif 
 f fuppofed) errors to the number of Thirty fe- 
 ven , and not a word of this among them 
 all. 
 
 • And next is added the M)diu examinandi h&- 
 rcticos ; And next dc er ambus Begehurdorum ; 
 and have not a word of it* 
 
 What ,the Papift do&rine was you need no 
 better informer than Lucm Tndenfis foregoing 
 ( Part, 1*636. who writeth again i\ worfe per- 
 ions ( though Gretfer intitleth it againft the Al~ 
 bigcnfcs ) and yet chargeth them not with this ) 
 
(399) 
 viz.. Cap. i. li. 2. T In cafe of necejfity every 
 tizophytcmaybe Bapuz.cd^of any Lay-man^ Jew, 
 Htrttu'^y or Gentile. But for the dignity of 
 the Sacrament it mufi be done by a Prelbyter or 
 Deacon , if there be opport unity , and received 
 from any other , it is not at ak to be iterated, By 
 this Sacrament , both Infants and adult are Rege- 
 nerated of Water , and the Spirit 5 and receive re- 
 mtjfign of all fws y with the adoption of the children 
 of God. 
 
 <$. 25. If all this will not clear the Waldenfes 
 at Mr. D.\rbarr, and if he look that we ihould 
 take notice of his Dutch Martyrologie^ and his 
 MemingW) let him that erreth, err ftill. 
 
 CHAP. 
 
C4 co ) 
 
 CHAP. IV. 
 
 His Impenitence in Calumniating the Donatifts 
 (and Novatians ) reprehended. 
 
 $. i. T}4g. 1 3 2.. of his Reply he returneth to 
 JL this notorious calumny, and charging 
 Mr. IVilles with difingenuity he falls to his wont- 
 ed way of proving , i . From Sebaftian Frank 
 and Twisk^ whom I neither have at hand, nor 
 am obliged to believe in telling me what the Do- 
 natifls held , nor to believe thac Mr. D. here fo 
 differs from himfelf, as truly to report them; 
 Once fur all, It is ufual with Writers to charge 
 the Anabaptifts as following the Dmatifts in Re- 
 baptizing, but not in denying Infant-baptifm : For 
 the Donatifts baptized again both Infants and adult. 
 And it is like this deceived this temerarious man. 
 
 £.2. Next he repeateth his falflioods of Cref- 
 conius, Fulgentius , Vine. Viftor^ which I have 
 (hewed to be done in great temerity. 
 
 5f . 3 . Thirdly he repeateth his ftupendious ilan- 
 der of Auftin as with much x^eal and fury in 
 many Books oppofmg the Donatifts for denying In- 
 fant-baptifm^ of which in them all ( ?s far as I 
 can find ) he hath not one fyllable, but the clear 
 contrary, as is proved by me. 
 
 £. 4. Becaufe Eckbertus and Emericus charge 
 the Waldenfes herein as conforming to the Dona- 
 tifts rfffd Novatian?; 1. It was not the Waldenfes 
 
 they 
 
(4°0 
 they (pake of as I proved, but the Manicheari 
 Catharifts ; 2. Or if they confounded them they 
 Wronged them-, 3. And if they fay as he report- 
 eth , they belied the Donatifts -, and why then 
 fhould I believe them ? 4. But this time-robber 
 hath tempted nae once more to perufe Eckbertpis 
 tht Abbot, and to read his Serm, 7. and 8. and 
 where-ever this fubjedt is his theam, and I find 
 not one fy liable of any fuch matter in him of ei- 
 ther Donatifts or Novatians jfuch a man have we 
 now to deal with. 
 
 £. The reft of his recitals are riot worthy the 
 recital : The Anfwer before given is fufficient, 
 Only I fay again that his contempt of fo full a 
 teftimony as the Decree of a Council at that time 
 
 ifor receiving without rebaptizing fuch as the 
 )onatifts baptised in Infancy^ cited by C«fa n - 
 der as a certain proof, is a proof that there is 
 jvorfe than a weak judgement in fault. 
 
 j>& CH'AP, 
 
 
( 402) 
 
 CHAP. V. 
 
 
 Hi* renewed Calumny of the old Br it tains re- 
 
 ffoved. 
 
 f. i. Ty Epeating and defending Fabians fop-' 
 1\_ P e ry> he argueth that it could be no- 
 thing elfe in which they- are [aid to contradict 
 the Apofiolick^ Catholic^ Chilrch t Anfw. i. If 
 Beda lay that Augttftine tells them that in many 
 things they do contrary to the Roman Catholic k^ 
 and the Apoftolicl^Chnrch , doth it follow that 
 the three things in which he requireth their con- 
 currence were all part of thofe many ? To preach 
 the Gofpei to the Saxons was one. Is that a 
 point that they differed from all the Apoftolick 
 Church in ? When it feemeth to be from no 
 oilier reafon, than that they would not own the 
 Saxons that had conquered them , nor the Papal 
 power that would ufurp upon them : And on 
 the fame reafon they might as well refufe to ba- 
 ptize the Saxons children. 2. But there is no 
 inch thing in the words of Hede, as I have (hew- 
 ed [~ but according to the wanner of the Church 
 of Rome , &c. ] And who knoweth not that 
 the Church of Kume , and all in its communion 
 then called the umintfal Ckmk, ufcdin baptifa, 
 
 the 
 
(403) 
 
 r he White Garment ^the taftihg Miik^md Hony^and 
 Chryfme , as an .jipoftolical tradition or fuch as 
 they knew no original of ? Tertullian and Epi- 
 pbstniHs alone are full witnefTes of this, if there 
 were no more. 
 
 $. 2. There is nothing in the reft that I think 
 needeth a word more of anfwer than I before 
 gave. And I fear being guilty of idle Words and 
 loft time in writing needlefty. 
 
 Dd 2 CHAP, 
 
(A°4) 
 
 C H A P. V I. 
 
 Of his venturous report of Bijhop 11 (hers cenfure 
 of me, 
 
 IN his Reply pag.^i* he faith [_ 1 have anho- 
 nourable regard to his perfon , and due value 
 to his labour s, efpecially where he has laid outhim- 
 felf to promote practical holinef ( and wherein 
 as 1 have judged his grcatcfi excellency lies ) 
 fuppofng had he let £ontroverfus alone, and ad- 
 dicted him f elf thereto , he would much more have 
 furthered the pejee and union he pretends to pro- 
 mote : It having been, as I have heard, a judge- 
 ment that Bifiop Ufher made of him, that if he 
 perfifted in Polemical writings , he was like to 
 prove a trouhler, rather than a promoter of peace. ] 
 Here, i . See how he feareth not to make re- 
 ports of the dead by this hcarfay ? No wonder if 
 by this fort of men I my felf am by backbiting fo 
 frequently traduced, and faid to Preach and Print 
 that which never was in my mouth or books or 
 thoughts ? 
 
 2. Should one ask him whom he heard this 
 from , do you think we (hould get a fatisfying 
 anfwer ? No one. is here named. 
 
 3. It is poiiible BHhop Vficr upon the coming 
 forth of my Aphorilms (which had many crudi- 
 ties, and many quarrelled at it more than there was 
 caufejmight fear any thing that looked like unufual. 
 
 4« But 
 
4- But I ask the Reader whether this be a 'pro- 
 bable report, when he underftandeth, 
 
 i. That I was for fome weeks familiar with the 
 Bifhop, and he never fpake a fy liable to me of 
 fuch importance. 2. That when Dod. Kendal 
 and I were together with him, and our queftion 
 was what was Auguftins jugement of Redemption, 
 Per -fever ance, and fome other things, he exprefly 
 averred that my AfTertion in all ihofe was the 
 truth. 3. But I imagine this following might be 
 the occation of the report. Dr. Kendal had fome 
 acquaintance with and interefl in the faid Arch- 
 Biihop , ancl he having written two difputations 
 againft me , I had anfwered the firft , and had 
 drawn up part of the anfwer to the fecond : But 
 Mr. Vines and Dr. Kendal defired me to meet at 
 Biiliop V fliers lodging in order to the ending of 
 our difference. There the Bifhop motioned that 
 we fhould promife to write againft each oiherno 
 more : which we did, and I caft by what I had 
 begun. But yet DocT. K. after in a Latine Trea- 
 tife broke that promife (which occafioncd my 
 verfes. in the end of my Difpute of the Object of 
 Juflifying Faith againft Mr. Warner y which fome 
 underftood not. ) Now it is not unlikely that the 
 Bifhop might fay that if Dr. K. and 1 perfifted in 
 that Difpute, it would but trouble the Church. 
 I am fure he faid no more to me, nor fo much. 
 
 As for Mr. £>.'s judgement, I deferve' not the 
 
 honour he giveth me, but indeed I think that of 
 
 moft men that I have Had to deal with in that 
 
 kiad, he is one* of the unfirteft to make himfeU a 
 
 Dd 3 Judge, 
 
Judge, who U fit to meddle with C or.tr over fie y 
 or to judge him f elf much fitter than me. Doubr- 
 lefs his knowledge hath coft him much lefs time 
 and ftndy than mine hath done me ; And if his 
 advantage be in greater illumination of Gods Spi- 
 rit , as I ferioufly profcfs to fear left I fhculd 
 want it, for my manifold fins againft the Spirit, 
 and therefore have caufe moft earneftly to beg for 
 it •, fo I could wi'li that he had better manifeited 
 it, than in thefe two Voluemshe ha:h done : at 
 leaft by an ordinary humane friendship to histori- 
 cal truth. For my part I had never more pub- 
 lilted any thing in this caufe, if my fenfe of tbc 
 hurt and danger of their Separations and Divilions 
 of Chriftians, and deftru&ion of Love and Peace, 
 had not moved me much more , than any great 
 Zeal againft bare rebaptizing, in it felf confidcrtd, 
 efpecially if hypothetically done. 
 
 Poft- 
 
(4°7) 
 
 Poftfcript. 
 
 s 
 
 '/« *• ^^t^ nce tne writing of this, I have 
 perufed Smaragdiu, Peter Abbas 
 ClnniacenfiSy and Bernard^ which 
 were not before at hand. And 
 
 I fhall give you a true account of their teftimo- 
 
 nies. 
 
 I. As for Smaragdtu, I never before read 
 him, but on this occafion getting his expofition 
 on the Epiftles and Gofpels I find that there is 
 a great agreement indeed among Mr. Danvers 
 witnefTes, that in his citations he is ftill like him- 
 felf. 
 
 tf, 2. Smaragdpis on i Vet. 2. in olh Pafch, 
 fol. 87. faith, £ Sinite parvulos 'venire ad me, 
 taliam enim eft regnum ccelomm : Hanc enim fan- 
 ftam^ ptram & innocentem infantiam, par baf- 
 tifmi gratiam cafta mater gignit Ecclejia ] 
 That is ^faffcr little children to come to me , for 
 of [neb is the Kingdom of God ^ " For this ho- 
 Dd 4 iy 
 
(408.) 
 
 "lypute and innocent Infancie , the Church 
 u their chaft Mother dotfi by the grace qi Ba-. 
 " ptifm beget."] 
 
 tf. 3. And on Mar. 16. in Afcenf. fol. ioi, 
 £ Cum autem dicatur , Qui vero non crediderih 
 condemnabitur, quid hie dicimm de parvulis, qui 
 per at at em adhuc credere non vaknt i Nam de 
 major ib 114 nulla qnafiio eft : In Ecclefia ergo 
 falvatoyis per alios parvuli credunt, peat ex all- 
 is ea qua tll'is in b apt if mo remit tiwtur peccata 
 traxerunt.'] That is, \_ He that believeth and ts 
 Baptized foall be faved, &c. But when it is faid, 
 'But he that believeth not jhall be condemned y what. 
 fay vpe here to little ones who by their age are 
 not yet able to believe ? For of the elder there 
 is no que ft ion. therefore in the Church of our 
 Saviour j little ones believe by others, as- from 
 others they have drawn thofe fins which, tn Ba- 
 ft ifm are forgiven to them. 
 
 4. 4. And m fab. Pentecoft. in Aft. 19./0/. 
 103, 104. having at. large opened how Cate- 
 chumens we-re inftruBed before Baptifm , and 
 defcribed approve dly their Ceremonies , of 
 crcjjing, breathing on them, exorcizing, fait-, the 
 Creed to be recited and under food , he addeth, 
 
 Quia eroo Parvitli, necdum ratione utentes % 
 mc mmime cap ere poftunt , oportet ut cum ad . 
 imtelligibilcm at at cm pcrvenermt, doceantur & 
 filci facramenta & confcffionis myfteria, ut ve- 
 raciter credant , & diligenxi cura cuftodiant 
 confeflhnem Juam n plane diximm ; quia, quam- 
 jzujf 1 IU necaum loqui pojfunt , pro i His & con<* 
 
(4op) 
 
 foefitur & loquuntur -qui cot de lavaero f otitis 
 fafcipiunt* Nee immento ; dignum eft ut qui alio- 
 rnm peccatis obnoxii font) aliorum etiam confef* 
 fiane, per minifierium baptifmatid, remiffionem 
 originalinm percipient peccatorum, 3 That is [ But 
 feeing little ones that have not yet the ufe ofreafon 9 
 cannot receive thefe things, it is meet that when they 
 come to age of understanding they be taught both the 
 Sacraments of faith and the my fiery of confeffion jhat 
 they may truly believe, and by diligent care may keef 
 their confeffion : And not mdefervedly : It ts meet {or 
 worthy ) that they who are obnoxiom to {or by)others 
 fins, by others confeffion alfo Jhonld by the my fiery of 
 Baptifm y receive the pardon of original fins. \ 
 
 55. 5. Yet it's true that this fame Author doth 
 oft call- for confeffion from the aduk, and per- 
 fwade men not to truft to meer outward bapti- 
 zing, as may befeen on 1 Cor. p.fol. 30. crc.Buthe 
 could reconcile this to Infant-Baptifm, though Mr. 
 D. cannot. See him further fol. 85. c. in Math.zS* 
 andfol.8j.in 1 Pet t $.& foh84.dHfol.19.Hi Jfa.6o* 
 
 tf. 6. II. As to Pet. Cluniacenfis (another 
 Abbot near the fame time , and r contemporary 
 with Bernard ) he is the moil plaufible of all 
 Mr. D.'s witnefTes , as againfV two men, Pet. 
 Bruit, and Henry : But, 1, Fol. 1. Epift, I. 
 he writeth Twenty years after Peters fowing his 
 doctrine. 2. And though Henry lived in his 
 time, yet fol. 2. he faith , \ Sed quia cum ita\ 
 fentire vel prdtdicare , nondum mihi plene fide* 
 faffa- efi 7 differs refponfionem qmufque & horum < 
 
 qua 
 
£»<* dicttntur indnbitatam habeant certitudinem j 
 chat is, ( having called Henry the heir of Peters 
 voicksdncfs , who rather changed than mended 
 his Devilliflj dotlrine ) "But becaufe I have not 
 "yet teftimony. fully credible Cor am not fure ) 
 H that he fo tbinketh, and preacheth , I delay 
 "my anfwer till I can have undoubted cerr 
 <c tainty of the things reported ]. By which 
 it is plain that he knew neither of them , 
 but went by that fame , which commonly then 
 ilandered them. 
 
 f. 7. 3. And in his firft Propofal fol. 7. 
 ( of Hoffmeifters Edit. ) he reciteth the words 
 fuppofed to be theirs , in which they deny as 
 much the Salvation as the Baptifm of all In- 
 fants. Ex his domini verbis Mar. 16. aperte 
 fnonftrant , nullum nifi credidertt , (£• baptiz.a« 
 tm filer it , hoc eft y nifi (fiorifiianam fidem ha- 
 buerit & baptifmum perceperit , poffe faiuari : 
 Nam non alterum horum , fed utrumque pariter 
 falvat : Vnde Infantes^ licet h vobts baptiz.cn- 
 ttir , quia tamen credere , objlante <ttate^ non 
 •poffunt , nequaquam falvantur. \ So that it is 
 the falvation of any Infants that they principal- 
 ly here deny ^ accounting Baptifm needful to 
 falvation. 
 
 $. 8. "And fol. 8. He addeth their next 
 " charge that fama vulgavit , fame reported , 
 " that they wholly believed not Chrift^Prophets^or 
 "Apoftles, the Old or New Teftamenr. Sed 
 quia fallaci rumorum monflro non facile affcnfum 
 prabere debeo ( maxime cum quidam vos totum 
 
 di- 
 
divinum Canonem abjeciffe ajfirment } m alii quA* 
 dam ex iffo vos Jufcepifje contendant ) c it! pare 
 vos de incertis nolo \: Where he fully confefTeth 
 that he knew them not, but went by fame, and 
 that he fufpetted himfelf this fame to be ialfe , 
 calling it a Monfter , and proving it contrary t» 
 it fejfy and profefling that he ought not to be- 
 lieve it : But yet left it fhould be true, hegoeth 
 on to prove the truth of the Scriptures, as he 
 doth Infants falvation and Baptifm. 
 
 £. 9. Now I leave it to the Reader,among many 
 uncertainties, which of thefe he will believe moft 
 probable : 1. That all the parties were ilande- 
 red : 2. Or that Peter and Henry were flan- 
 dered by occafionof the mixed Manichees, or by 
 the vulgar lying levity or Popifh malice, 3. 
 Or whether Peter and Henry were guilty as 
 fome now, though the reft were not. 4. Or 
 whether they and the Albigenfes and Walden- 
 fes, really denyed all Infants falvation and Ba- 
 ptifm ( their very pretended words being cited.) 
 5. Or whether they were flandered as to In- 
 fant- falvation , and not as to their Baptifm. 6. 
 Or whether all this rofe not from their denying 
 the falvation of the children of all the wicked, 
 as ex of ere operato, by the Baptifm of the Prieft, 
 and their rcfufing to bring their own children 
 to be Baptized by fuch Priefts, and their- telling 
 the wicked at age , that their Infant-Baptifm 
 would not fave them. Believe which of thefe you 
 find moft caufe. 
 
 £. 10. Ill* 
 
• 
 f. 10. III. As (or Bernard , r. Though at 
 holy man, yet his conceit that Papal unity was 
 necefTary, and that the DifTenterscaufedconfufion, 
 tranfported him with fuch prejudice againft them, 
 as we have now againft the vikft Sccls. 2. He 
 was acquainted with Clnniacenfis and might be- 
 lieve him. 3. He took things on truft as he did. 
 4. He chargeth even- the fecret hcreticks that 
 he writes againft, as holding it unlawful tofwear, 
 and yet lawful to for (wear , rather than reveal 
 their cafe -.Scrim. 65. 5. And that in fee ret 
 they are reported to commit filthy wicked/?fs, 
 not to be named, 6. That he heareth that fome 
 of them rejed Pauls writings , and? the Old 
 Teftament. 7. That they lived fcandaloufly with 
 Women : and he talketh as if it were impoili- 
 ble for men and women to dwell tjgether, and 
 yet to be chaft. 8. Yet fheweth that he moil un- 
 chariiably fufpefted them, faying, \_ Sifidemzn- 
 terrogeSy nihil foriftianiHs • fi converfationem, ni- 
 .hil trreprehenftbiiim ; & qua, loquitur, fattis pro- 
 bst : Videos hominem in teflimonwm faa fidei 
 freqnentare Ecclefiam , honor are prefbyteros y of~ 
 Jarre mnnw fnnm y confejftonem facer e , facra- 
 rnentis communicare ( and did they deny Infant- 
 Baptifm then ? ) Quid fdeliiu ? Jam quod ad vi- 
 tarn morefque fpettat, neminem concHtn, neminem 
 circumvenit^ neminem fitter gr edit ur , pallent or a 
 jejuniis , panem non comedtt otiofm > cperatur 
 manibus qntbm <vitam fuftentat ; XJbi jam VhU 
 pes i:~] And what's the proof again!! them, ffi'- 
 
 ne- 
 
C4*3) 
 
 ncarww demolttio teflatur vnlpem : Mulicres rt- 
 lift is viris^ Q- viri dtfmjjls uxcribtts, ad ifios 
 fe conferunt : clerici & facerdotes populis Ec- 
 clefitfque relittis intonfi & barbati apnd cos, in- 
 de textores & textriccs piernrnque mventi [ant. 
 jhfinon grav^ demolitto ijta $ Annon opera vulpi- 
 nm hxc f ] And the way he appoints for their 
 purgation is to put women out or their houfes. 
 9. Serm. 66. he chargeth them for being 
 againjt Marriage, yez that they ' took^filthinefs 
 to be only in having Wives. 10. And with for- 
 bidding to Marry, they joyned abflaining from 
 meats ; and fo holding devilifh dodtrine : But 
 that fome allowed Marriage only to Virgins, 
 .but noc fecond Marriages : That they abhorred 
 Milk ,• and ail that was made of it, and all that 
 was procreated by generation, and that ( de in- 
 fanta Manichdii.) That they held themfelves on- 
 ly to be the Church , and derided them that 
 Baptized Infants : ( yet he himfelf writes large- 
 ly Ep. ad Hug. de Santto Viftore, for the fal- 
 vation of perfons that have faith, and die unba- 
 ptrzed through neceflity ♦, alledging Ambro[e y 
 Ah ft in y Cyprian -, And concludeth Infants faved 
 by others faith, as they were guilty by others 
 fin.) 11. In Epifl. ad Hildefonfam he faith, 
 of Henry by name, that he was an Apoftate, 
 that made a trade of preaching, to live by in ne- 
 ceflity, and what money he eould get of fimple peo- 
 ple and women more than found him food, he fpent 
 in playing at dice, or other more filthy uies : 
 that alter his daies applaufe by the people he was 
 
 found 
 
CM) 
 
 found at night with whores : that he thus left 
 every where fuch a ftink behind him, that he 
 could come but once to a place, naming many 
 Cities. 
 
 Now let the Reader judge if Bernard be 
 to be believed what a man ; this was : If not, 
 what his teftimony is worth. 
 
 AS I am writing this, the Hawkers are cry- 
 ing under my window , Mr. Baxters Ar- 
 guments for Believers, &c. The men that cite 
 Authors at this rate, cite me againft my felf, 
 with the like confidence : Becaufe I have prov- 
 ed in my Treat, of Confirmation, the neceflity of 
 perfonal Profeffion in the Adult : And he that 
 will think that fuch dealing as this doth need an 
 anfwer , and that if the Adult muft make an intel- 
 ligent profeffion, Infants muft not be Baptized, 
 let him be ignorant •, for I have not time to fa- 
 tisfie him. 
 
 4 
 
 FINIS, 
 
 

 ; Infant Baptifm Afferted and Vin- 
 dicated by Scripture and Antiquity, 
 in Anfwer to Mr, Henry DanVers ? 
 with a full detection of his Mifre- 
 prefentation of Divers Councils and 
 Authors both Ancient and 'Mo- 
 dern, &c. By 0. Wills: Sold by Jo. 
 ^bhfon at the Golden Lyon in St. 
 Paul's Church -yard. 
 

 
it» ~* v 
 

 * 
 
 4 
 
 
 <$£j>, 
 
t ? 
 
 v ^^%i»"'*v 
 
 
 *%'•# 
 
 
 ■"it 
 
^t, m ' 9 . V 
 
 3ft 
 
 m 
 
 v -'