(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
See other formats

Full text of "More proofs of infants chruch-membership and consequently their right to baptism: or A second defence of our infant rights and mercies. In three parts. The first is, the plain proof of Gods statute, or covenant for infants church-membership from the creation, and the continuance of it till the institution of baptism; with the defence of that proof against the frivolous exceptions of Mr. Tombes. And a confutation of Mr. Tombes his arguments against infants church-membership. The second is, a confutation of the strange forgeries of Mr. H. Danvers against the antiquity of infant-baptism ... The third part is, animadversions of Mr. Danvers's reply to Mr. Willes .."








Confequcncly their Ri^hc to 


Or a SecondDefence of 

. our Infant Rights and Mercies. 

_ ♦...■■ 

In Three Parts. 

The Firft is, The plain Proof of Gods Statute, or 
Covenant for Infants Church- mcmberfhip from the 
Creation, and the Continuance of it till tlie Inftiruti- 
on of Eaptifm •, with the Defence of that Proof againfl 
the Frivolous Exceptions of Mr. Tombes. 

And a Confutation of Mr. Tambfs his Arguments againft 

Infants Church- niembernii p. 
The Second is, A Confutation of the Strange Forgeries of i 
Mr. H, Danvsrs againft the Antiquity of Infaut-baptifni, j 
And of his many Calumnies againft my Self arid 

With a Catalogue of fifty fix New Commandments and 
Doftrines, which He, and the Se^aries who joyn with 
Him in thofe Calumnies fcem to own. 

1 The Third Part is, Animadverfions on Mr, Dan-^erss Re- 

I ply to Mr. irlUcs, ,^^ 

i Extorted by their unquiet Impormnity from an earncft 

i Defirer of the Love and P^ace of all True Chriftian^^. 

Bv Richard B^xier 

London^ Printed for lY. 5/>;//;flw at the P///;^'-/ A)ks, and 
y. Roiirf.r, attheu<'/i/7-Lvo/.' in Sr. F.;.-'/'s Cir.:rrh->aro. 16-7^. \ 

V-) »■ 

The Preface. 


THefirfi year of 'my Miniflry I fell 
into A doubt about Infant-Ba- 
ptifm • dnd I was fo ignorant 
as not to underfiand the na- 
ture of that [olemn Covenant and Invejli- 
ture 5 and the Parents duty of entring 
the child into the Covenant with God y 
and what the Vow was which then was 
made : when time^ and light had fattsfied 
me^ I retained as charitable thoughts of the 
Anabaptifts, as of almofi any that I coffer- 
ed from. About 16465 1647^, 1648. they 
made more Jlir among us th an before : Mr. 
Tombes living near me 5 we continued in 
feace^ not talking of our difference ; For 
Ipurpofely avoidi^d it in publick and pri- 
A J vate, 

The Preface. 

'v Ate ^ unless Any asked, my opinion. At lajt 
his Converts came to me^ and told me that 
if I vpoidd net anfwer him in vpriting^ 
they mujl take it as an encouragement to 
them to be Baptized • and confejfed that 
he fent them^ or that they came by hu 
consent : To avoid long tvrhings^ one dayes 
difpute rvas thought a jhorter' way, ~ That 
difpute with many additions I was ne- 
ceffitated to pMtp ; with fome returns 
to [ome after arguings of Mr, T.V. He 
wrote what he thought meet on the 
other jide. I thought I had done with that 
work for ever: But in 1655 he fent to 
me again ^ and drew from me the Letters 
here recited. Thefe without my confe»t he 
fublijfjcd 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 againft me, 
I thought It not lawful for me to wajle my 
precious time on things fo little necejfary: 
A man . 7f/ay find words at length to fay 
foralmofi any caufe. I partly know what 
can be faidagainjl this^ and every book that 
J have written. And I know what / inn 
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 j and fo talk 


The Preface. 

c» till tpe hAve vfirangled arvay curChwr 
cy and our Time : und maft all this h^ 
frinted^ to enfmre poor renders ? But at 
laJtMr. Dan vers hath laid a neceffity upon 
me : / had filently paji pver all his uain 
Rea^oningSy and all hii accusations of my 
roritings^ and all hts falfifications of Authors^ 
had he net called me fo loud to repent of 
flandering fome for being Baptized naked; 
And when I found it my duty to [peak to 
thatp I thought tt fit to fay fomewhat of 
the rejl , pafftng hy what Mr. Wills hatk 
done more fully m an anfrver to his book, 

'There Are trvo forts of men called Ana- 
baptifts among us : The one fort are fiber 
Godly chriftians y rvho when they are re- 
baptized to fatUfe their Confidences^ live 
among us in Chrtflian Love and peace • and 
I {ball be afhamed if I Love not them as 
heartily y 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^ and other 
lovers of peace. And if God would per- 
fwade them hut ferioujly to think of thefe 
A 4 obvi- 

The Preface; 

ohviotis quefiions^ it might fometohxt Jiop 
them. Qa. I. How inconfiderable a fart of 
the univerfal Church they hold communion 
vptth ? And unchurch almojl all the chur-^ 
ches on Earth? Qa, 2. whether they can 
foffibly hope that ever the church on Earth 
vptll Unite upon their terms , of re'jeBing 
aS, their Infants from the vifible Churchy 
and renouncing all our Infant Rights and 
Benefits confeued by the B^ptifmal Cove- 
nant of grace ? Qu. 3. Jndvchetherifthey 
continue to the vporlds end^ to fepar ate from 
almofi all the Churches and unchurch them^ 
their employment will not be fill to ferve 
the great enemy of Love and Concord^ a- 
gainft the Lord of Love and Veace^ and 
ag^ainft the pro fperity of faith ^ and godlinefs^ 
and agatnft the -welfare of the church and 
fouls 5 and to the fcandal and hardening of 
the ungodly ? 




OF THi^ 

First Part. 

TH E Preface. pag» i 

tiMr, Tombes'j firfi Letter* p. 5 

R. B.V Anfvper to it. Ibid* 

Mr. T.*s fecofid Letter. p. 8 

R. B/j fjinfvper to it, p. 9 

<J^r. T/i r^ir^ Letter. p. 10 

R. B/j Anfvper is divided by tJ^r. T. into Sf- 
^/<7;7j : Hi^Anfwers are confuted^ Sed. I> 2, 3, 
4. T/?ff w^AT)' Qneflions to he handled^ Queft. i , 
Infants were once (lourch-memhers. P» 13 

Seft. 5. Queft. 2. It vpm not only the Infants of 
the Congregation of Ifrael that rvere Church^ 
members. p. 1 8 

HovQ far the Sichemites xfere of Ifrael, and 
Chnrch -members. p. 21 

Sefl, 6, 7, 8,9> 10. Of other Nations, Ibid. 

A 3 Sed. 

The Contents. 

Scft. II. The UtidmsJnfams mre mefnhen pf 
the ChHrchVniverfaL p.2^« 

Sed. 12, to the i8. Infants were me7?fhers of the 
Jews Church di well as Commonwealth, p. 28» 
Scd. 1 8. Qu€ft«4» There was a Law or Precept 
of God obliging Parents to enter their ChiU 
dren into Covenant with God^ by accepting his 
favour y and engt^ing and- devoting them to 
Cod '^ and there if^as a fromife of Cod ^ ^ffi^^- 
ing them his mercy^ and accepting them when- 
devoted as afor^imdy &c. p. 3 1 
Sed. 19, &c. Vijwle Chttrch-memberfinp what it 
is f And that it is a benefit, p. 32 
Sed. 22. Legal-right to Infants Church-ftate gt- 
'uen by Gods Covenant : Mr* T.V confuted and 
the cafe opened, P« 3$ 
Se<3-^23, 24. This Right is the egeUof Gods Law 
^r Covenant, ^ f • 44? — 4^ 
.fed. 2 J, 26. The proof of Parents obligation to 
.: ^etnter their Children into Covenant: v^at we 
.. mean by a Law •, Mr. T. waheth nothing i^f 
Q Chttrch-memberjhipt ^ p. 46,, — — Jp 
5 eft, 27. Precepts oblige to duty, and the promi^ 
fisgive right to benefits. p. 5^ 
jSe^. 28* No Tranfemt faVt without Gods fla- 
ttucj or moral donation^ or covenant j made the 
Ifraelices Infants Church-members, proved y tp 
. Sed. 44. p. 56 
Sed. 44, 45^* Infants dhurch-memberjhip infiitu-^ 
ted by God at mans creation and the conflitu^ 
tion of Gods Kingdom at the firfi, p. 72 
Sed. 46. Infants Cburch-member^jip continued or 
renewed by the firji Law of grace made to 


The Contents. 

Adam, Gen. 3. 15. f(? Sed. 49. Chrifls being 

' the Head in Infancy froveth what it is brought 

far J and forceth Mr. T. to grant the canfe* 

p. 8i 

Seft. 49. Tht fame proved by the exfofnion of 
this Covenant in that made to Abraham vindi^ 
cated againft tJffr. T. who again forfakfth his 
cayfe. p. gj 

St^* 50. No proof that there was ever anc 
Church-mewber who in that fiate had an In^ 
fant born to him^ who was ndh* alfo a Church* 
member, p. 104 

Seft. 51, 52, How far the Law of Natnre pro* 
'vetb what I ajfert. The Chnrch-ftate of In-- 
fants 710 difadvantage , but a great benefit : 

f9 wherein proved j to Sed. 59. p. 105 

Scft. 60. Afore particnlar proofs ^ as of Cain , 
Abel, Seth, Noahs SonSy Sec. p. 1 16 

Seft. 70, to'/g. Proving the point fnlly from the 
Covenant with Abraham. ?• 1 24 

SeA.79, to 86. The point proved hy 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 felfy 
but in the recipient. P- 130 

Seft. 86. The proof from thefccond Commandment 
vindicated. P« 135 

Seft. 87, to gi, Troofs from divers other texts. 

^ P- 137 

Seft.93, to g6. The cafe of Infants in the womb. 

p. 140 

Seft. 96, 97. Thefe ftatntes not repealed. Mr. T.'s 

conceit that (jods promt fe cannot be repealed , 


The Contents. 

confHted. p. 141 

Sed.98, fo 107. Divers Que ftiom offered to con- 

fderation* p. 145 

Sed. 107, &c. Ten Ijptmblin^ jQueftions to Mr* 

T. ( pnhltjhed by hiwfelf agamfi my mU*) 


The fuller proof s from the New Teftament only 
named as being before handled. p, 159 

ji Confutation of the many z^rguments by which 
Mr, T. vcGuld prove that Infants were not 
Church-members under Chrifi, p. 161 

The Contents of the Second Part, 

THE Preface : ScA. i. Of Cotitroverfies -^ 
how far good or bad'^ with whom fharp re- 
buke and earnefl contending is a duty, and with 
vrhom not : And whofe duty it is, p. 1 85 

S.cl. 2. Of the weight of the prefent C^ntrover- 
fie^ that we make tt not greater or lef than it 
is : And th^ fiate of it in part, p. 1 98 

Cbap. 1. The occafwn of this Book^y from Mr, 
Danvcis. p. 211 

Cl'.ap. 2. More of my prefent judgement of the 
Anabuft;(ls and their caufe ^ with a motion to 
them for Communion and Peace, p. 2 16 

Chap. 3. e^ general view of Mr, D^inycrs book,, 

p. 234 
Chap. 4. <L^r. Danvers Witneffes again ft Infant^ 

baptifm, Hi^ fad forgery againft the Dona- 

tifli deteEicd : Hn marvellous falfif cation of 


The Contents. 

Auguftines third and fourth hookj again fl them 
' de bapt. The faid hooks iiindicated. They prove 
that the Donatifts confented to Infant- hapttfmy 
and that the vphole Church held it ^ and no Chri- 
Jiian thought tt vain. His forgery againfi 
Vincemius Vidor : His [lander of Crefconius. 
His flander of all the Novatians, His Jlander 
of the Ancient Brittains deteUed, His reafons 
for the Brittains being againfi Infant -bapt ifm 
confuted: where many wore i^ntruths are de^ 
tededy of them and many others. His forge- 
ries or falfe ftories of the MelTalians, called by 

him J Dadoes, Sabas, Adulphus, Simonis 

His flander of Fauftus Rhegicnfis His 

deceit about Albanus. His grofs falff cation of 
Nicephorus and flander of Peter of Apamea 
and Zooras. His falfe ftory of Adrian Bifl)op 
of Corinth ^ and his falfe report of Grcgories 
dealing xvith him. His fable of z^gyptian 
Divines. His fi5iion about one Beiiniu-j, and his 
falfification of Beda concerning him. His for- 
gery about Hincmarus Laudunenfis , and of 
Hincnftrus Rhemenfis charge againfi him. His 
flander of the WM^nks ^heretofore detebicd^and 
further ly Nauclerus. A reference to our former 
proofs of the antiquity of Infant -baptifm. N^zhn- 
Z^ns judgement. His audaciom abufe of Cy- 
prian and the Carthage Council. My repeat- 
ed affertion of the novelty of Antipedohapttfm, 

, P-239 

Cnap. 5, Mr. T>!s great Calumnie of my fclf re- 

futedy 04 tf I had falfly reported that feme at 

that time vpere bapt iz.ed naked, p. 281 


The Contents^ 

Chap. 6. His ahufivc Citations of my Wfitings as 
for his caufe. p. 285 

Chap. 7. His many perfonat accufations of mttx^ 
amined. Whence it is that fo many boldly 
fpeak. evil of the things they knovf not. His 
reproach «/ [_ every one of my Non- conform- 
ing Brethren, that my Doftrines in the parti- 
culars accufed by him are heynous to every 
one of them, ] vphen J remember not any one 
of them that hath ever to me exfrejfed his dif- 
fenty much lefs endeavoured to change my judge- 
ment y hiA mjtny that have frofejfed their appro- 
bation. His vain talk, of my being loft with 
my friends •, by vphich he imply eth that they are 
Hypocrites in concealing it , Mnd would makjs 
me one in feekjng the applaufe of man. Hit 
many faljhoods tn his ace ufat ions of felf-con- 
tradiition and mutability » i. jihout Epifco^ 
pacy J 2. jibout Non-conformity r What he 
meaneth by my fheltring my felf in their Tents 
in a ftorm , and with their indulgence coming 
forth of my hole.] 3. Gf my friendship to 
Calvin and Arminius. 4. Of the parliaments 
eaufe^ &c. 5. Of Tradition* 6. Of Popery, 
7. whether a Controverfie may have difficult oh- 
jeEiions againfi plain proofs. His Catalogue of 
my heynous errors : A ]uft demand from the 
Non-conformifts^ if there he any fuch, whom he 
dothn§t flander : and from himfelf p. 28S 

Chap. 8. The new Religion of my Backzbiters : or 
a Catalogue of fame DoUrinesef Air. Danvers, 
and the reft that joyn in his accufations of my 
Writings^ if indeed they hold the contraries ta 


The Contents. 

-timr t^hith they accufcy as their accufation$ 

, feem to fptffofe •, viz. fifty fix New Command-, 

- wntt and Dafhines. The good that thefe men 

do. p. 313 

Cfaap. 9. Mr, William Ailcn^ vindication of him- 

ft If again fl: Mr- D/i mfrefort •, and my Tefti- 

Tffony concerning Air^ Allen and Mr. Lamb. 

P- 333 

Cmtclnfkn , an Admonition to Mr* Danvers for 

bisSepentance. P- 337 

The Contents of the Third Part. 

Chap, i.np HE frightful ajpt^ of his Reply 

1 P- 345 

Chap. 2. His impenitent falfe allegation of Wit^ 
neffes againft Infant-bap ifm. Of TenuUian j 
vphether Cyprians DoBrine vpas uintichrif^ian. 
Wickliff vindicated at largCy from his exprefi 
. vpords, Berengarius vindicated. p. 349 

Chap. 5. Mr. T>.'s juftification of his flander of 
the Waldenfes confuted. Hts mtnejfes exa- 
mined.^ and his unfaithfulnefs opened ^ and the 
cafe of the Waldenfes more largely explicated^ 

. ... P-^79 

Chap. 4. His impenitence in CaUimniating the 

Donatifts and Novacians as againji Infant -ba- 

ptifwy reprehended, p. 400 

Chap. 5. Hts renewed Cahmny of the Old Bnt- 

tains reproved, p. 402 


The Contents. 

Chap. 6. His rafh import of Bijhofs Ufliers cen- 
fiire of mcy Confidered. p. 404 

Poftfcript. TheTeftimony of Smzxsi^us fully open" 
ed : And the reports of Peter Abbas Cluniacen- 
fis, and Bernard Abbas Clarevallenfis. Their 
weak. difin^nuoHi conrfe of Printing my vpords 
4s againfl my felf ( in a jheet called Mr^ Bax- 
ters Arguments^ &c. cryed about theftreetf) 
as if the necefpty of profeffed faith for our 
felvesy would prove that our profejfed faith and 
dedicating them to Gody were not fufficient for 
the baptifmal reception of our Infants, p. 407 


MY pain and greater bufinefs deny me time to colleft 
the Printers Errata, though I fee divers -, and there- 
fore muft leave the difcerning of them to your felves. 
And I again admonifh and intreat you, that tjfie deteftion 
of the extr aordinary falfhoods and blind temerarious auda- 
city of Mr. D. be not imputed to the whole KebapiTing par'* 
ty, ( to whofe Praftice Oregor. Magn, paralleleth Keordaln- 
ing^ ; and that his crimes abate not your Chrifijan Love 
and tendernefs to others, there being truly Godly, wife, 
and peaceable perfons, worthy of our Communion, and 
willing of it, of that party as well as of others. Hearken 
»ot to^ them that would render the Party o( Anabaptifls 
odious or intolerable^no more than to thofe Anabaptlfis who 
would perfwade thofe of their opinion to renounce Com- 
munion with all others as unbapti2ed. It is againfl this 
dividing fpirit on all fides that I Write and Preach. 




Part L 

Aij private Letters to Mr, Tombes provmg 
the church-member jhip of Infants in all 
ages y ^'indicated from hi^ unfattsfa^or.y 

The Preface. 

^i li K i 'S HE occafion and time of thefe 
Letters is long ago publi/hed by 
Mr. Tombes hinrifelf in the third 
Part of his Anti-PAdobaftifm y 
page 353. and forward •, where 
he printcth the faid Letters without my confent : 
Had I found his Anfwers fadsfadory ^ I had 
changed my judgement and retraced that and 
other fuch writings long ago. But I thought fo 
much otherwife of them. that I judged it not nc- 
ceilary, nor worth my diverting from better em- 
ployment to write an anfwer to them; 

f'sT,', And whatever the fingular judgement of that 

B karncdt 


learned and excellent ProfefTor of Theology men- 
tioned in his Preface , was or is concerning the 
arguments that I , and many before and fincc have 
u^^d for Infant Bapcifm, and notwithftanding his 
opinion that it w^j introdnced in the fecond Ccn» 
tury^ &c. yet fo many wifcr and better men than 
I, think otherwife both of the caufc, and of Mr, T's 
v/ritings, that I hope the modefl: will allow me the 
honour of having very good company if I Ihould 
prove millaken. 

^.3% No fober 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 Hillory of the Church, can choofe but 
think that there are now in Heaven many thou- 
fands, if not hundred thoufands that were not 
againft Iflfant Baptifm, for one that was againft 
it : And while we differ de jure , yet without 
great ignorance of the ftate of the world , wc 
muil needs agree that de fa5fo^ the number in the 
Church of Chrift in all Nations and Ages that have 
been againft Infant Baptifm hath been fo fmall , 
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 tear- 
ful of turning rafhly and without cogent proof 
to the other fide, I know the Churches have 
ftill had their blemiflies ; but that they (hould all 
iiniverfally fo err in the fubjed of Baptifm and 
Chriftianity it felf, is not to be believed till it be 

^* 4. Though 


^i 4. Though Chrift be hot the Author of air^ 
©f our errors, he is the healer of them.and he is the 
EfFedor as well as the Diredor of his Churches 
faiih and holinefs : And yet to fay that though 
ihoufands or hundred thoufands are in Heav<tn 
that were for Infant Baptifm , for one that waS 
againft ir, yet Chrift was againft even fuch a con- 
ftitutiveparcofhis Church ( as accounted) is nor, 
to be received without good proof. 

^. 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. Danvers^ I do' 
not at prefent remember that I have read of any 
one Chriftian that held the baptizing of Infants 
unlawful , in many and many hundred years after 
Chrift •, at leaft not any that denied not Original 
fin .* Though indeed the Pelagians themfelves than 
did deny it much , yet denied not Infant Bap- 

^, 6. But of this enough heretofore : I lay not 
my faith on the number of Confenters • but in a 
doubtful cafe I think the way that almoft all went 
that are in Heaven, and took it as the very entrance 
bf the door of life, is fafer ceteris farihm than 
that which few in Heaven did own : And though 
on earth I have more approvers than Mr.T. I 
think mans approbation fo poor a comfort , a« 
that I am forry to read in his Preface and elfe- 
where how much he layeth upon it. Alas, were 
it not more for the good of others than gur felves^^ 
B ;$ how 

how incon/iderable a matter were it, whether men- 
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 fignification ? 

5^. 7. In the anfwer which I muft give to 
Mr. Tombes, fhould I tranfcribe all his words, and 
anfwer every impertinent pafTage, I fhould need- 
lefly weary the Reader and my fclf: 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 fhall anfwer to nothing, but what 
feemeth to me to need an anfwer : And for all 
the reft I am content that the impartial Reader 
judge 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 plaia 



ci^r. Tombes his fir/l Letter. 


NOt finding yet that Law or Ordinance 
of Infanrs vifil^le Church- memberr 
fhip which you aiTert in your book of 
Bapttfm to be unrepealed, I do requeil 
you to fet down the particular Text 
or Texts of Holy Scripture where you conceive 
xhat Law or Ordinance is written, and to tranfmif 
ic to mc by this bearer, that ycur allegations tnay 
be confidered by him who is Yours as is meet^ 

ty^pril ^^ 1 6^$, JohnTomhsso 

Richard Baxters Anfwer, 

Sir, / mean to fee more faid againfi what I 
•have aiready written^ before I will write any more 
jihoHt Infant Baft if m , withoht a more "fr effing 
tail than I yet dtfcern, J have -difcharged my 
■Confcience^ and fljcJl leave you and yonrs to take 
yoHr coiirfe, jdnd indeed I do not under f:and the 
fenfe of yonr Letter , becanfe you fo joyn tfpo 
^uefiions in one ^ that I know not which of the 
fwo it is that y OH would have me anfwn to, Whe^ 

B 3 ther 


ther there were any Ordinances or Law of Go4 
that Infants jiiould be Church-mcmbcrs ? is one 
^Hejrtcn : . W> ttker thts he repealed ^ is argther : 
yon joy n both into of^e. For the firfi^ that Infants 
"Were (^hurch-mem^ers^ as you have not yet denied 
that I know of y fa will I not be fo uncharitable 
as to imagine that yon are now about it : And 
much Uf that y<iH fhould have the lea ft doubt whe- 
fher it were by Cjbds Ordination^ There are two 
things confiderable in the matter, Firfl^ the be- 
nefit of Chisrch-membcrjhip , with all the confe^ 
^uent priviledges. It is the work. f>f ^ grant or. 
fromife to confer thefe^ and not diretlly of apre- 
ifept. Secondly^ the duty of devoting and dedica- 
ting the child to God^ and entring it into theCo-^ 
venant which confers the benefit ; and this is the 
Vporh^ of a Law or Precept to confiitute this duty, 
I am pafh ijoptbt that yon doubt, not of either of 
thefe : For yon cannot imagine , that any Infant 
had the bleffmg without a grant or promife, (that*s 
impoffible ; ) nor that any Parents lay under a, 
^ty without an obliging law^ (for that is as im^ 
pojjihle* ) Taking it therefore for granted that 
J/OH are refolved in both thefe , and fo yield that 
fuch a grant and precept there was , there re- 
mains no que ft ion but whether it be repealed: 
which I hdve long expeBed that you Jhould prove. 
For citing the particular iexts in which the or^ 
Aination u contained , though more may be faid 
than is faid^ yet I (hall think^it nee die f^ tilllfet 
m^ ordination contained in thofe Texts which I 
have already mentioned to you^ proved to he re- 
^erfed. Nor do I k^ow that it is of fo great ufe ' 
"' "' *". '" ' •■'••' ■ - f(f 


to fland to cite the f articular Texts , 'ixhile yotjt 
confef in general^ that fpich a fromfe and free eft 
there is, hy vertne of which Jnj ants rvtre tillLhrijh 
ttr/^e duly TKembers of Chrtjis Chitrch (forChrifis 
Church It was ) even his urii'verfal vtfible Church. 
Still remerKber that 1 take the word [^ law ] not 
firitily for a precept only , hnt largely , as com- 
frehendtng both prcmife and precept, and I have 
already jhewed yon both, and fo have others* 

So much of your endeavour as hath any tenden^ 
cy to the advancement of holinefs, I am willing 
to fecond you in, viz. that at the age you dtfxre 
people might folemnly profefs their acceptance of 
Chrifi, and their refolution to be his : But I hope 
Cod will find me better wor\!^ while I mufi flay 
here^ than to fpcndmy time to prove that no In^ 
fants of believers are within Chrifis vifible 
Churchy that is, are no J-nfant Difciplcs, Infant 
Chrifiians , Infant Qmrch-members, I know no 
glory it will bring to Chrifi, nor comfort to many 
nor fee I now any appearance of truth in it, I 
hlefs the Lord for the benefits of the B apt ifmal 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 
dejfife this mercy, or account it none, or not worth 
the accepting, may go without it , and take that 
whieh they get by their ingratitude^ And I once 
hoped, that much lefs than fuch an inundation of 
direful confcquents as our eyes have feen, would 
have done more for the bringing of you back, te 
fiop the doleful breach that yoH have made, lam 
fain to ^etid my time now to endcAVour the rr- 

B 4 (ovtrjf 

covery of fome of your Opinion who are lately 
turned Quakers^ or at leafl the 'preventing of 
others jipofiafie : which is indeed to prevent the 
emptying of your Churches. Which I fuppofe will 
be a more acceptable work^with yoH^ than again 
to write againft rebaptiz^ing , or for Infant Bap^ 
tifm. Str^ I remain your imperfeii brother ^ know- 
ing bnt in fart, yet loving the truth , 

Rich. Baxter. 

Air, Tombes hk fee end Letter* 

Sir ', I confefs Infants were by Gods fad: of 
taking the whole people of the Jews forhispeo- 
plcj in that eftate of the Jewiih Pjedagogy ( not 
by any promife or precept ^ vifible Church-mem- 
bers, that is, of the Congregation of JfraeL I do 
pot 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 fooliiTi 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 repeaiable , 
that is, which may in congruous fence be either 
by a later ad faid to be repealed, or elfe to be 
eftablifhed 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 
need not hinder you from oppofing the Quaker^ 
- Tin 


( in which I have not and hope fhal] not be want- 
ing j of whom I think that you are mifinfornfied 
that they are Anabaptifts, I think there are very 
few of them that were ever baptifcd , 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 Bapcifm, and to the 
prad^ice of adult Baptifm , and that as your felf 
are deceived fo you millead others. I yet ex- 
peA your Texts, knowing none in any of your 
Books that mention that law of Infants vifibic 
Church-memberfliip which you aflert either ex- 
plicitly or implicitly, and am yours as is meet, 

Bevcdly^ April ^. i6^^, JohnTomhes, 

Richard Baxters fecond Letter. 

Sir, If yon will needs recall me to thi< ungrateful 
vcork^j let me rc{^Uffl yon to tell me fully ^ exaElly 
and plainly, what tranjicnt f^r.tl yon me^^^n^ which 
you conceive without law or prom^ife did make 
Church-members : that fo I may k^now where the 
competition lieth. When I k^.ow yenr meaning j I 
intend, God willing, to fend you a jpeedy anjwer 
to yoHT lafi. Tour fc How- ferv ant y 

April i6. 1655. Rich.Bixter* 

Mr* Tombes 

tMr. Tombcs his third Letter. 

Sify The tranfeunt fad of God , whereby In- 
fants were viiible Church-members, was plainly 
esprcft in my laft to you, to be the taking of the 
whole people of the t^ws for his people, which 
is the expreffionof zj^ojhy T>eiit, 4. 34. £aW. 
6.7. Aad by it I mean that which is exprefled 
Levit. 20, 24.. 26. when God faid, I have feve*. 
red you from other feofle^ hat you jhonld be mine. 
The fame thing is eAprelTed iA'^w^jS. 53. Ifai. 
43.1. This I term [fad 3 as conceiving it mofl 
comprehenfive of the many particular ads in many 
generations, whereby he did accomplifh it. Fol. 
lowing herein Stephen^ Auls 7. 2. and Nehem. 9, 7* 
I conceive it began when he called Aoraham out 
of Vr , Gen. 12. i. to which fucceeded in their 
times the enlarging of his family , removing of 
Loty Jjhmaely the fons of KetHrah^ Efaiiy diftin- 
dion by Circumcifion, the birth of //'^^c, Jacobs 
his leading to Fadan Aram , increaie there, re- 
moval to C^naariy tozy£gypty placing, preferving' 
there, and chiefly the bringing of them thence, to 
which principally the Scripture refers this fad , 
Exod. 19. 4. Levit* 1 1.45. Nehem. i. 10. Hof. 
II. I. the bringing them into the bond of the 
Covenant at Mount Sinaiy giving them laws, fet- 
tling their Priefthood, tabernacle, army, govern- 
ment, inheritance. By which fad the Infants of 
the Jfraelites were vifible Church-members as be- 
ing part of the Congregation of Jfrael , and in 
like manner though not with equal right ( for they 


plight be fold away) were the bought fervants 
or captives, whether Infants or of age, though 
their Parents were profelTed Idolaters. And this 
I faid was without proniifc or precept, meaning 
fuch promife or precept as you in your Letter fay 
I confefs, and you defcribe, a fromtfe conferring 
to Infants the benefit: of ChHrcb-rKemberJhtp with 
mil the confecjuent priviledges^ a frecept conflitti^ 
ting the duty of devoting and dedicating the child 
to God J ana entring into (Covenant ^ which confers 
fhe benefit. For though I grant the promifes to 
the nuural pofterky cf jibrahanty Gen, 17. 4,5, 
6, 7, 8, and the Covenant made wirh Jfrael at 
Mount Sinai y and Dent, 29, wherein Ifraei avouch- 
ed God, and a precept of Circumcifion, and pre- 
cepts of God by oJlfofes of calling the people , 
and requiring thera to enter into Covenant , 
£xod, 19. and Dent. 29. Yet no fuch particular 
promife concerning Infants vifible Church-mem- 
berfliip, or precept for Parents or others , con- 
cerning the folemn admifTion of Infants as vifible 
Church-members, befides Circumcifion, as in your 
Book of Baptjfm you afTert. Nor do I conceive 
that Infants of Ifraei were made viable Church- 
members by the promifes in the covenants or the 
precepts forenamed, but by Gods tranfeunt fad: 
which I have defcribed. Which I therefore term 
[ tranfeunt ] becaufe done m time , and fo not 
eternal , and paft , and fo not in congruous fence 
repealabie as a law, ordinance, ftatute, decree, 
which determines fuch a thing fball be for the fu- 
ture, though capable of continuance in the fame 
pr the like ads, or of interruption. Which con- 



tinuance or interruption is known by narration of 
what God 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 Ifraelites began as I conceive 
with ^irahams call, and was compleated when' 
they were brought cut of ^^gy^t to God, Exod, 
19. 4. (o I conceive it ceafed when upon their re- 
jedion of Chrifl as was fore-told Matth. 21. 43. 
they were broken off from being Gods people , 
which was compleated at the deftrud:ion of Jeru^ 
falem^ when the temple was deftroycd, as Chrift 
fore-told, Luk^e 19. 43, 44. And in.^cad of the 
Jewiih people by the preaching of the Gofpel conr 
firmed by mighty (igns, God gathered to himfeif 
a Church of another frame in a fpiriiual way , 
according to the inftitution of Chrift, Matth.iS. 
19, 20. Mark^i6. 15, 16. in which he included 
not Infants, the Jews therafelves were no part of 
the Chrifrian Church without repentance and 
faith in Chrift profefTed at leaft. 
■ Having now fully, exadly, and plainly told yoik 
my meaning as you rcqueft, I do now expcd your 
fpeedy anfwer tomy laft, and therein to fulfil my 
requefl of fetting down the particular Texts of 
tioly Scriptdre wherein that law largely taken 
comprehending promife and precept of Infants vi- 
able Church-mcmberfhip, which ycu alTert to be 
r:nrepealed, is contained. Ifyou (hall in your an- 
fwer fer down whertin the blefliii^, benefit, and 
-priviledgcs of Infants vifibleChurch-memberfhipy 
jwhich you affert unrepealed, Aai confift-, I may 



bettet underftand you than I do : But I (hall prefs 
you no further than you (hall be willing in this 
thing. lam Yours as is nicer, 

Bervdleyy j4fril 2 1 . 1 65 5 . John Tomhes, 

Richard Baxters third Letter being long, is di- 
vided by Mr. Tomhes into fevcral {edions , and 
his Anfwers accordingly divided ; which order I 
tnuft therefore obferve in my reply. The words 
of the Letter are. 


R. B. Q I R , ui frobahility of doing or receiving 
O goody is to me a call to aBion* Seeing 
no fuch probability J I told you at firfi my purpo- 
fes to forbear any firthcr debates with yon , till 
yoH had better anfwered what ^ is faid^ In yohr 
next yoH feemcdto deal fo plainly ^ as if fomefmaH 
probability of good did yet appear: But in your 
third you fly off again and eat yonr ovpn wordsy and 
jumble things in much confnfwny fa that I now re- 
turn again to my former thought s. Tor you that 
exprejly fay and unfay^ and contradiB: your f elf ^ 
are not likely to be brought to a candid manage- 
ment or fair ijfue of the Difputc. Toul fure 
thinks it no great matter to be driven to a felf- 
contradiciion ( which with ethers is to lofe the 
Caufe ) who fo eaftly and ex pre fly run upon it your 

*' Mr* 7^s Anfwcr^ It was a call fufficient, &c. 



Re fly. I muft be the difcerner of my own Cat! 
or Reafons to write ; time is precious : As for his 
offence at Mr, M, and Mr. Firmin for charging 
him with fophiftry, and at Mr. Fi?r^ for charging 
him with railing, and Mr. Gatak§r for doubting ii is 
his difpofition to braze his forehead •, and his owa 
angry words hereupon, they concern not our pre- 
fent bufinefs. 


R, Bi XN yoHr fecond you fay [ Iconfc^ infant? 
X were by Gods fad of taking the whole 
people of the Jews for his people , in that eftate 
of the Jewifh Pedagogy, not by any promife or 
pr.cepc, then vifible Church-members, that is, of 
the Congregation cf Ifrael •, I do not confefs, that 
there was any Law or Ordinance determining h 
fhould be fo, buc only a fad of Godj which is a 
tranfeunt thing, &c.^ Jn your third, yon fay ^ 
\_ For though I grant the promifes to the natural 
poflerity of ^r^/7^w 5 Gen, 17*4,556,7,8. 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 
by Mofs of calling the people, and requiring of 
them to enter into Covenant, Exod» 19. & Dem* 
29. yet no fuch pairticular promife concerning in- 
fants vifible Church-memberfhip , or precept for 
Parents or others concerning the folemn admillion 
of Infants as vifible Church-members befides Cir-^ 
cumcifion, as in your book of ^^/>r//z» you affert ] 



Before there was no {_ Law or Ordinance deter- 
mining it (hould be fo , but only a fad: 3 nox9 
there are Lavps or precepts and promifes that it 
JIjohU befo^hnt [not fuch as I aflert in my book. 3 
jind if Ifiould jljew yoH never fo many^ yon may 
reply , they are not fuch as I ajfert m my hook^^ 
and wafle the time in that trial^ when it ii better 
for me to fee firfi what you fay to that book,: For 
this is but to lead us about to trifitng, 

'' Mr. T's Anfwer. There is no fhadow of a 
*' contradidion, c^c. 

Reply. Let the inipartial Reader judge. 


R. B. 'Tp O make any clear worh^ upon the things 
JL in que ft ion y we mufl necejfarily {peak^ 
to the queflions dtflintily^ many of which yon too 
much confound. The fir ft queftion in order fit to 
be refolvedtSy \^ whether Infants before Chrifts in' 
carnation were Church-members , or not ? J yoU 
grant they were : and therefore this is paft difpute 
with m. The fecond que ft ion and the fir ft refold 
ved^ is \_what Church tt is that Infants were 
members of f ]] This you give me occafon to take 
in the way^ becaufe you twice explain your me an^ 
tngy when you confefs them Church-members , by 
an i i. e. of the congregation of IfraeL ] By 
which you feem to imply two things : Firft , that 
none but the Infants of the Congreaticn of Ifrael 
were Church-members : Secondly^ that the infants 
f/* Ifrael were members of no Church but what is 



tonvertihle vpith the congregation of Ifrael*'] The 
third queflion ;>, what it is that gives the Ifrae^ 
lites that denomination of [^ the Congregation of 
Jfrael 3 of which Infants wefe members ? Foryun 
jumble both together^ both canfes Civil, and Eccie^ 
fiajiical^ and of both thofe that make to the being 
and well-being. So that our enquiry miifl be ^ 
whether the (Congregation and the Commonwealth 
be the fame thing in yonrfenfe ? ~\ and what confii- 
tuteth it formally ? por in this you fpeak in dark^ 
ambiguities, The fourth queflion is , [[ Whether 
there wa^ any Law^ Ordinance or Precept of God 
concerning mans duty herein^ or obliging him to 
the Covenant acceptance and engagement^ and fo 
to men.berfnp'^ and any promife^ grantor Cove-' 
nant^ conferring the right of Church-memhcrflnp 
and the confcquent prtviledges to Infants ? ^ T9. , 
this you fay both Tea and Nay y if I can under- 
ft and you , or at leaft as to muc h of the queftion 
concerning the heing , and part of the ejfcih of 
the precept and prcmifc. Tet you conclude ^ that 
you [^ do not conceive that Infayns of Jfrael were 
made vtfihle Church-members by the promifes in 
the Covenants^ or the precepts fore- named, but by 
Gods tranfeunt fati, ~\ I will not fiifpefi that you 
imagine any other prorrnfe doth it bcfides that in the 
Covenant, be c an fe your tying the ejfc^to the tran^ 
feunt faEi doth exclude them* Here we are caft 
upon thefe qucflions next. The fifth queftiony 
[^ whether there be finch precepts and pronnfies as 
you grant^ {or as I fiiall prove ) which yet makj 
77dt Infants Church-members,^ ] The fixth quefti- 
ony [* Whether there be any tranfeunt faEi ofGod^ 


Vphich without the efficie^2cy of precept or promife 
did make the Infants of JfraelChHrch-memhcrs ? J 
The fcventh qnefiio^iy [_ Whether thcfe which yon 
ha've affignedbe fichfaCis ? ] The eighth que ft ion ^ 
(^ which are the Texts of Scripture that contain or 
expreji the faid laws^ precepts^ or grants which I 
maintain ? ~\ this yon in/iflHpo}:^ The ninth qitefti- 
on^ ^ Whether fnch laws , preceps or grar.is as I 
Jhall prove, are capable of a repal or revocation ? ]] 
The tenth qnejiion^ [Whether they are a^ituHy re- 
voked or repealed ? \ 

^^yiic.T's Arjfwer. The eighth queftion is the 
*' only queftion needful to be refolved ^ &c» 

Reply. If I do too much it is but your palling 
ic by, and it will not trouble you. 


R. B. 'VyEfore all thefe que ft ions are well hand" 
JD led^ we jljcnld eafily be convinced that 
it had been better either to have let hU alone , or 
el fey if we mtift needs have the other boHt^ at leafc 
to have agreed on our lermSy and the fating of 
the qneftions better before we had be.aun. jind 
1 thinks that even that i^ not eafie to do, 'por when 
I defired your plain , exacl and full explication 
of one word [] tranfeunt faB ~\ and you tell me 
you have plainly^ fully and exacily told me your 
meaning : It falls oiity either through the unhap- 
py darkjief of my own underftandi?ig^ or yours ^th at 
I know but little more of your mind than I did 
before , and that yon feem to me to have raifed 

G mor0 


wore doubts and darknefs than y oh have refolveS 
and dijfipated, Tet being thm far drawn in , / 
/7W/ briefly fay fomewhat to the fever al queflions^ 
not following your defires to anfwer one alone : 
Vphich cannot be done to any furpofe while the fore- 
going are nnrefolved , becanfe it is the clearing 
ftp of truth, and not the ferving of your prefent 
ends in your writings now in hand that I mnfi 

^^ Mr. T's Anfwer, I afFed no more bouts with 

" fuch a captious wrangler fo many doubts 

*' fcem 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^c. 

Reply. This is not the Controverfie : Is your 
judgement alike right of perfons as of Dodrines ? 

S E C T. V. 

R. B. np HE fir ft queflion being refolved that 
JL Infants were once Chirrch-members y 
to the refolving of the fecond queftion , / fliall 
-prove thefe two Propoftions* I* That it was not 
cnly the Infants of the Congregation of Ifrael 
that were Church-members, 2. The Infants of 
Ifrael were members of the univerfal vifible (^hurch^ 
and not only of that particular Congregation. The 
fir ft I have proved already in my book* And 1* 
llaac was a Chnrch-membery yet none of the Con- 
gregation of Ifrael • it was not Ifrael till Jacobs 
day Si If you fay that by the ^Congregation of 

Ifrael 3 


ifrael ] you mean [ the feed of Abraham vphich 
had the promtfe of Canaan] Tet 2* J fay y that 
Ifhmael and Ab}[a[ums feed by Keturah a?idE{m 
had none of the fromife , and yet were Church^ 
members in their infancy, [_Jn [(23icf)a/i thy feed 
be called ~| that /V, that feed which had the pro- 
mi fe of Canaan. And fa tt was confined to Ja- 
cob, who got the blejfing and the birthright y 
which EidU lofiy and was excluded^ yet was of the 
Church frora 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 t, 
Jf you fay J that by \^the Congregation of Ifrael] 
yott mean all the natural fed of Abraham: 1 addy 
3. The children of his bond- men born in his farni- 
ly^ or bought With mony^ were none 0/ Abrahams 
natural feed , and yet were Church-members iti 
their infancy. If you go yet further , and fay , 
that by \_ the Congregation of Ifrael _] you mean. 
all that were at the abfolute dijpofe of Abraham 
or h^s fuccejforsy and fo were his own: I addy 4* 
The Infants of free Profelytcs were none fuch 3 
and yet were Church-members, If you yet go fur'* 
thcr^ and fay^ that you mean by [^ the Congrega^ 
tion of Ifrael ] a?iy that came under the govern- 
ment of Abraham or his fuccejfors : then I add , 
5, That the Sichemites, (7^;/. 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 fiwuld be theirs •, yet were they cir" 
cumcifed every male , and fo were made m.embers 
of the vifible frofejfwg Church, for it was not 

C z tH 

the bare external fi^n that Jacob or his fans would 
ferfwade them to ^ withont the thing fgnified: 
For the reproach that they mentioned of giving 
their daughter to the uncircumcifed ^ wa6 not m 
the defeli of the external abfcifjjon •,/«?r /o'Mofes 
own fon ^ and all the Jfraelites in the -wildernefi 
fljould 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 profcf to Worflnp the fame God in his 
true rpay of wor(i}ip as they did. And therefore^ 
as Bapttz^mg is not indeed and in Scripture fence 
Baptizi/7g 5 if it be not ufed for engagement to 
Gody even into his name •, fo Circmncifion is not, 
indeed and in Scripture fence CircHmcifian^ unle^ 
ft be ufed as an engaging fign^ and they be cir^ 
curficifed to God, 

*^ Mr. T's A-nfwer. By [ the Congregation of 
*^ Jfrael J I mean the fan^e v/ith the Hebrew peo- 

*' pie or houfe of Abraham — by an anticipa- 

*' tion, c^c. 

Reply, I, That not only the Infants of Abra^- 
hams houfe were Church-mennbers fhall be pro- 

2. Here he is forced to take in the Children 
of Keturah, Ifimael, and Efau^ into [ the Con- 
gregation of Ifrael 1 ^ And fo to extend Infants 
Church-raemberlhip further than the Jews Cora 
mon-vveahh. For let the Reader judge, whether 
the pofterity of Ijhm.aely Efau and Keturah were 
of that Repubh'ck, or Profelytes either, and not 
isifually errenfiie?, 

3- Hsr 

3. He is forced to extend Infants Churcb- 
memberChip to whole Cities that would be buc 
iheir Allies, as the Sichewites were: For when 
he faith [^ Thty were one peo-ple ] by confent , 
he could not fay that they were to be their fub- 
jtds and fo members of their Kepubiick. And 
they may be [_ one peofle ] by mixture and con- 
federacy, wkhout fubjediion. And there is no in- 
timation that the SichemUes were to part with 
their former Governours and be fubjed to Ja- 
cob, And then if all the Kingd ms about would 
but have been accordingly ''■Jacobs confederates, 
it feems Mr. T. mud yield ihac their Infants had 
been vifible Church-members. 


R. B. TT was then the duty of all the Nations 
\. TO mid about (if not of all the Nations 
on earthy that could hcive information of the Jew^ 
ijjj Religion ) to engage themftlves and their 
children to God by Qircumcifion, That all that 
would have any alliance and cow.merce with the 
Jews mnft do tt^ is commonly cofife (fed: that it 
miifl extend to Infants^ the cafe of the Sichemites 
( though deceitfully drawn to it by fome of Jacobs 
fons) doth file w J and fo doth the Jewijh fraliice 
which they were to imitate : that the fame engage- 
mait to the fame God is the duty of all the 
worldy is commonly acknowledged^ though Divines 
¥tre -not agreed whether the diflant nations were 
obliged to ufe Circimcifwn the Jewijh fign. The 

C 3 h^fi 

hefi of the Jews were z^ealoHs to make Profclytes^ 
and no doubt bnt the very law of nature did 
teach them to do their hefi for the falvation of 
others. To think^fuch charitable and holy works 
unlawful , is to think it evil to do the greatefi 
good. And if they mnfi perfwade the neigh- 
vour nations to come in to God by Covenant en-* 
gdgeynenty they mnft perfwade them ta bring their 
children with them , and to devote them to God 
04 well as themfelves* For the Jews knew na 
other covenanting or en^ging to God* As the 
Sichemitcs mufl do^ fo other nations mufl do : For 
what priviledge had the children of the Siche-* 
mites above the refi of the world? 

*' Mr, T's Anfwer, The argument in form 
*' would be thus : If it were the duty of all the 
^' nations round about to engage themfelves and 
" their children to God by circumcilion, then it 
^^ was not only the Infants of the Congregation 
^' of Jfrael that were Church-members, c^c. 

Reply, I. You fl^ould have (aid [^ that would 
have been Church-members had they done that 
duty J, But you can befl ferve your own turn. 
2. One Supream Power maketh one Republick 
( with the fubjeds ) ; And many Soveraigns make 
many Republicks ( asallgrant J -.'Therefore if all 
the Nations about had engraffed themfelves into 
the Congregation oUfrael but as th: Sic hemites did, 
they had not made one Republick, as to humane 
Soveraignty : I prefume to tell you my thoughts 
of fuch a cafe f and fo of the Sichemites ) : It 
was the glory of Jfrael to be a Theocracy : God 
WJis their Soveragin^ not only as he was of all 
f > th? 

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 Mofu ) : Reappointed them Cap- 
tains under him by Revelation : He decided cafes 
by Oracle : He gave them Judges that were Pro- 
phets , and aded by his extraordinary fpiric. 
Though (iJMofes is called a King, he was but an 
Official Magiflrate , Captain and Prophet : [] A 
Prophet fhall the Lord your God raife up to you 
like unto me, c^c. ] faith he : which had imme- 
diate refped to the form of Government and man- 
ner of fucceflion, ( as differing from the way of 
Kings which the Ipraelites finfully preferred af- 
terward , cafling off this fpecial Theocracy ) 
though ultimately it intended Chrid. Now, this 
being fo, the Sichemites or any other nations who 
would have taken God for their Soveraign ^ and 
come under this fpecial prophetical Theocracy , 
(which Circcmcifion engaged them to as refpe- 
ding the Laws to which it bound them) had 
been fo far united to Ifrael. But hotv far mighc 
this have extended ? To the reft that he faith I 
confent. If you will not hold to this you mufl 
fay that the Sichemites were to be of the fame 
Communitie with Jfrael^ and not of tl-ie fame 
Republick , which (ignifieth either ungoverned 
Communities or various Republicks confede- 

C 4 . SECT, 




R. B. TN Hefters tme many of the people be-^ 
X came Jews^ Heft. 8. 17. who yet veere 
not under their government, cy4ndtohe Jews is 
to be of the 'jevpijh frofcjfion. And it is well 
known that this was to be circumctfed^ they and 
their little ones ( as the Profelytes were j and fo, 
to keep the Law of Mofes, 

'^ Mr. T's Anfxfer. They were incorpo- 

^' rated into the JewiOi people, e^c, 

Keply, This needeth no reply byt what is given 
to the former. 

S E C T. V 1 1 1. 

R. B. '"^^HE fcattered and captivated Jews. 
JL themjelves were from under the Go- 
njernment of Abrahams fuccejfors, and yet were to 
CircHtncife their children oa Church-members, - 

^' Mr. T's Anfwer is the fame, and the Reply 
*' the fame. 


R. B, "yrTTMen Jon2i\f reached to Ninive, /> 

VV w^ all the race of man among 

them^ without exception^ from the greateji to the 

feafiy that was to fafi and join in the humUiation :■ 


Ergo, ally even Infants as well as others , were to 
-partake of the rcnnjfion. If you fay , the heafis 
were to faft too : I anfwer^ as they were capable 
in their kind of part of the cwrfe^ fo were they 
of part of the hencft^ but their capacity was not 
as mans : They fijied to manifefi mans humilta- 
tion. And if by the hnmiliation of the aged the 
beafis fped the better in their kind, no wonder tf 
Infants Jpcd the better in theirs , and accordtno- 
to their capacities^ and that was to have a remiQi- 
en fuitable to their fin, 

'' Mr. T's finfwer. Neither aged nor infants 
^' were vifible Church-members, c^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 theiu did 
not according to the terms of the Common Co- 
venant of Grace made with Adam and No'e ^ 
though they came not under the Covenant of pe- 
culiarity : And if fo fas Repentance is to be inter- 
preted in the bell fenfe till the contrary be pro- 
ved j 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 Ifraelites Infants fl- eweth what they were 
capable of.> Mr. T's denial is no difproof. 




R. B. WJ^'^^ ^ have [aid of Sem and many 
VV others , and their pofierity already^ 
J Jhall not here again repeat : and more will be 
faid anon to the foUoxving queflions, 

^^ Mr, TsA^fwer is none, and needs no Re- 



R. B, Tp HE fecond profofttion to he f roved 
Sl ^"5 that [ the Ilraelites children vpere 
members of the Hniverf^l vijible (^tourch of (lorifi 
AS vpell as of the Congregation of Ursid J Bat this 
yoii did heretofore acknowledge , and therefore 
Jfuppofe veill not now deny, I fnffofe it fafi con- 
troverfe between /^ ; i. That Chrifl had then a 
Church on earths As Abraham faw Chrifis day 
and reioycedy and Mofes fujfered the reproach of 
Chrifis Heb. it* 26* and the Prophets enquired of 
the falvation by Qhrifi , and fe arched diligently^ 
and prophefied of the grace to come •, and it was 
the fpirit of Chrifi which was in thofe Prophet i 
fignifying the time^ and tefifying beforehand the 
fnfferings of Chrifl^ and the glory that jhouldfol" 
low, I Pet. I. 10, 1 1. So were they part of the 
Church of Chrift , and members of the body of 
Chrifiy and given for the edification of that body : 
Though it was revealed to them that the higher 


friviledges cf the Church ^ftcr the cov'ing of 
Chrifi, were twt for them but for u>^ I Pet. 1.12. 
2' I ftppofe it agreed on aljo between lu > that 
there was no true Church or EccUftaflical wcrfhip^ 
jing fociety appointed by Cod tn all the world 
jince the fally but the Chut ch of Chrifl^ and there- 
fore either Infants were n^embers cf Chnjis 
Church 5 or of no Church of Cods inflitution. 
Mofes Church and Chrifts Church according to 
Gods infiitution were not two , but one Church. 
For Mofcs wa6 Chrifts Vfjcr , and his ceremo- 
nies were an obfcurer Cofpel to leadrKcn to Chrift : 
^nd though the foelijJj jews by mifunderftand- 
ing them made afeparation^ and made Mo^ts Di- 
fciplesto be feparate from Chrifts Difciples^ and 
fo ft up the alone \^f}adows of thi>;gs to comcy 
yet the body is all of Chrift] Col. 2. 17. and by 
fo doing they violated Gods infiitution , and un- 
churcht thcrr/fel'ves, 3. I fuppofe it agreed alfo^ 
that Chrifts Church ts but one , and that evert 
thofe of all ages that are net at once vifble^ yet 
wake up one body, 4. jind that therefore who- 
ever is a member of aiiy particular Church is a 
member of the univerfaL ( Though the Church 
was more emnnently called Catholicity when the 
wall of feparation wa^ taken down. ) But Iremjem^- 
ber I have proved this in my Book^^ part, i.cbap. 
20. and therefore pall Jay no more now. 

" Mr. T's Jnfwer, The two firft are granted. 
^' To the third, Though whoever is a member of 
^' any particular Church is a member of the uni- 
^' verfal ^ yet it follows not, (which Mr. B. drives 
[^ at, and vainly talks of his proving) that every 

^^ one who was a member of the univerfal Church, 
/'in that hewisa member of the Jevvih Church- 
*^ particular, was a vifible member of every parti- 
'' cular vifible Church of Chrift. 2. Nor that every 
"one that was a member of theuniverfal Church , 
*^ in that he was a member of a vifible particular 
*' Church of Chrift, was a vifible member of the 
" Jewifh particular Church, e^c. 

Reply, I. None of this ever came into my 
thoughts which he untruly faith I drive at, c^c* 
What fober man could imagine either of thcfe 
afTertions ? What pittitul 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 theuniverfal? He durft not deny 
xhis,. and yet a flander ferveth his turn. 


R, B. f^Oncerning the matter of the third qHe- 
V_V fiion, I ajfcrt that [_it n>a4 not only 
of the Jews Common-n^ealth that Infants were 
TKerKtbers -i but of the Church difiinti from it* ~\ 
This is frovedfuffciently in what is fatd befere. 

*' Mr. T's Ar/Jveer. As yet I find it not proved 
" that the Jewifh Church was diftind from the 
*^ Common-wealth , or that there was not any 
*' member of the Church who was not of the 
" Common-wealth. 

Re fly. 

(2P ) 

Reply, I. It is only a formal and not a wateri- 
al diftindion that I medled v/ith : The formal 
reafonof a Church-member and a Civii-memb.r 
differ, at leaft after the choice of Kings, whea 
the Republick was conftituted by a humane head : 
Of which I refer the Reader to Mr. Galitfpie's 
Aarons Rod ; If the Jews Common-wealth be 
fpeclHed as a Theocracy from God the Soveraign, 
the Sichemites were ot it, and other nations might, 
2. But many fay that fome were of the Common- 
wealth that were ROt of the Church, though not 
contrarily : And be they diftind or not , it fuffi- 
ceth me that Infants were of the Church, 


R. B. li yT(9;^fo^'fr , i. Infants were Church" 
1 V Jl members in Abrahams family before 
Circumcifion^ and after when it was no Common^ 
wealth. So they were in Ihacs, Jacobs, c^c. 

2. The banifjed^ captivated ^ fcattered Jews ^ 
that ceafedtobe members of their Common-wealthy 
yet ceafed not to be of their Church. 

3. The people of the Land ^ that became Jews 
in Hcfters time , joyned not themfelves to their 
Common-wealth : Nor the Sichemites* 

4. <tJ^any Trofclytes never joyned the mf elves 
to their Common-wealth, 

"Mr.T. affirmethchem all to have been Com- 
*' mon-wealths. 

Anfwer, The word being ambiguous may in a 
large fenfe be extended to a family, and to a 



fcattcrcd people that have no Soveraign ^ but 13 

•not fo ufually taken. 


R.B.T^HS Children of Abraham by Ketu- 
X rah, when they were removed from hU 
family were not unchnrcheA ; and yet were no mem- 
hers of the Jews Common-wealth, But I jJjall take 
fsp with r^hat is faid for this already , nnderta^ 
king more largely to manifef ity when I perceive 
it necejfary and nfefnU 

^' Mr. T's Anfwer, Abrahams children by Ke^ 
'^ tiirah when out of the Conamon-weahh of the 
" 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 fearofGod^ 
and I will leave it to thy Confcicnce to judge 
whether it be credible, that when God had fore^ 
told that j4braham would command his children 
and houfhold after him to keep the way of ihe 
Lord, Gen, 18. 19. and when Iflimael^ Keturahs 
children , and Efaii , were circuracifed 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 
Ijhmdely Ketttrahj Efau to be uncircumcifed : anrf 
all their pofterity to ceafe that ufage, as foon as 
they were out of Jibrahams houfe : when yec 


Hlftory affureth us that they long continued it : 
Or whether God would have them circamcifed 
and yet be no Church-members ? Believe as evi- 
dence conftrainech thee. 

S E C T. X V 1 1 L 

R. B. ''^O the fourth que ft ion I affert that (^ i. 
X There was a Law or Precept of Cod ch- 
li^irig the Pare?2ts to enter their children into Cove- 
nant with Godyby accepting his favour ^and re-inga- 
ging and devoting them to God^andfo entrtng them 
Jolemnly Church-members, ~\ And \_z*there was 
A Covenant^ promife or grant of God^ by which 
he offered the Church -member^np of fome Infants 
and actually conferred it , where hps offer Was ac- 
cepted, 3 / jlionld have mentioned this firfiy find 
therefore will begin with the proof of this. By 
thefe terms Covenant^ promife, grant^ or deed of 
gift^ &c. we underftand that which is common to 
all thefe , viz» [] A fign of Gods will conferring 
or confirming a right to or in fome benefit J fach 
^ we commonly call a Civil aU: of Collation as 
diflinEt from a m>ere Phyfical all of difpofaL I 
call it [ a fign of Gods will de jure ] becanfe 
that is the general nature of all his legal moral 
4ilts : they are all fignal determinations de debito, 
vf fome dne* 2. i f^ conferring or confirming 
right to fome benefit j to difference it from pre- 
cepts which only determine what fhall be due from 
us to God 5 and from threatnings , which deter-' 
mine what panifhment fiiall be due from God to its, 


. " Mr. T, If we prove by another grant 

"or deed of gift Phyfical or Moral which is not 
''a promife , or by any Law which is not fuch a 
'' precept, he contradids not my fpeech, c^c. 

Reply, Your words are \_J do not confefs thai 
there Viuu any Law or Ordinance determining that 
it Jlwnld he fo ( that Infants fjottld he members 
of the Jewiflj Ch^irch ) hnt only a faci of God 
which is atranfcHnt things and [ think, it were 
a foolifh Hndcrtaliing to prove the Repeal of a 
fa^, J Perufe his words Reader. 


R. B. "TJ Aving thm explained the terrtts , / 
.L JL prove the propofition. If Infant i 
Church-memher^np with the prtvi ledges thereof 
were a benefit conferred^ which fume 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 j fo is the 
confequent. I fi4ppofe you will not deny that it 
was a bene ft to be the covenanted people of God, 
to have the Lord engaj^ed to be their God ^ and 
to take them for his people, to be brought fo near 
him , and to be fcparated from the corr^mon and 
unclean^ from the world, and from the ftrangeri 
to the Covenant of promifes^ that live as without 
God in the worldy and without hope. 

If It were asked what benefit had the Circitm- 
cifion / / fippofe yon wonld fay , 7nnch everj 



If Infant Church-member^jif were no bereft <> 
then they that had it, were not ( when they cam^ 
to age or their Parents in the mean time ) obli- 
ged to any thankfnlnefs for it. But they were 
obliged to be thankful for it. Ergo, it was a be- 
nt ft, 

' Mr. T. Denyeth not the benefit •, but denyeih 
*' [ that this is to be Vifible members formally 
*' or connexively, for they may have all this be- 
" nefit who are not vifible Church-members : 
" <viz.» fome believing Saints that are dumb. 

Reply, Mark Reader, what an iflue our Con- 
trovcrfies with thefe men come to ? [ Men may 
be the covenanted people of God, and have the 
Lord engaged to be their God and to take themi 
for his people, and be feparared from the com- 
mon and unclean, from the world, from Grangers 
to the Covenant, g^c. and ^et be no vifible 
Church-members '} with them 1 Doth a dumb man 
(ignifie his confenc to the Covenant by any figns 
or not? If he do, that is vifible covenaniing. If 
not, how is he one of thefe covenanting and fe- 
parared 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 fccret un- 
exprefled heart-confent : What will m/Kc i 
Church-member then with fuch men ? 

'' He next faith that [^ To be the circjmciiion is 
*'not all one as to be vifible Church-members-, 
'' Cornelipii and his houfe were vifible Church- 
" members, yet not the circumcifion ]]. 

Reply, Reader, deft thou not marvail to find 
•im fo plead for meagainft himfelf, or fpeak no- 

P thiaT 

thing to the cafe? To be circumcifed then^ or 
haftiz^ed novp , is not all one as to be viftble 
ChHrch-members : But fure all the Circumcifed 
were, and ail the Baptized are, invefted in vifi- 
ble memberfhip? Is it not fo? And if CorneUus 
and more of the uncircumcifed 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, a-c.) conferred to 
*^ them as vifible Church-members : For then all 
^'vifible Church-members had been partakers of 
" them ]. 

Reply. But it was to them as members of the 
Jevvilh vifible Church: And if you plead for the 
extent of the Church to others alfo, I thank you 
for it. 

When I fay [^ Infant Church-memberjljip wof 
a benefit ~\ " He faith [ Vifible Church-member- 
'' (hip fimply notes only a ftate, by which was 
*'abeneiir. ] 

Reply. Only^ u an exclulive term : Reader, by 
this thou maift perceive the myftery of w^j^^Tg- 
Church-members by a tranfennt faU , withont a 
Law or prowife. It is no henept with thefe men, 
but a ftatc by whtch \va.s a benefit. Either they 
or I then know not at all what Church-member- 
fhip is : And are not ail our Volumes wifely 
written to trouble the world , about that Subje^ 
that we are not agreed )vhat it is , and about a 
term which we agree noc of the fenfe of? I take 
a ^vifible Church -member to be a vifible member 
of Chriil as Head of the Church and of his 



Church as vifible? To be a rJMemher is to be'Ji 
' fan : It is therefcre as the member of a Family, 
School, Kingdom , a related pan ! And is it no 
hef^efit in it /f// befides the confequents to be 
.vifibly united and related to Chrift and his bo- 
dy > to be relatively a member of the Houfhold 
ot God ? Sure were it but for the exclufion ot 
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 ftir about it 
as they do , if it be no benefit , let it be copfi- 


R. B. 'Tp H E next thing in the antecedent tp 
JL be proved u\ that there was a right 
conferred to this benefit ^ and fome 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-^ 
Tiefity Ergo. The confequence of the major is cer- 
tain. I. Becaufe the very natnre of the ve?jeft 
confifteth in a right to further benefits, , 2. If 
any had the benefit of Qntrch -member fi^iip^ Cove- 
nant-interefly &:c, without right ; then they had 
it with Cjods confent a;nd approbation or without 
it» Not with it : for he ts jitfi:^ and confenteth 
not that any have that which he hath not fome 
•right to or in : Not without it : for no man ten. 

have a benefit from God againfi his willy or mth^ 
vm it, z. If no Infants had dnly and rightful" 
ly received this heneft , God vpould have fome* 
where reprehended the nfnrpation and ahnfe of 
his ordinances or benefits, Bm that he doth not 
Oitoth'A cafe ^ Ergo. 3. God hath exprefftd this 
right in many Texts of Script ftre^ of which more 
afterward. • 

'' Mr. T. The Infants of the Jews were vifi- 
*' fible Church-members, not by a Legal right to 
*^ ity antecede?it to their being fpichw ifibW Church- 
*' members which they or any for them might 
^' claim as due: Nor Was it capable of being du- 
" ly and rightfully received or ufurped : For it 
^' was nothing but a flate of appearing to be part 
" of that people, who were in appearance from 
" things fenfibie, Gods people; and this they had 
" by Gods fad of making them to be a part of 
''that people viilbly, viz.* his forming them and 
^'bringing them into the world, and placing 

" them, 

Reply, More myftery ftill 1 i. Was there no an-'; 
tecedcnt Law or Covenant of God, giving a jm^ 
foctetatis a Right cf memberfhip to zAbrahams) 
feed as foon as they had a being initially, and 
commanding them to be devoted to God in Co-'^ 
venant, andi Circumcifed, that they by invefliture 
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 niembrs before they h::d a 
being- nor could lay claim to it: But could not 


j (57) 

\ Gods Law , Grant or Inflrumental Covenant bo 
made before they were born ? And could ic not 
be the Jnftrument of conveying right to them as 
foon as they were born ? that is, as foon as they 
were fubjeds capable ? And is not the caufe in 
order of nature , though not of time before the 
i efPcd ? 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 fubjeds > Is not the Adion 
Ht agentis naturally antecedent to it as in fatieme ^ 
Is it only Gods tranfeunt faB of making them 
men 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 Jus dignitatis^ vel fo- 
details^ though their adion be not terminattd in 
any fubjed till it exift. For every man born in 
England is not born a Lord, or Efquire, or Ci- 
tizen, no nor a free fubjed, unlefs the Law fay 
it fball be fo. If Foreigners or Rebels (bould have 
children here, and tht Law were that they fhall 
be Aliens, they would be no members of the 
Kingdom. If Mr. T. or Mr. jO's children have 
nothing but Generaticn^ and being hern in Eng- 
land to fhew for their Inheritance , their Title 
will not hold. 

2. And might not right have been faldy plead- 
ded or ufurped by a counterfeit Jew ?' Or the 
children of fuch ? Or the children of Apoftates? 
who yet w^xchoxvioi Abrahams feed, and in that 
Land ? Whatfoever they were that Nchef?:iah ufed 

D 3 (ever:- 

feverely, I am fure v^ci^?^;?^ 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 fin ; And God 
might if he had pleafed, have continued the Life 
of Apoftates children , without continuing their 
Church-right ^ Or Apoftates might (md 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- 
Ihip for themfelves or Infants ( born after ) : For 
he that hath loft his right to life, hath loft his 
right ( or may do ) to the priviledges and benefits 
cf it. 

^^ He addeth [^ yet I grant, they had a right 
" m it, that is , that they had it by Gods dona- 

Reply, And was it not a Moral Donation then, 
if if gave Right > You will be forced thus to con* 
fute your fcli-. 

^^ Mr. T. It feems to me not true, that the na- 
^' ture of the benefit of Infants vifible mertiber- 
'^ fhip confiftech in a right to further benefits. 

Reply. Yet he giveth hot a word to tell us why 
Le ihinkeih fo. If we are at this pafs about Re- 
latiops and Ri^ht in general, no marvail if In- 
fant Baftifm go for Antichriftian ; Doth not 
the RcLittve fiate of a Citiz^en^ or of the mem- 
ber of any priviledged focicty, confift in his ftate 
Oi Rjght to the Benefits^ Priviledges and Com- 
wnnion of ihe Society , and an obligation to the 
du.ies of a member, to the end. he may have the 
benefits, and the Society the benefit of his mem- 
' " berfiiip 

berfhip and duty > A conjundion of Ri^h 
( i^acioL ) and obligation ccnftituceth all fuch Re^ 
lations. But what fliall we be agreed in that are 
ignorant and differ here ? 

*'Next Mr. T. denieth the confequence, [^For 
^* a man may have a benefit wichouc right. J 

Re fly, I. And yet juO- now , ChHrch-merKber^ 
fljijf in Ifraei ppOi -a thtr^g that none could ufarfj 
or have yvithotit right ? 2. Buc I faid [] no man 
can have a benefit fyon> God againfl hii will or 
without it : ] And rhtTcfore if God give fuch a 
thing as Ghurch-mtaibtrfliip which confifteth in 
A Right to further benefits , ht thac hath it by Gods 
gift hath it rightfully : Natural effetis f as a prey 
to a thief j may be faid to be given of God im- 
properly, by Phyfical difpofal, rohim that hath no 
right : But right it felt cannot be given to him 
that hath no right ^ nor any thing elfe/ Relative 
or Natural , by Gods Moral or Covenant dona^ 

^' He [^conceiveth it to' be very erroneous that 
** vifible Church-memberfhip is given out of di- 
<' ftributive Juftice •, for as Regeneration, fo alfo 
*' vifible meraberfhip are of bounty by God as 
*VSoveraign Lord, not of diftributive Jufthre by 
*'God as Judge. 2. That all that any man hath of 
"God he hath of debt, contrary to Ror^.^.^. 
^'3. That vifible Church-memberfiiip is concei- 
" ved as a thing offered, and tobeduly andright- 
'•' fully received 

Re fly. If Mr. T. and I (hall tire the Printer, 
and waft Paper, and trouble the world, with tel- 
ling them how many errors each of us hcld^ it will 

D 4 t.c 

be an unsavory task, and I doubt it would be ^ 
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 teU 
^he Reader as to this matter. I hold that Gods 
Kingdom is to be confidered in its Con flit ntioh 
and Adminiflration : The firft hath, i . The effi- 
cient, 2. The Conftitutive, 3. The final Caufes ; 
And in the large fenfe it containeth, i . SnbjcBs on^ 
ly by obltgation^ ( fuch as Rebels are J 2. Snb- 
^clis by cofifent ^ (ox voluntary), Th^ Efficient 
caufe of the former is only Gods i. Making : 
them men , and Redeemed men quoad '^rtcium^ 
2Xi^ commanding their fMbje5i:ion or confent. To 
the effe^iing of the fecond is befides theie required 
their A^aal Confent ( Parents confenting for their 
Infants )j 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 intcreft and bleffings of his Co- 
venant, viz, Chrift and Lite ^ sndthreatneth the 
privation of thofe benefits, and forer punifhmenc 
CO refufing rebels : He is Lawgiver and will be 
Judge of Non-con [enters -, called, Unbelievers and 
refufers of Chrifl and Salvation; When men do 
c.onfent they are under his further Adminiftring 
Laws. The faid efficient caufes are Gods A(5l;i- 
ons, i. As Omnipotent Owner, 2. As Bene- 
fador, 3. <iy4s Sapiential Recior. i. According 
to the firfl, he giveth us our B.cing and frefer- 


^eth it, 2nd in him we Live, and Move, and Are. 
2. As our BenefaUor antecedent to his Admt^ 
mftration^ he gave the world a Redeemer abfo- 
Intely^ and reprieved the world and us, and gi- 
veth us all common Antecedent Mercies* 3. As the 
Redor de jure of men not yet confenting^ he ma- 
keth the Law of Grace abfolucely and antecedent- 
ly to any condition ( of making it ) on our part. 
This Law hath the frcccpwe fart^ commanding 
confent f faith and repentance j. 2. Tht Donative 
or fromtf]ory part, giving us Chrifl in Relation , 
and right to his prefent benefits , if we co77fent ; 
which is the condition. 3 .And the penalty aforefaid. 

The Admimfiration of the Kingdom de jure^ is 
the efficient of the confent ing Kingdom-.Thc Admi- 
niftration (or Actual Government^ of the Con- 
fenting Kingdom , is by Legiflation , Judgement 
and Execution, And the Legiflation is , i. For 
the conflitution of the particular members that: 
ftall from time to time be added : 2, And the 
Governing of them all. 

Now if God have made a Law that men fhall 
I e received members of Chrift.and his ChurcL' if 
they confent ( or Repent and Believe j and former- 
ly to the Jfraelites , if they be Confenters ( or 
their feed, who confent by them ) then it is an 
ad oi difiribtitive jufiice of God as Judge ^ to 
givctliefe benefits to Confenters: And ro contra- 
diflinguiili an aU of bounty unlefs he fay [^ meer 
bounty 2 is intolerable. For God governeth us 
Paternally^ as a Kegent-bcnefatior : He never gave 
reward to a Creature, Man or Angel, which was 
not a Gift as to ihe value of the things and a Re- 

ward only as to the or do confer endi c^ ratio reZ 
cipendi : It is madnefs to think that we can raej 
ric from God commutatively. And it's little 
better to thinks that bounty and diftributive jnfiice 
may not confift -^ yea that there can be any right 
i^tioad ordinem diftrihuendi from that juftice, 
which is not qnoad rem donatam from boHnty, 
It is fad therefore that the world mufl fee, that 
looking all how to make good an efpoufed caufe, 
fhould tempt fo Ancient and Learned a Divine 
to fubvert the Gofpel and all Ghriftianity : For 
what doch he lefs ? If he talk only of members 
by obligation y every living man is a member : This 
he meanech not. If he talk only of Consenting 
^voluntary Members , to fay that God command-^ 
eth none to be fuch^ is to fay that he command" 
eth none to be Chriftians^ to Repent, Believe or 
Confent : To fay that he hath made no fromife or 
Donative Act in the Law of Grace, that if yon 
confent (repent and believe ) yon fmll have uni- 
on vpith C^rifl and his Church ( or be members ) 
is to deny the very fumm of ail the Gofpel, 
and Baptifm it felf. To fay that God doth not 
as Judge execute his ovf^n Law and fromife , gi- 
ving*t\i\s anion to Confent ers^ and denying it ta 
Refufers^ is to fay that he will not as a judge ab- 
folve Believers or condemn Vnbelievers. O Rea- 
der , hate fadion and partial difpuces that can 
make men overthrow all Chriflianity, not know- 
ing what they do. 

2. And his denying that vifible Chitrch'Tnem- 
bcrfiif is a thing offered , and rightly ro be ac- 
cepted^ is the fame, even to deny that Chrift in- 

V It eth 

ijiteth any Infidel to become a Chriftian, or ever 
called or commanded Heathens to believe : or fehc 
his Minifters to compel them to come in, that his 
houfe may be filled. 

But his flander that I fay all that man hath 
from God is of debt, is forged groundlefly. I fay 
God giveth fome benefits antecedently and abfo- 
lately^ and fome confequently on condition , by a 
Law : And none of them all are of debt as a 
workman deferveth his vpa^es with commutative 

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 refnfed •, bnt a fiate refnlting from 
Gods fdSl. He feigneth a Church to be formal- 
ly ^litd Thyficum fure 1 He that would not con- 
fent CO the Covenant was by Jfa 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 xh^r feed 
then have had any right for being theirs f Indeed 
it is difputable how iar fome Jnceflors^ or other 
Proprietors might be a medium of right to fuch 
Apoftates feed : but as theirs^ there is no difpute,^ 


SECT. XX in. 

R. B. T Am next to prove the confecjuence^ that 

Jl {_this right wa6 conferred by fame grant y 
promise , or Covenant of God. 3 And this is as 
eajie as to -prove that the world ypas 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, i . If there he no other 
way pojfible for right to be conveyed from God to 
i^iSy bat only by his grant, promife, or Covenant, 
( which we call donation , and is a moral civil 
aBion J ) then it is by this means that it is con^ 
veyed, Bnt there is no other pojfible way of fuch 
conveyance : Ergo, we have no right till God give 
iU right. His will fignifed createth our right. 
No man can have right to that which is wholly 
and abfolmely anothers^ but by his confent or wilL 
This will is no way known, but by feme figns of 
it. Thefe figns of fuch a will for conveyance of 
right to a benefit^ are a civil moral aEiion, called 
a donation or gift fimply. If the fign be in wri- 
ting, we commonly call it a deed of gift. If it 
be by word of mouth, conferring a prefent right , 
%ve call It a verbal grant or gift. If it confer 
only a fiitnre right, we call it a promife , and 
fometimes a Covenant-^ and fometimes the word 
Covenant figmfieth both , that a^ which gives a 
prefent right^ and promifeth a continuance of it^ 
Right being a rr;-oral or civil thing , can be no 
way conveytd bat by a mcral or civil allion. A 

( 45 ) 

gift that was never given^ ii a contradiU:iofj, So 
that this fart of our controverfie is oi eafic as 
whether two and two he four, 

*^Mr. 7^. Vifible Church-memberfhip is not a 
" Right , but a flate of Being ; as to be flrong, 
" healthy, rich , c^c. which are not given by a 
^' civil moral adion , but by Providence of God 
**ading Phyficaliy as the Soveraign dirpofcr of 

" all. I deny therefore that there is fuch 

"a promife 

Re^ly, 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 Erfiicks, or Politicks, and Phyficks, But 
it is our (hame that a Preacher in England fhould 
be found fo ignorant. God as the Fountain of 
nature y and Omnipotent Lord of all, is indeed the 
firft Caufe of Being and Aiotion as fuch : As a 
free BcnefaEior he is the firft Caufe of all our 
Good as f/ich -^ And as a Sapiential Redor, and 
Ecnefathr conjundly (that is, by Paternal go- 
vernment ) he is the firft caufe of Right, 

Being and Motion are the eifeds of Phyfical 
efficiency : Jus vel Dchitiim is the very formal 
ejfeEl or obje^ ot ' toral Efficiency by a Redor, 
and the formal objed of Ethicks. To be a Qjnrch^ 
member , is to have a flated Relation , confin- 
ing in Right to the Benefits and cbligatton 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 cjiiid Thyftcnm as 
Healthy firength^ Riches ^ and an anfwerable Phy- 
fical caufe. Let the (hame of this ignorance re- 


form the common error of Schools that teach nbt 
their children betimes the principles of Ethicks I 
Politicks , or Governing Order t It is a fhamc 
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. 


R, B, 2. /"^ O D hath exfrejly called that aU d 
Vjr Covenant or fromife by vphich he 
conveyeth this right : which we fimll more fully 
mamfefl anon when we come to tt. 

The fecond Fr of option to he f roved , is , that 
[I there was a Law or Precept of God obliging the 
Parents to enter their children into Covenant and 
Church'memberjhipy by accepting of his offer, and 
re-engaging them to God. 3 And this is as obvi- 
QHS and eajie as the former. But firfl I pall in 
a word here alfo explain the terms. The word 
r Law ~\ is fometimes taken more largely ^ and un- 
ptly, /w comprehending the very immanent aB's oir 
the nature of Gody 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 J nor can be fitly fo called. 2. It is ta- 
ken properly for [_ an authoritative determination 
de debito conftituendo vel confirraando. ] And [o 
it comprehendeth all that may fitly he called (L 
law. Some define it, [_ JufTum majeftatis obligans 
aut ad obedientiam aut ad poenam.J But this leaves 



ottt the fremiant fart^ and fome others: So that of 
Grotius dothy Eft regula adionum moralium ob- 
ligans ad id quod redum eft. / acejuiefce in the 
f^fii ^^ rather in this^ which is more full and ex- 
aih '^\_A law is a fign of the Re^ors will confii- 
tHting or confirmtng right or dnenef. J That it 
be a flgn of the Rdiors will de debito conftituen- 
do vel confirmando , is the general nature of all 
laws. Some quarrel at the word {_figrt \ becaufe 
it is logical and not political : As tf Politicians 
jlwnld not fpeak^ logically as well as other men ! 
There is a twofold due : 1. What is due from us 
to God ( or any Re^or ; ) and this is fgntfed in 
the precept and prohibition^ ( or in the precept de 
agendo & non agendo.) 2. What jloall be due 
to m '^ and this is fignifedby promifes^ or the pre^ 
miant part of the laWy and by laws for difiribu- 
tion and determination of proprieties, ayill bene- 
fits are given us by Cod in a double relation^ both 
as ReEior and Benefa^or : or as Benefador Re- 
gens •, or as Redor benefaciens : though among 
men that flan d not tn fuch a fubordmation to one 
another as we do to God^ they may be received. 
from a meer benefaSior without any regent inte* 
reft therein. The firfi laws do ever confiitute the 
debitum or right : afterward there may be renew- 
ed laws and precepts to urge r/ientoobey the for- 
mer 5 or to do the fame thing : and the end of 
thcfe is either fullier to acquaint the fubjeEi with 
the former, or to revive the memory of them , or 
to excite to the obedience of them : Andthefe do not 
properly conflitute dnty^ becaufe it was conflitu- 
ted before -, but the nature and power of the a^ 


is the fame with that which doth conflitute it^ and 
therefore doth corjfirm the conftitmioHj and again 
oblige m to what we were obliged to before, for 
obligations to one and the fame dnty may be mnU 
tithed, 3 . Some take the word [^ law 3 i^ fi r^- 
ftrained a fence as to exclude verbal or particu^ 
Ur precepts , efpecially direUed bnt to one •, or a 
few men ^ and will only call that a law which is 
written^ or at leaf: a well known cnflom obliging 
a whole fociety in a flated way. Thefe be the^ 
mofi eminent fort of laws : but to fay that the reft 
are no laws^ is vain and groandlef ^ again f the 
true general definition of a LaWy and juflly rejeti- 
ed by the wtfeft Politicians, That which we are 
now to enquire after ^ is a precept^ ox the command- 
ing part of a laWy which is ^ afign of Gods will 
obliging us to duty^ ] of which Jig?ts there are ma- 
terially feveral forts^ as I. byavoice^ that's evi- 
dently of God : 2, by writing : 7,, by vifible works 
or effects : 4. by fecret impreffes^ as by inf^irati- 
oHj which is a law only to him that hath them* 

^'Mr.T*. I alT^^rtj i. There is no^fuch offer, 
*' promife or Covenant : 2. That though there are 
'' precepts for Parents to pray for their Children, 
"to breed thenri up yet they are not bound 

'^ to. believe thi^, that upon their own faith God 
"will take their Infant Children to be his, and 
*' will be a God to theoi , nor to accept of this 
" pretended offer. 3. That though Parents may 

"enter into Covcnanr for their Children 

" as Dent, 29. 12. they do not by this make them 
*' partakers of the Covenant or promife that God 
*' will be their God, 



Re^ly. What a deal of the Gofpel and the 
Churches mercy s do thefe men deny ? i , The very 
nature of our own Holy Covenant is, that in ic we 
give up to God our [elves and all that is oars accord- 
ing to the capacity of that all. And as our Riches 
are devoted hereby as capable utenfils ^ fo our In- 
fants as capable ot Infant Relation , Obligation 
and Right, What is it that a fan^ified man muft 
not devote to God [hat is His f If you except Li- 
berty, Health, Life, you are hypocrites : And can ^ 
you except C/7/7^rf 77 f It's true; this is but fo/«r 
^s they are our own, and we fay no more i when 
they have a will to choofe for themfelves , they 
muft do it. 2.1 have fully proved Scripture com- 
mands for Parents to offer their Children to God, 
and that fignitieth his will to accept what he com- 
mandeth them to ofter. And his promifes to (hew 
mercy to them as theirs are plain and many, which 
I muft not tire the Reader with repeating. 

Mr. T. addeth, That if there were fuch afro- 
mife and duty of accepting the pretended offer and 
y^'f^g^gi^g -) y^f ^^is mither did then nor doth 
now make Infants vifible Church-members, 

Reply, /deader, are not the Anabaprifts ducftile 
mea where they like, as well as intradable where 
they diflike, that they will follow fuch a Leader 
as this > Promife and Duty o^ accepti?:g and re-en- 
gaging aggravateth the fin of Rebels that rejed: 
it ^ but if thefe performed, even vifihle mutual co- 
vcNantingy make not (^hurch-members vifible j what 
doth ? You fee what he hath brought the ancienr 
1 j and later Church-memberfhip , Circumcifion and 
i Baptifm to? I think to nothing: As tormalPon- 

E* ^ tificiao: 

t'fician Church-tyrants when they have mortified 
fome ordinance , and turned it into an Image , 
make an engine of it to trouble the Church, and 
filence the Preachers and ferious pradifers of the 
Gofpelwith. Thcfe men make nothing of Church- 
memberfliip, and thenreftlefly trouble the Church- 
about it. 

S E C T. X X V L 

^»^' T "TAvwg thtu ofened the terms [_ LaW- 
.IX and Precept '] J f rove the Propo/iti^. 
on thtis, I. If it was the dnty of the Ifraelites 
to accept Cods offered mercy for their Children , 
to engage and devote them to him in Covenant , 
then there vpas a Law or Precept which made this 
their duty, and obliged them to it. But it wa4 a 
dnty : Ergo, there was fuch a Law or Precepts 
. For the antecedent^ i. If it were not a ditty y then tt 
T^as either a fln^or a neutral indifferent aliion : But 
it was not a fin^ (fir, i. It was againft no Law^ 
2, It is not reprehended ^ ) nor was it indifferent y 
for it was of a moral nature^ and ergo, either good 
or evil J yea fin or duty : Vor property perjnictere 
is no ail of LaWy ( though many fay it is^ ) but 
a fujpenfion of an a^ : and fo licitum is not mo- 
raliter bonum, but only non malum ; and ergo is 
not properly within the verge of morality, 2. If 
there be a penalty (and a mo ft terrible penalty ) 
annexed for the non-performance y then it was a 
duty : But fuch a penalty was annexed ( as fJjall 
nnon be particularly fiiewed) even to be cut off from 



his people y t9 he put to death ^ S:c* If it Mige ad 

boenain, tt did firft oblige ad obedientiam : For no 

Law obligeth ad poenam , bnt for dtfobedience^ 

which prefuppofeth an obligatio'a to obedience o 

3. // It "Were not the ifraelites dmy to enter their 

Children i>ito Gods Covenant and Qnurch^ then it 

would have been none of their fin to have omitted 

or refhfedfo to do : But it would have been their 

gre^t and hamom fin to have omitted or refufed 

It •, Ergo. Now to the confequence of the majoro 

There u no duty but what is made by fome Law or 

Precept as its proper efficient canfe or foundation : 

I E^gOj '/ *^ ^^ ^ ^'^^y •> ^^^^^^ ^'*^^ certainly fome 

I Law or Precept that made itfnch. (i^imong men we 

\fay^ that a benefit obligeth to gratitude , though 

there were no Law i But the meaning is ^ if there 

were no humane law^ and that w becaufe the Law 

of God in nature requireth man to be jufi and 

thankful. If there were no law of God natural 

or- pofitive that did confiitute it or oblige m to it^ 

;here could be no duty, n There is no duty but 

\^hat is made fuch by Gods figni fie d will ^ ^rgo, 

; \no duty but what is made fuch by a Law or Pre- 

\ :ept. For a Precept is the fign of Gods will oh" 

' 'tging to duty. 2. Where there u no Law there ts 

[10 tranfgrefjion^ Rom. 4. 1 5. ergo, where there 

^.\s no law there is no duty •, for thefe are contra" 

^\-ies : tt IS a duty not to tranfgrefi the Law, and d 

\ Tanfgrejfion not to perform the duty which it re- 

r <utreth of hs. There is no apparent ground ofex- 

•j eption^ but in cafe of Covenant Si> Whether a man 

■ nay not oblige himfelf to a duty meerly by his con- 

' -ntf I ftnfwer^ i.Hem^y oblige hmfelf to ark 

E 3 ^^i 


^iy which he n:nfl ferform^ or elfe frove unfaith* 
Jul and dtjhonej} : but hi^s own obligation mak^s it 
not flri^ly a duty : ergo, when God makes a Co- 
venant with man^ he u as tt were obliged in point 
of fidelity y but not of dnty. 2. He that obltgeth 
' himfelf to an ati by fromife^ dotkoccafion an ob- 
ligation to dtity from God^ becapife God hath oblt^ 
ged men to keep their promfes. 3 . So far as a 
rr.an may befaid to be his own Ruler, fo far may he 
be [aid to oblige himfelf to duty , ( that is duty to 
himfelf^ though the alb be for the benefit of ano* 
ther ^ ) hut then he may as fitly be faid to make a 
Law to himfelf^ or command himfelf : fo that fttll 
the duty (fuch as it is ) hath an anfwerable com- 
mand. So that I m^ay well conclude^ that there is 
a laWy hecaufe there is a duty^ For nothing but a 
law coutd caufe that duty^ nor make that omiffion 
of it a fin. Where there is no law ^' fin is not im-* 
futedj Rom. 5. 13. But the omiffion of entring 
Infants into Covenant with Go^ 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^ or enter them in-» 
to Covenant with him^ then either by Gods will, or 
without it : certainly not without it. If by Gods 
willy then either by his will revealed, or unrcveal- 
ed. His unrevealed will cannot oblige -^ for there 
wants promulgation^ which ts necejfary to obliga- 
tion : And no man can be bound to know Gods un- 
revealed willy unlefi remotely , 04 it may be long 
cf himfelf that it is not to him revealed* If it be 
Gods revealed will that mufl thm obligey then there 
%iis fome fign by which it was revealed* jind 



if there were a fign revealing Cods will obliging 
US to duty^ then there \va4 a law , for thi-s is the 
'Very nature of the preceptive part of a law , 
( which is the principal part^ ) Jo that you may a^ 
well fay^ that yon are a reajonable creature^ but 
not a man^ as jay that men were obliged to duty by 
Gods revealed wtlly but yet not by a Law or Pre- 
cept. 3. We jl J a II anon produce the Law or Tre- 
cepty and put it out of doubt that there was fuch 
a thing. In the mean time I mufi confef^ I do 
not remember that ever J was put to dijpute a point 
that carrieth more of its own evidence to jhame 
the gain-faycr* And if you can gather Difciples 
even among the godly , by perfwading them that 
there were duties without Precepts or LdWSy and 
benefits without donations , covenants or promife 
confirming them* , then defpair of nothing for the 
time to come: Tou may perfwade them that there 
PS a Son without a Father ^ or any relation with- 
out its foundation^ or effctl without its caufe^ and 
never doubt but the fame men will believe you , 
while you have the fame inter efi in them , and 
' ufe the fame artifice w putting eff your con- 

Mr. 7*. would firft perfwade the Reader that I mean 
EOthing but CircunicifioPj 

Reply. Long ago I told you that, i. The Fe- 
males were not circumcifed, 2. Nor the Males for 
forty years in the wildernefs : And yet were all 
Church -menfibers by being Gods Covenanted peo- 
ple. And fo was Ifraelhdoxt Circumcifion. 

His terms of \_ the htffing of a Goofe^ and the 
' fnarling of a Cnr ] and other fuch , I account 

E 3 lighter 




leaft of his 





R. B. np HE fifth Qjteftion requireth me to lay 
J., down this ajfcrtion , that [^ there is no 
Law or Precept of God which doth not oUige to 
duty ^ arid no aciual promife or donation , which 
doth not confer the benefit* ] This I aver on oc- 
cafion of your lafl Letter^ where in contradtciion 
to the former^ yon confef \_ the promife s to the na- 
tural ^o?ttm^' o{ Abraham y Gen. ij, and the 
Covenants made with Jfrael at Mount Sinai^ and 
Dem, 29. and a precept of Circumcifion , and 
precepts of God by <*Jf'fofes, of calling the people, 
and requiring ihcm to enter into Covenant, Exod. 
19. Dent. 29. ] Tet yon [ do not conceive that the 
Infants of Ifrael were made vifible Church-mem- 
bers by the promifesin the Covenants, or the pre- 
cepts tbrenamed. 3 ^ffij then either you ima- 
gine that among all thofe precepts and promifes 
there was yet no promife or Covenant that gave 
them the benefit of ^hurch-membcrjhip^ or precept 
concerning their entrance into that ftate •, or elfe 
you imagine that fuch promifes were made^ but did 
72ot actually confer the benefit ^ and fuch precepts 
were made , but did not atlually oblige^ Tour 
•words are fo ambiguom in this^ that they fignife 
Toothing of your mind to any that knows it not fame, 
father way^ Eor when you. fay £ there is no fuch 
papicular promife concerning Infants vifible ' 
' ' ■ ' - Church^ 

Chorch-memberfliip , or precept , err. befide? 
Circumcifion, as in my Book of Baptifm I afTerr, J 
nho knows whether that exception of [_ Circura- 
.ciiion ^ be a conccffio?2 of fnch a precept or pro- 
mife in the cafe of (^\rcnmcifion?or if not^what fenfs 
it hath f and what yon imagine that precept or 
proTKtfe to be which I ajfert /* and before the fenfs 
of your one fy liable [///c/jI is aifcernedbytryi7Jg 
jt by a whole 'vobtry.e^ 1 d?nbt you will make what 
you lift of it. Howezier if ycttjlwitld mtan^ that 
fiich precepts there are a^s have for their fubjetl 
|_ the avouching Cod to be their Gody the entring 
into Covenant Circumcifion ^ of Infants^ but not 
their Church-n^emberjlnp -^ then, I. I have proved 
the contrary to the negative before-^ 2. z^^nd 
more f)all do anon •, 3. u4nd it's a palpable con- 
tradiiiion to the precedent affrmative. But tf 
you mian that Church-memberjhip of Infants as 
well as others is the fubje^ or part of the fubjech 
of thofe premifes or precepts , and yet that Jn^ 
ftnts were not wade or confirmed thereby ; it is 
the contrary that J am afflrting , and I have no 
further need to prove ^ than by jljewing the con- 
tradi5iion of your opinion to it felf, For an aBu- 
al Covenant or promife that doth not give right 
to the benefit promifed ( according to its tenor 
and terms , ) is like a caufe that hath no ejfeth , 
a Father that did never generate ^ and it is all 
one as to fay y a gift or Covenant which is no gift 
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 
C bHrch-mcmber^np , Vfhich yet obligeth nonefo to 

E 4 enter 


ffiter them^ is ^ gro^ a, ccntradiUion a^ to fay^ 
the Smhath not heat or Ifojjt^ and yet is truly ok 

Mr. r. here confeiTeth , 2. That thiC Jews were Gods 
vif]ble_ Churcii not barely by Gods promife to them to 
be their God, but by th?ir fromife to Cai : Gods rail oj 
them made thein his Church, and their promifi to God wiih 
other ad:s made them viiibiy \o 

Reply. Reader, is not all here qnTaid again by 
this conceffion? llnlefs he will fay that this C^//, 
A7id Covenant^ and Fron?ife made them all a vifible 
Churchy and yet none of thefe^ but their birth and 
flace made them rfiembers f As if any thing made 
the Whole Church wiiich rnade none of the Farts 
as fifch. 


R. B. T Co?}7c next to the fixth ^^ejlion,. Whether 
X indeed there be any tranfeunt /^^, which 
without the caufation of any fromife or frecept ^ 
did make the Ifraelites Infants Church-members,^ 
This yoii affirm (if^ycii vrould be nnderftood -^ ) 
Vphether this your ground of Infants Church-mew- 
herjloip or mine be righter^ I hope will be no hard 
matter for another man ( of common capacity) to 
difcerno By a \^ tranfeunt faEl ] thm fet as con- 
tradiflinU to a law, preceft or promife y either yon 
mean the aEi of legiflation and promife makings or 
fome other meerly phyfical a^o If the former, it 
is too ridiculom to be ufed in a feriom buftnef : 
Vor yoH jhould not put things in competition eX" 
eluding the one^ where they both mufi nee effarily 

concur , 

foncur, the Qne fla?iding in a [Hhordmation to the 

other, VV^u there ever a Law or Cove nam made 

in the world any other way than by a tranftunt 

fad: f Sure all legislation ts by fome figmficatioff 

of the Soveyaigns will. And the making of that 

fign is a tra?iftnnt faB, If it be by voice ^ ts 

nat that tranfcunt ? If by writings ts not the ath 

tranfemit f // by creation it fdf^ the aU is tran^ 

fennt though the ejfctl be permanent. And cer^ 

tamly if iegi flatten or fromtfing be your tranfc^ 

unt facl^ yuii do very abfitrdly put it tnoppnfition 

to a law (or promtje ) it being the making of fuch 

a law. And the legiflation doth no way obhge 

the fubjellj hat by the law fo made : nor doth the 

rnakmg of a promife^ grant or covenant , confer 

right to the benefit which is the fiibjed of it , any 

otherwife than 06 it is the making ^f that grant 

which jhall fo confer it. As the making of a kiiife 

doth not cut, but the k^iife 7nade : and fo cf other 

inftrH?nents, Sd that tf the law oblige not , or 

the gra7it conjer not , certatydy the legiflation or 

pror/iife-7r,akj.ng cannot do tt, I cannot therefore 

imagine that this isycur fenfe^ without charging 

yoH with too great abfurdity. As if you fliould 

fay^ It is not the will of the tcftator^ i, e. his te- 

ftament^ that entitleth the legatary to the legacy , 

hut it is the tr an fount faB of the teflatcr tn ma^ 

king that will- or it ts not the Soveratgns commif- 

fwn that aiithoriz^eth a Jtidge^ fohldtery &c, hut it 

is the tranfeiint fall of writing or making that 

commiffwn. It is not the flgn that fignifieth , but 

the tranfeunt fact of making that flgn. Were not 

this a contempt tbic arguing f To charge yon with 



$hiSy were to ir.ahe yen tantum non Hnreafotiahh. 

And yet I k^cw not what to fay to yon ^ that is^ 

hovp to under fiand yoH, For if you mean a, meer 

fhyjical tranfennt faEb^ which is no fuch legijlati-* 

en or frcmife'Wakjng^ then it is far nr.ore ahfurd 

than the former. For jf it be not afign of Gods 

vpik obliging to dmy^ or conferring benefit y then 

can It not fo oblige to duty \ nor confer benefits. 

It is no or her tranfenyit fizli but Icgiflation that 

can oblige a fuhjcch to diuy^ nor any other tran-^ 

feunt fa^i but fromtfe , or other donation , that 

can convey right to a benefit ^ or oblige the fromi^ 

fer. A moral or civil ejfed: muji be "produced by 

a moral or civil aEiion , and not by a meer fhy^ 

fical aBilon ^ which is unfit to produce fuch an ali^ 

en effe^y and can go no higher than its own kind. 

What fen fe therefore I fiiould put on your words j 

Without making them appear unreafonable , even 

much below the rates of ordinary rational peoples 

difcourjey I cannot tell. For to fay^ it is not a 

law but legtfiationj ts all one oi to fay^ it is not 

the fundamenrum , but the laying of that founda^ 

tion that caufetk the relation , or from which it 

doth refuh. And to fay it is an alien phyfital 

aci^ which hath no fnch thing as right for its 

fubjeEi or terminuis , is to confound phyfickj and 

morals , and to fpeak the groffefl abfurdities -, as to 

fay that the tranfeunt fad of eatings drinking , 

goingy buildings &c. do adopt fuch an one to he 

your heir, I mufi: needs thinks therefore^ till you 

have hetttr cleared your felf that you have here 

^uit your felf as ill , and forfaken and deliver-- 

id up your Caufe^ as palpably as ever I k^ew man^ 


do^ VpithoHt an exprefi con fefjlon that it is naught. 
When men muft he tait^ht by thts ohtufe fitbttlty 
to prove that I?ifa??ts (loHrch-wemherJljip needed 
no revocation^ forfcoth \_ becaufe their Chnrch- 
memberfljip xcm not canfed by a law, precept^ pro- 
wife or covenant^ but by a tranfettnt fa^h J tha^ 
rvhich asyoH leave it^ the world hath fcarce heard s 
wore incoherent dreair, "But I pray yen remtm- 
her in your reply that yon being the aff.rmer of 
thisy mufl prove it. Which I fljall expcEl ^ rvhen 
yoH can prove. th.it yon can generate a man by (hit ^ 
tng or blowing your ncfe, or by plowing and Jow- 
ing can produce Kings and Err-perors, 

Mr. T. Here Mr. T. is at the old rranfeunt faft 
again : Let the Reader make his beftof it: I ac- 
count it not worth the reciting ; nor his title of 
Canine Sceptical Rhetorick^rcgardibk, 


R, B. T iV conftderation of the feventh Quefiiony 
X / fljall confider the nature and cjfe^ of 
the tranfeunt fa^ which you here defer ibe. And 
firft of the reafon of that narKe, Ton [ay that yon 
call tt [^ tranfennt ] [^ becanfe done in time and 
fo not eternal^ and pafi and fo not in congrnous 
fenfe repe ale able at a law, ordinance^ flatnte^ de^ 
cree which determines fnch a thing fhail be for 
the future. ] An<i do yon thinks this the common 
fenfe of the word ? or a ft reafon of your appli-* 
Ration of it to the thing in hand ^ 

J think^ 


7 thlnh^yopir i?Jtelkchion and volition are imma" 
fient at}s, and yet not eternal. 

We -nfe to contradiftingnip] tranfcunt a5is from 
imminent, and that because they do tranfirein fub- 
jeAum extrancum. 

But it feems you take them here as difiinii front' 

But life your fenfe as long as we underfiandit. 

If it be only \_'^a(}^ atiions vphtch yoit call 
\_ tranfeunt ] it feems your long fad which was 
fo many hundred years in dohig -y was no tranfe-^ 
unt faU till the end of all thofe years ; and fo did, 
not ( by your own doSirine ) make any Church- 
members till the end of thofe years, 

Buty Siry the jQjicflion is not-, whether it were a 
tranfeunt faEi that laid the foundation by legiflati- 
on or promife-makjng • but whether the effect were 
tranfeunt yor the aEl as it is in patiente : Whether the 
law were tranfeunt which wa^ made by a tranfeunt 
faEi ? and whether the moral action of that law were 
■permanent or tranfennt^it being r^ofi certainly fuch 
a moral all that mufl produce a title , or confli- 
tnte a duty, Gods writing the ten (fommande^ 
ments in ftone was a faoi foon pafi^ but the law \ 
was not foon paft, nor the moral aU of that laWy 
viz. obligation. There are verbal laws, that have 
no real permanent fgn : and yet the law may be 
permanent, and the obligation permanent^ becaufs 
the fign may have a permanency in efle cognito , 
and fo the fignifying vertue may remain by the 
help of memory^ though the word did vanijh in the 


when yoH come to point out this tra?j[eHnt faB 
individiuilly^ yon Jay [ it is Gods takjn^ the -whole 
people of the jews for his people y ] yyhich yon term 
\_fii^ I 06 conceiving it moft comprchenfive of the 
many particular ails m many generations whereby 
he did accomplijhit/} i, Idtd not well nnderfiand 
before that [^ a faEi ] did fo vafily differ from 
an [ A^y ] as to contain the aEls ( rather than the 
fa^s ) of many generations* 

This is a long fa^i according to your meafure^ 
even from Abrahams call out of Ur ; but how long 
it feems you are not well agreed with your ft If. 
I- or in the firfi part of your Letter you enumerate 
to the other alls that compofe this fati \_ the 
bringing them into the bond of the (fovenant at 
^iount Sinai , giving ther/i laws , jetling their 
Prteflhoody Tabernacle^ Army ^ Government^ Inhe- 
ritance : ] But before you end , you change your 
mind ^ and (ay [" the Church ^men:berflnp of the 
Ifraelitcs beg-an at 1 conceive with Abrahams c^//, 
and was compleated when they were brought out of 
itgypt to Cody Exod. 19. 4. 1] But fur e that was 
long before the fetling their inheritance. Tour 
fatl according to your lafl account w^u> about ^ij^ 
years in doing ; but according to your firfi opinio 
on^ it wa.s about 470. years long. 

If it were one individual faB of about 470. 
years bng that made Infants Church-members , 
then they could not be Church-men': bers till that 
fatl was pafij For the cffech is not before the caufe^ 
or caufality of the efficient -, the relation cannot 
he before the fundamentum ^^ laid: and it feems 
this long faU w^ the laying of the fundamentum ; 


But the confequent is ccrtai7ily falfe ^ for Infants 
were Church-member; s before the end or compleating 
of your long faoi : For they were Church-members 
( youl grant ) when Ifhmael and l(^^c were cir- 
cumcifed. Ergo , it was not this long fa§ that 
made them Chnrch-members, 

If yvH mean that it was not the whole ^ hm fome 
fart of this long faU: that aCiually m,ade Infants 
Church-members , then yon would ha'Ve afflgned 
that fart ^ when that was the thing defiredy and 
which you pretended exatlly to perform ; or at^ 
leafi you would nn have told us it comprehended 
all the fe aEis, 

And if each particular aB: did make Infants 
Church- member Sy or lay a fujfcient ground of ity 
then itfeems that it was done before the inftitution 
cfCtrcumcifion, For Cods calling Abraham out of 
Ur was before it. So that the Children born its 
his houfe muft be Church-r/iembers upon that ; and 
a fufficient ground laid for his own to have been 
fuchy if he had then had a natural ijfue : And it 
feems then that Ifhmael was born a Church-mcm- 
her many years before Circumcijion* 

If this be your medning^ I pray you be fo jufi 
and impartial as to accept of the proof which Ijhall 
give you of Infants Church-member jhip before 
Abrahams days , if I make it appear to be as 
ftrong as this call of Abraham from Ur. 

If you Jhould mean that fome one of thefe com-'* 
prehended atis Jhould of it felf make any Infants 
Church-member Sy then it muft beany one *^ for you 
no more ajfign it to one of them than to another ^ 
( only fay f chiefly th$ bringing them from JE" 


gypt : 1 But fnrely fome of thefe aEls particularly 
cannot do it^ as the leading to Padan Aram, the re- 
moval to Canaan, to itgypc, placing^ prefervtng 
there J fet ling their Arn>) ^ d^c. Did any one of 
thcfe n^ake Infants to become Chmch-mtn.bers ? 

Nay , fuppofe yon wean that all theje ad:s mnfi 
concur to make them memhers^(andfo that they were 
no members till many hundred years after the in- 
flitntion cfCtrcumctfon^ ) yet could not your Dy- 
Urine hold good : For fome of thefe aEls are of an 
alien nature , and no more apt to caufe infant 
Church-memberjJjip^ than a Bull to generate a Bird. 
What aptitude hath the fetUng of an Army to be 
any part of the caufaticn of Infants Church-mem- 
berfinp? None^ I think^-^ at leafl tf it be fuch an 
tArmy as ours : for furely the fetling of ourscau^ 
fed no fuch things as. yon vrellkliow. What apti- 
tude hath the leading to Padan Aram, or removal 
to jEgypt, to make Infants Church-mem.bers ? 
Nay ^ hovp firange is it , that the removing 
I of Church-mem>bcrs , and fuch as had been In- 
fant Church^members-y as lllimael, Keturahs chil- 
dren^ Efau J muf; caufe Infant Church-member- 
Jhip ? Sure it was no caufe of their own, Ketu- 
rahs children were Church-members in infancy : 
1 encjuire of you by what act they were made fuch ? 
Tou fay [^ by GodsfaEi of taki^ig the whole people of 
the Jews for his people^ whereof the aEl of rem>oving 
Keturahs children was a part, Kery good. It 
feems then that removing from the Congregation 
of Ifrael a people of the Jews, is a taking of the 
removed to be of that people: 6r elfe it is not on- 
ly the takjvg that people ^ hit alfo the removal 
• . from 

from that people that wakcth Church'Tnemhers ^ 
tven the rtmoi>€il as rvill a4 the tal:j'n^ boih vohich 
¥ire alike abfurdk 

And I pray ycH tell me yet a little better^ how 
an ath can make a man a Qj^.rch-member that was 
one long before that was done /' Ton cannot here fay ^ 
that it was before in efle morali, and had a mo- 
ral canfation. How then conld your chief efl ati^ 
the bringing om of ^gypt > make thofe Infants 
Church-members that were born in >Egypc, and 
•were Church-members before f Or how could it be 
any part of the caufe f Did the bringing out of 
iGgypt concur to make Mofes a Church-member 
vphen he was in the basket on the waters ? And 
when you anfwer this , you may do well to go 
a little further^ and tell me^ how fiich an a^ con* 
curreth to makf him an Infarct Church-member 
that was dead an hundred or two hundred year's 
before that a5i was d.ne. For exa7nple^ how did 
the fetling of the Ifraelites Army^ or Inheritance^ 
or the Covenant on Mount Sinai, make Khmael , 
or Efau, or Ifaac, or J^cob Church-members i* 

J deftre you alfo to tell me by the next , whet 
he the tiervcs and ligaments that tie all thefe 
idEls £?/ 43 d. years at leafl together^ fo as to make 
them one faB f And whether I may not as ground- 
edly mak^ a fall fufficient for this pitrpoje of the 
atls of an hundred or two hundred years only ? 
And whether you may not as well make all the 
^^j /r«?w Abrahan:is call till Chrift to be onef^H^ 
and ajfign it to this office ? 

Tou fay that you call this fad: [ tranfeunt 3 
hecaufe it's \_pafl^~\ {a?id fo till it's [_pafi~\ n 


[eems Ifaac and Jacob that were dead before '] ar^ 
no ChrHch-memhers ; ] I would then fain kncv> 
whether it he this fame travfcunt fad: , or fome 
other J that makes Infants Church-wembers fv6 
hundred years after it is paft ? Jf it be thisfame^ 
then how comes u meet tranftunt tad to work^ ef- 
feEiually fo n^,any hundred years after it is paft ^ 
Hnlef it made a Law or Covenant which doth 
the deed ? If it be a new tranfeitnt fad that muft 
make Infants (^hurch-members after the comfleat-^ 
ing of this ( the fetling their inheritances •, ) then 
I fray yon let me know ^ whether it be one fad cxr 
ercifed on the whole nation in grofy or mnfl it he 
a fad Hfon eiiery Infant member individnally f If , 
on the nation y remember to tell m what it was • 
and do not only tell us the canfe of the member- 
fiiif of former Infants, And feeing it mufl h^ 
fach as the memherjhip of every Infant tillChrifis 
time at lea (t mufl hecattfedby^ I pray yen remem^' 
her to make your worki fquare and full , and he 
fure to affign ns no other kindofhdiy thanwha^ 
yoh will prove to have been fo frequently repeat-^ 
ed in every age^ and fo fully extenfive to everyl 
Infant among the Jews^ as that it have nogapSybut? 
may make all members that werefo in each age/And 
remember y that it is no law^ precept , promife or 
covenant that you mnfi ajfignfor the caufe ^ for that 
is it you are engaged againfl : but a confiantfiAC-- 
ceffion of tranfeunt fads extending to each indi^ 
Vkdital member. . O what work, have yon wade 
yourfelf? and what a fort of new political Do-^ 
Brine jhall we have from you, when thefe things 
an accomplijhed according to the frame you ha'^a 

F begm^ 

__ (66) 

tegunf Such as I believe the Sun fteverfaw,mf 
the vplfefi Lawyer in England ever read he^^ 
fare f IVhkh makes me the lef marvel that fi ma-» 
ny^fyour opinion arefo much again ft the Lawyers j 
for / dare fuy they will be hut few of them for 
you^ if thefe be your grounds^ or at leafi not for 
thefe your grounds* 

Refly. To all this I find nothing (aid by Mr*T. 
tlut I think worthy the Readers trouble to reply 
to : Let him read it and fee. His charge c* 
{^foclijh excUrnationSy vanityy &:c. ^ I pafs by. 


R. B. T5 ^^ all this yet is but a light velitation : 
XJ The principal thing that I would en* 
quire into, is^ what your great comfrehenfive fa^ 
ts in the true nature of ity which you call [] Gods 
taking the whole people of the Jews to be hispeo* 
fU'J Doth the word {_taking~\ fignifie a meer 
fhy/ical taking orfu^ ; or a moraly fuch as among 
wen we cally a civil aBion f If it be a meer phy^ 
fical takings then^ i . It cannot produce a moral 
effe^y fuch as that in que ft ion is, 2. j4nd then 
it mufl have an anfwerable obje^j which muft be 
indii idual extftent perfons. 3 • Ji/id then you can- 
not 4;a 7 it one fdi^ but many thoufand :■ even as 
n any as there were perfons taken in to the Jews 
in above four hundred years, 4, And then what 
"Was the phy fical att which is called Gods taking ^ 
y^as it jttch a ttikjr^g as the Angel ufed to Lor, 
tlikt carried him out of ^dom •, or m the Apo- 


cryfhal jiuthor mentions of Habakkuk , that vpo^ 
taken hy the hair of the head, and carried hy the 
Angel into another Conntry , to bring Daniel 4 
PJefi of Pottage ? If God mttft by a phyfical appre^ 
hen/ion take h'Ai of them that he makss Chnrch^ 
members , vpe jhall be at a lof for our proof of 
their Churih'wemberjljip. But I cannot imagine 
that this PS yonr fenfe. Bnt what is it then ? Is 
it a phyfical a^ion thoHgh a moral caufation ojf 
fome phyfical effeli ? That it cannot be : for it 
it a political or moral effe^ that tve enquire af* 
ter* It necejfarily remains therefore that this bit 
a political moral taking that y0H here [peak of» 
And if fo^ then the tranfeitnt faB you Jpeak, of 
fffttfi needs be a civil or political aSiion, And 
Vfhat that can be y which is no Law y Fromife or 
Covenant in this cafe ^ I prny you befiow fome 
ftfcre diligence to inform usy and not put us off 
with the raw name of a iranfeunt fatl oppofed to 
thefe. (Certainly J if it be a civil or legal aBion^ 
the produU: or effe^ of it is jus or debitum , fome 
due or right : And that is either ^ i . A duenefs 
of fomewhat from m^ ( which is either fomewh at 
to be donCy or fomewhat tc be given - ^ 2i Or 4 
, iduenefs of fomething to t^y which is either of good 
, \or evil : If goody it is either by contrail or dona-^ 
, ^ion ( whether by a Tefiament pramiant LaWy or 
. jhe like : ) if evil , it is either by fome pcenal 
, \Law , or voluntary agreement ' Now which of 
; \heje is it that your tranfeunt fa<ft produceth f To 
}t a member of the Churchy is to be a member of 
\ ^fociety taking God in Chrifl to be their Gody 
^, te< tfiksn by him for his jpecial people i The a($ 

t Z which 



Vi^\hich m^k^^s each member^ is of the fame ndturt 
with that ' which makss the^ fociety. The relation 
then cfftmially containeth^ i , Aright to the great ^ 
benefits of Gods f over aignty over men ^ Chrifts^ 
hcadfiif^ and that favour ^f rot eEiion ^ frovifon 
and other hlcjfwgs , which are due from fnch a. 
■powerful and gra&tom Sovera:ign to fnch SubjeciSy 
and from fnch a Head to his ^J^emhers : Asal^, 
fo a. right to my fiation in the Bodyy and to the- 
iinfeparable benefits thereof, 2. Jt containeth my 
debt of obedie?ice to God tn Chri fly* acknowledged-, 
and fromifed aU: 11 ally or virtually ^ really orrepu-j 
tativdy. Now for the firft^ how can God he re^ 
latcd unto me a.s my Godj or Chrift a^s my Savi- 
viour, and I to him as one that have fuch right 
to him and his blefftngs , by any other way than 
his own free gift? This gift mufi be fome fg" 
nif cation of his will : For his fecret will is not a 
gifty but a purpofe of giving. This way of gi- 
'vmg therefore . is by a civiT or moral all ion ^ 
V(hich is a fignifying of the Donors will •, and 
can be by no way , but either pure donation^ con- 
traii,y tefiament , or law. In our cafe it muft 
needs partake of the nature of all thcfe, h ii 
not from one in any equality ^ nor capable of an) 
(bilging compenff.tion or retribution jrom m- Be- 
ing therefore from an abfolute dif-engaged Bene- 
fatiory it muft needs be by pure donation , or i\ 
cannot be ours. Tit as. he is- pleafsd as it wen 
to cblige htmfelf by promifcy or by his.word, am 
alfo to call m to a voluntary accept ancty and en 
gagement to certain fiaelity', gratitude and duty 
» nd fo is the ftipuUtory and we the promifers it 


the latter fart of the aBion : it is therefore jufily 
called a-coTJtraEi or Covenant ^ though indeed the 
word r Covenant J frequently fig'nifeth Gods own 
•promije alone. As it proceedeth from the death 
of the tefiator (in natural moral-repitative -he- 
ingj ) jo it is called a te flame nt. And a6 it is 
an td of a rHlingBcnefad^or^ giving this bene ft 
to the governed^ to promote the ends of govern- 
ment , and obliging td ditty thereby , fo it par- 
taketh of the natnre of a law. The comrnonefb 
Scripture name for this ad:^ is Gods (Covenant or 
Promifey and fometimes his gift -^ which all figni-- 
fie the fame thing here. It follows therefore j 
that either by Gads \_ taking Ifrael to be his peo^ 
pie "I you mean fhme civil poiitical aUion , as a 
Covenant^ Promife , or the like collation of the 
benefit, ( and then you ajjert the thing which yon 
deny , ) or elfe you know not what you mean , 
Kor Ctin makr another know it , wtthmt the dif- 
covery of the grojfefi abfiirdity* And 06 for the 
other thing which is contained in Church-mem" 
berfijipy the profcjfed duty of man to God , it is 
mo ft certain^ i. That Gods Law ,obligeth in to 
that duty: z. And obligeth all according to their 
capacities to confent to the obligatiofi , and fo to 
' re-engage themfelves : 3. That^ this aViual ton- 
j fent profejfed doth therefore double the cbligatian'i 
I And thi^ by a mutual contrary Covenantor eon- 
, fent (whereof our part is fir ft recjiiired by a 
laWy ) is the relation of Church-me-mberfinp ^con- 
traced. Now to lay by and deTiy all this ^ and 
give us the general nak^d name of [^ taking for 
Gods people fj^.ii meeriy dekfory , feeing/ that 

F3 C-'-''---T 


C f'^ki^^ 1 w^ans this vphich yoH exclude , or ff 
means nothing that is true and reafonahle, jind 
therefore tell m better what tt means, 

cyis for the Texts yon cite , Diut, 4. 34. <^ 
f.evit. 20. 24, 26. I King. 8. 53. irai,43. 1. In 

J)eur. 4. IS mentioned not the moral ap: of God 
y which he made them his people , or took^ them 
for his own , and founded the relation : but the 
natural aBions whereby he refcued them from the 
Egyptian bondage and took^ them to himfelf or 
for his ufcj fervice, and honour out of that land^ 
But I think^fure they were his feopUy and all their 
Infants were Church-members before that taking 
i^y vertuc of a former Covenant-taking, 

j^s to Levir. 20. God did perform a twofoU 
work, of fcparation for Ifrad. i» By his Cove- 
nant and their entrtng Covenant with him. Z.By 
local feparation of their bodies from others. It 
VSftu the firfi that made them his people , and 
phurch-members , and not the lafl : the lafi was 
only a favourable dealing with them a^ hts be-r 
laved* The fame I fay to the other two Texts^m 
Sure you cannot think, that corporal feparation 
wakes a Church-member, What if an i^gypti- 
^1 that had no part in the Covenant had pafi out 
with the Ifraelies, and got with them through the 
f.ed Sea , do yau thinks he had been therefore a 
Church-member ? Suppofe God had made no pro- 
mife or covenant with Abraham or his feedy but 
fnly tjaksJ^ them out of ChaMea into Canaan, 
and thence into iEgypt, and thence inp the Wil^ 
dernef , ^n^ thence it)to Canaan again : Do yon 
ifhink^ this much had mad€ t^em Chnrch-mem-^ 
• ^ hers^ 

Vers ? Then if the Turkj conquer Greece ^ cr the 
Tartar tans conquer China , they are he come 
QjHrch^memhers , becanfe this feems as great 4 
temporal frofperity at leaft. And I think it ts 
fafl donbt^ that Lot vea4 a Church-member in thg 
midfi ef Sodom, and the Ifraelites in ^gypt be* 
fore they vpere brought out , as truly as after. 

As to Gen. 12. i. Ads 7. 2. Nehem. 9. 7. 
V^hich you alfo cite , as there is not one of them 
that gives the leaft intimation that Infant* 
P^Hrch'Wemberjhip then began ^ fo } jhaU further 
enqnire anon; whether they contain any Covenant 
er promife. 

So Exod. 19. 4, 5. hath no word that gives the 
leaft intimation that God by that a5l of taking 
them out of ^gypt , did make Ifrael a Chnrch ^ 
er the Infants or any others^ members of it : But 
only that by fulfilling a former promtfe in the deliver 
ranee of a people formerly his own^ he layethfur^ 
ther obligations to duty on them by redbubling his 
Mercies. The fame I fay of Levit. 1 1. 45. Neh. 
I, 10. / Will not believe yet^ but that you believe 
your felfy that the Ifratlites and their Infants 
were as truly Church-members before ^ as after 
their deliverance out of ^gypt. And me-thinkj 
the Texts you cite might put it out of doubt » 
mat if God fay, Hof. ii. i, ^When Ifrael was 
a child I loved him , and called my Son out of 
-^gypt, ] Is it eafie hence to prove thsit eaUing 
him out of -/Egypt did make him his Son that woe 
none before : or to prove that Ifrael was Ced$ 
$on before he called him out of iEgypt ? V ytm 
fioitUi maints^n the former , / might cxfcU thai 

you jhot0 fay the like of Chrifl himfelf^ to whom 
the Evangelift applieth this text ♦, and fo you may\\,\ 
f'ove 4^ fairly ^ that Chrifl xvas none of Gods Son 
till he vp as called out of ^gypr, but woi made his 
Son by that call. Certainly the Text termeth him 
Gods Son that was called^ as being fo before that 
calL By this time I am well content that any 
Xvaktng man do compare your doBrine an'i mine , 
and try whether it be atranfeimt faU^ or a Law 
and Covenant , that made Infants and all others 
()ourch mer^ibers : and if they do not admire that, 
tver a learned man jhould harbour Jhch a conceit^ 
ss yours, and th.it 'ever a godly man fliouldbmld 
}i4ch a Yf eight on it , and go fo far on fiich a 
ground, yea and that evef ordinary godly feoplis 
Jjjo/ild be To blinded with fich palpable nonfenfe 
or abfardities, then let them fl ill follow you in the 
*i^^yK.\ for I expeEl not that reafon fhould recover 

Reply. To :1I this I find nothing faid that 
lieedei'h any /orcher reply. 


R. Bo T Ccr/ie now to the eighth Que ftion^ that is 
JL to fp call to the point which yon propound- 
ed> TvH ifige me to cite to yon the particular 
Texts that contain thif Law^ Ordinance^ Precept' 
or Covenant, To which I anfwerthm. i. There- 
are two forts cf Laws •, one which firfi make a 
dupy I the ether which fiippofe itfo made ^ and 

do only call for obedience^ and excite thereto , gt 
frefcribe fomewhat as a means in order thcrennto* 
If I could [Ijevv you no veritten law or fron?ife 
as firfi confiitHting the duty, or granting the fri- 
viledge of Chnrch-meTnberjhip , it were not the 
leafi difparagement to wy catife^ as long as I can 
jherv yon thofe following Laws which prefapfofe 
this. Ton know the Church of God did live about: 
2000. years without any written law that we 
know of : where then was Cods will manifefted 
ahont fuch things as this , hut in tradition and 
nature ? If Mofcs then at the end of this 2C00. 
years did find this tradition^ and find all the In- 
fants of Chttrch'tnembers in foffeffion of this be- 
nefit^ then what need he wake a new Law about 
it ? Or why Jljould God premife it as a new 
thing ^ I confef if I jhould find by any new law 
or promife that it did beginr but in Mofes days , 
I fijould thinks it fome abatement of the firength 
of my canfe ( thoifgh yet I thinks there would 
enough remain, ) 2. There are (yet higher ) two 
forts of laws ': the one for the c on ft it ut ion of the 
(^0 m mo n -wealth it ft If ^ the other for the admi- 
7itflration or government of it when it is fo con- 
ftitnted. The former are caUcd by fome^ Funda- 
mental Laws^ as laying the frame and form of 
the Commo?7'Wealthj and the quality of the mate- 
rials^ &c. / thinks indeed) that as conftitutive of 
the form of the Common-wealth\^ thefe ^re fcarce 
-properly called Laws ^ though as they look^ for- 
ward, obliging to duty^ and prohibiting alterati- 
on^ they may. But if they be not laws, they are 
Comewhm higher^ and lay the ground o^ all laws 



tutjd ohedienci^ 4nd fo are laws eminenter & vir- 
tualicer, though not aCinally and formally: And 
in owr cafe , as this confiitution did fnbjeti m t9 
Cody making it our dmy ever after to obey him j 
fo doth it oblige ta to ackffowledge that fubje^i* 
on, jind the very conftitution of the Church is 
an aU of high beneficence y and performed by the 
fundamental grant or Covenant, JSlovff if this Co' 
V^nant and confiitation could not exprefiy be fioew^ 
ed in wriringj it were no diminution of the au^* 
thority of it , p^^i^g among men fundamental^^ 
are feldom written •, and when they are y. it it 
only as Laws obliging the fuhjeli to maintain and. 
adhere to the firft cQnfittution, As long there* 
fore as we can -prove that it is Gods will that 
fuccejjlvely Infants jhould be Church^memberSy it 
no whit invalidates the caufe if we could not 
fiiew the original conftitution in writings Xet 
fomewhat we jhallatten^pt, 3, We have full proof 
of Infants Church-member fioip by Laws and Con 
venants concerning it , ever fince the time that 
there was a written word of God : and that ii 
fiifficient J if we could fetch it no higher, Ha^ 
^ing premifed this , / come nearer to the Q^e-^ 

The firfi infiitution of Infants Church-mem--' 
herjl}ip de jure upon fuppofition of their exiflence^ 
reas tn Gods firfi conftitution of the Republick of 
the worldy when he became mans Govermur^and 
determined of his fubjecis , and members of thi 
Commo/i-wealth : Which Republick^ being facred , 
^nd devoted to Gods worfioip and fervice , 111;^ 
truly a (hurch of which God WM head^ ThU 


\K>as prformed by the firfi Law avd Covenant 

piade either tn or upon wans creation, Thatftich 

Covenant or projnife of felicity was made by 

Cod to innocent nian^ alnjofl aU Dtvtnes agrte : 

^Ht becahfe it is rather implied than exprejjed m 

Mofes hnef Htfioryy fome ftw cavillers do there^ 

fore contradtli tu, Bnt ^ i. The thrcatntng of 

death for fin, feerr.s t9 imply a prowife of life tf 

he finned not, 2. ayind the New Tefiament af- 

fordeth m divers pajfages that yet plamlier prove 

ity which to you I neeanot recite, 3 iit whether 

this promife of life were natural ( a^ the threat^ 

ning of death was ^ ) or only pofittve and more 

arbitrary , Divines are net agreed among them* 

felves, Thofe that fay it was free and pofitive^ 

give this reafony That God could not naturally he ob^ 

liged to blef or felicitate the moft innocent or 

perfcEi creature^ nor any creature merit of God, 

Thofe that thinks it natural at the threatning wasy 

fay^ It's true that Gad could not be properly ob^ 

ligedy becaufe he is under no Law , no more is 

he obliged to pumjh, but only man obliged tofuf- 

fer if he infill it : And its true that m^n can- 

not ftriilly merit of God, But yet, fay they^ as 

man way have a natural aptitude for fuch feli- 

city^ fo Cod hath a natural propenfity to do good 

according to the capacity of the fubjeEi , and hi( 

works do oblige him (improperly ) in point offi^ 

deltty and immutability as well as his word. So 

that their reafons are thefe following, i, Becaufe 

Cod is as naturally prone to do good to the good, 

as to do evil to the evtl^ that *f, to reward as t9 

PHnifimem ^ as hu name proclaimed to MoFes , 



ExoCi. 34. jhews. 2. Becaiife God making man 
capable of a higher felicity ^ and principling him 
With inclin^tio?js thereto^ and giving him depres^ 
leve^ and other ajfe^ions for that bleffed endj even 
the everiaftmg fruition of Gody therefore they fay ^ 
43 od did in this frame af his nature give him ground 
to expeli fuch a felicity -^ if he finned not, Vor 
tlfe all thefc inclinations and affe^ions flwuld have 
hcen in vain : But God made not fo noble a crea- 
ture with vain inclinations and affeBions to a5i. 
fallacioiify and falfly, Alfo Gods workj would 
■not be harmonic al : So that as Gods promife is bnt 
a fi^nof his will obliging him improperly in point 
cf fidelity and immutability^ fo^ fay they ^ the na- 
jure of man was a fign of Gods will fo far enga- 
ging him : So that as he could not Ut fin go un- 
punifJjed without fome breach in the harmony of 
hifs fapi€?itial frame of adminifiratit)n , no more 
could he dc7iy to perfeH: man the objcB: of thofe de- 
fires which he formed in htm. So that aUhough 
he might have made man fuch a creature oa 
fljould not nneffarily be punifiicd for evil j or re— 
xvarded for goody that is y he might have r/^ade him 
not a man :^ yell: having fo made him^ it is necef- 
fary that he be govertud as ^ man in regard of 
felicity oa wcR as penalty, §, Our fhilofophers 
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 
tn cafe of rightcoufnefi, I interpofe not my felf 
us a fudge in this controverfie of Divines^ but I 
have mentioned it to the end which 1 fiiallnox^ ex^ 


frefs, T* It is mo fl certain^ whether the reward 
orfromife be natural orpofrwe^ that ftuh a fiat e 
of felictty man vpas either in or in the way to , or 
in fart and the way to more. And it is mofi cer^ 
tainj that man was made holy , dcvoted^ to God ^ 
an4 fit for his fervice^ and thai in this eftate ac- 
cording to the Law of his creation ^ he was to 
iyjcreafe and multiply : I; is mofi certain therefore^ 
that according to the fir ft law of nature^ Infant s^ 
flwidd have been Church-members, 2. Bat if their 
opinion hold^ that mak^ the reward grounded on 
the law of nature , and not on a meer poftive 
law-, ( and you fee the reafons are not contempti- 
ble, )■ then the argument would be yet more ad- 
vantagioHi. 3. But however it be of the title to 
glory or eternity ^ it is mofi certain ^ that accord- 
ing to the 'very law of nature Infants were to have 
been Church-members if man had flood. The firfi 
Text therefore that I cite for Infants Church- 
memberfliip, as expreffmg its original de jure, is 
Gen. 1.26,27,28. [So Gcd created man in his 

own Image And God blefTed them , and 

God faid unto them, Befruitful; and multiply, and 
repleniili the earth. ] Here you fee by the law of 
nature Infants were to have been born in Cjods 
Image and in innocency ^ and fo Church-mem^ 
hers. And note ^ that the firft bUfjjng that God 
fronounceth on mankind^ is y that they jtropagate 
Children in their ewn efiate^ to be as the Pa- 
r^ents were, even in Gads Image. 

Kr.T. I. If this prove their Church-rnenjberniip , it 
proves HOC their vinble Chiirch-memberrhip. 


Refly. Mark Reader, that Gods taw andWfp 
Jiug for che frofagation of Adams feed in his 
Image^ would noc have made them when born to 
be 'nifihle Church-memben , though members t 
What not fo notorious a LaWy and Cove.nant^ and 
BenediEhion ? No wonder if all Chriftians Infants 
mu ft be (hut out , if Innocent Adams rouft have 
been (hut out? 

He adds, [ 2. if it prove a Law or Ordinance, yet not 
fuch a Law or Ordinance as i^s in qtejlion j which u not d 
law or Ordinance dc jure, but de eventu, that fo it (haU 

be they being to be acluiUy vipble charcly-members bt" 

fore admijfion according to Mr. B'^ dictates. ] 

Reply, Alas, poor Readers, that muft be thus 
wearied I I know nothing that this LaW or Cove- 
nant giveth but a Ri^hf to real benefits that miift 
have anfwerable caules : I know no Right givtrt 
but it is evemnaUy given , nor received but it's^ 
eventually received, Aimiffion is an ambiguous 
word ; My didatesas he calls them, are i. Thac 
Gods Law obligeth perfons to devote therafelves 
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- 
ptifmal Covenanting Ordinance: 3. And in his 
Covenant or La^ of Grace he projnifeth to accept 
them^ and fignifieth his confent to the mntnal Co- 
venant : which is antecedently to their confent , 
but a conditional confent or Covenant^ but confe- 
^Hcntly a^iiaL 4. That accordingly natural in- 
terefi only is not the Reafon why a Btlie^ers Child 
is a Church-member , meerly becaufe he is his :' 
Biic God having given him povcer and obligation 
¥flfoiQ dtf^ofe of his own Child for the ends of hit 



Creation and Kcdenrftiort^ be is a Church-membet 
initially upon heart -confent •, and by Inveftitur^ 
upon Sacramental confent: which X think you 
mean by Admijfion* 

9, Saith Mr. T. if it did prm fuch a Law or Ordinmce^ 
yit it proves it not fuch a. promife and preapt as Mr, B. ^ 

Reply. Muft fueh dealing as this go for an an- 
fwer ? What's the difference } 

Mr. r. addcth, 4. // it did , ytt it only prtveth it of the 
church by nature, 

Reply, You are hard put to it, I do by this 
firft inftance ihew you where and when the Or- 
dinance y Law or Grant of Infant Chhrch-memher- 
pip was jirfl made* And 1 leave it to any impar- 
tial Chriftian whether I prove it not certain, that 
God in Nature making man in his own Image 
with an \_ Increafe and Multiply ] fignifie nor 
that Infants fhould have been Holy to him , if 
jidam had not fmned: and fo have been mtm^ 
hen of the Innocent Qonrch or Kingdom of God^ 
Alas, many go fo much further , as to alTert as 
truth, that had Adam flood ( nay but in that one 
temptation ; yea fay fome, had he but once loved 
God ) all his poftcrity had not been only borrt 
Holyy but co?2frmed 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 vifihle 
members. And if fo that God did found In- 
fant memberfliip in NatHre^ let awakened reafon 
think, whether Parents yet have not as much in- 
terefl in children^ and children in Parents ^ and 
then whftber C§d have ever rfverfi this natural 

order ? 

drder ? Yea whether he hath not all along cotu 
firmed it? At feemethout of doubt to me, 

I know that Parents and Children now ar^ 
corrupt : but withal upon the promife of a Re- 
deemer , [] an univerfal conditional pardon and 
f^ift of life in a Covenant of Grace took^ place J 
Let them deny it that can, and dare. And it in- 
tknateth no change of Gods will as to Infants 
conjmci interefl with their Parents, 
. He faith that [ the Church by Grace is only by 
EleEiion and Calling , not birth. ^ I would defire 
him if he can, to tell me, whether both Cain and 
zy^bel were not vifible Chiirch-members in Adams 
family ? And whether none but the EleU are -z;/-* 
fihle members? And whether God call not them,. 
that dxt vifible members to that fiate? • "' 

He faith [ //- this Law k in farc^ all an horn vplthoid 
fin.'\ ' . ' ^ ' y 

Reply, The Covenant of Inmcincy is not \W 
force; but yet I may tell you what it was while 
it was in forcfe ; and that Infants vifible Ghurch-^ 
memberlhip was founded in Nature and that Law 
at firft : And therefore though our Innocency be 
loft, Parents are Parents ftiil •, And if God change' 
ijot his order therein , are as capable of confent-' 
ing to Graceioti their Childrenj as they were of 
being innocent for them. - --'S^ '■ ■ 




R. B, T^-^^ riext Inflitution of Jnfafits Church- 
X, niemb€rjl)if^ WdS at the firfi proclawa- 
tion of grace to fallen man , or in the firjl pro- 
Wife of redemption to fmners ^ in Gen* 3. 15. 
[] And I will put enmity between thee and the 
woman, and between thy feed and her feed : it 
fhall bruife thy head, and thou (lialt bruife his 
heel. ] / will pro7je that this ftndar/iental Cove- 
nant of grace or promife doth declare it to be th? 
will of God that hfants fliAtld be Church-mem- 
bers : zy^nd to this end, let va firfi coyifder what 
the words exprefly contain , and then what light 
may be fetcht from other Texts to illuflrate them: 
It being a kz^own rule^ that an Expofitor TKiift not 
turn u?irjerfds into fingklars or particulars y nor 
refrain and limit the Scripture generals , where 
the word it [elf or the nature of the fitbjeB doth 
fiot limit them, J may well conclude that thefe 
things following are comprehended in this funda- 
mental promife , 1. That the Devil having plai- 
td the enemy to mankind , and brought them in- 
to this fin and mifery, God would not leave ther/i 
temedilefs, nor to that total voluntary fubjetlion 
to him as he might ha e done : Bftt in grace or 
ikndeferved mercy would engage them in a war 
i4gainfl hm^ in which they that conquered JJwuld 
^uife his head, 2. That in this war the Lord 
^Jefns Chriflj the principal feed, 'is promifed to be 
iHr General J whofe perfe^ nature fhoftld contatnj 

G and 


and hii perfecl life exprefi a perfetl enmity a^ainff 
Satan , and who jhoitld makj a perfe6i conqUeji 
over him, 3, The Lord Jefii^ vs promifed to da 
this work^ ^s the womans fcedj anafo as conceived 
of her, and born by her^ and [0 as an Infant fir fi^y 
before he corr.es to ripenef of age. So that here 
an Infant Qf the \vowan is promifed to be the Gens- 
. rat of.th^s Arrny, and Head of the Church. This 
is rKof} evident : By which God doth fanttifie the 
humane birth ^ and the Infant fiate, and ajjnre us 
that he doth not exclude now that a^e from the 
redeemed Church , which he admitted into the 
Church by the laws of creation* For the firfi 
promt fe u of an Infant born of the woman to be the 
Head of the Churchy and growing up to maturi- 
ty, to do the works of a Head, Had God excluded 
the Infant fiate from the vifible Church he would 
vot have made the Head fi'rfi an Infant, Where 
note^ I. That Chrifi is the great exemplar of hi4 
Church J and in things which he was capable of,, 
he did that fir ft in his own body^ which he would 
nfter do in theirs, 2. That the Head is a Mem- 
bcr^ even the principal (iJMember^ one of the two 
parts vMch confiitute the whole. As the parsim- 
perans and pars fubdita do conftitute each Com- 
mon:^wealth. So that if an Infant mufl be a mem- 
ber eminently fo called , then Infants are 
not excluded- from m ember flnp^ but are hereby 
clearly warranted to be members of a lower na- 
t4ire. If an Infant may be Soveraign^ no doubt he 
may be a SuhielL 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 



'flring-^ and fay. They are no Difclfles that learn 
not ^ yoH may 06 well fay ^ He ts no Prophet thai 
teacheth not. And tf yon xvill openly deny Chrifiin 
Infancy to have been the Prophet of the (^hurchj 
I will undertake to prove the falftwod and vtlenef 
ofthdt opinion y as joon a^ I know yon own it. 
The promife then of an Infant Heady doth de- 
clare Gods mind that he will have Infants mem" 
hers J hecahfe the head is the principal member, 

Mr. r. Tiie thing to be proved is a Law or Ordinance 
of God unrep^?aIcd, 

Reply, The thing I am to do , is to (hew yori 
Vphcn and how God inflitHted Infants ChnrcH 
ftate •, And that he never had a Church on earth 
that excluded them : And particularly to (hew yod 
that they are included in the firfi edition of the 
Covenant of Grace made to Adam , which is 
perfeded in a fecond edition , but not repealed- 
This I think I have done. 

Mr. T. addeth that It will not hold froin Chrills Head- 
fliip in Infancy, &c, i. It is not declared in Scripture, 
and fo a nicer pliancy : 2. Then an Infant in the womb 
fhould be a vinble member, beciufethen Chriil was Head 
of the Church : 9. Then an old man fhould not be a mem- 
ber ; for Chrift was not an old mm. 

Reply, I , IrendtHi thought it would hold who gi- 
vcth this reafon of it ; And I leave the Reader to 
confider whether the words cited prove i^tioto 
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 t 
Member^ even the nobleft : Therefore one Infant 
is confeffed by you to be a viftble member of the 
Church : And if one^ it will be incumbent on you 

G z to 

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 he an Infant^ 
and to be ferftcmed in Infancy^ and to have In- 
fants murdered for his fakj firfi y and to tnvtte 
and hfe them as he did, it is noc the rowling over 
of your wearifom dry denials and confident abfur-* 
dicies, that will perfwade me that Chrift jloHtteth 
out all Infants. And I am fure that the Inftance 
confiiteth your common exceptions againft Infants •, 
As that they are not Dtfctples becaufe they learn 
not J which yet they may be in the fame fenfe as 
Chriji was their zJlfafiet in infancy when he 
Taught not: And that their /»/v?wry did not inca* 
pacitate them to be in Covenant with God^ to be 
Chriflians^ to be Church-members ^ &c. Chrift 
(hewed, 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 aclual confent ( in his Infancy 
and humane nature ) to the Covenant of media- 

Mr. r. faith, [ Then an infant in tk v;omb may be a Church' 

member 1 

Reply, Yes, in the fame fenfe as Chrift in the 
womb was the Churches head : not by the folemri 
Invejiiture 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 (hould ac^ 
knowledge that this dedication and fo the vifibi- 
lity of memberlhip , hath its gradations to perH 
fcdion : Are not year frofelytes vifible members in\ 



one degree^ when they o}snly profefs Chrifllanity 
( as Con ji amine did ) and in ^further degree when 
haptifed F The inter eft of your opinion puts frivo- 
lous reafons into your mind which a child mighc 
fee through. 

Mr. r. addcth, [ Toen an old mm [honld not be a mm' 

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 \k\t ajfLrma^ 
tive^ that fuch a ftate of life which Chrift under- 
took is lawful, fuch words which he fpoke, fuch 
deeds which he did are lawful, because he ^/flftheni 
( being not proper to rhe Mediator : ) But will ic 
thence follow from the negative^ that no calling, no 
thoughts , no words, no deeds are lawful which 
Chrift u[ed not ? A fmgle man that hath no Wife 
or Children may be proved capable of Church- 
memberfhip, becaufe Chrift that was fuch was the 
chief Church-meraber,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 feera forfaken, may be crucified as aMale- 
fador : but not that no other are Gods chil- 

Mr. T. I deny not thit Chrift In Infjncy was bead of the 
church, nor that he was tin Prophet of the Church hi Jnfancvy 
underftanding it of his being the Frophet habitually and by de- 
ftgnation, nor that he in forne refpeci-, to wit, of Rule and p^o- 
teliion, was the head of the vifible Church, even of that part 
which is not ehcl : yet I deny that in refpeci . of that union 
which mal^s any members of his body, in the Scripture ac- 
cmions which is by his jpirit, he is the head of that part 
9f tbe vipble Church which is not ele^, 

G 3 Reply. 


• Reply, I. And will not the Reader be fatisffed 
with thefe concciTions ? Mark Reader , that he 
granteth that Chrift an Infant was the Chnrches 
head, and thus lar ashe mentioneth of the Church 
vifible, and that he was the Prophet of the Churchy 
beeaufe he was fo habitually and by defgnation : 
Why, even fo it is that we fay an Infant may be - 
a Member^ a Difciple^ a Chriftian habitually and 
by deftgnation^ (though Iwouldufe 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. Gataker. 

2. And then what brought in your denial of 
fpiritfial n;ember^np to the m^i-ele^ <' Would you 
have made your Reader believe that it was any 
thing to the queftion ? And when will you prove 
that neither i Ccr, 12. nor any other Scripture 
callcth thofe members that have but fuch com- 
mon gifts of the (pirit^ as tongues^ miracles^ pror 
fhecie-y &c. rejeifted Matth, 7. 23, And that 
Chrifl never talkt in fohn 15. cf branches in 
him not bearing fruit , aud fon. e cHt off from 
him and withered, I am fure it was a whole 
Church vifible that had carnal contentious wrang- 
lers againfl the Apoftles in it, and men that were* 
drunk at the Lords fupper , &c, of whom Pani 
faith jCor» 12. 15, 18, 20, 22,23, 26, 27. that 
they were the ^(?^f?/ Chrifi and members m par-- 
ticnUry and common gifts are mentioned as their 

Charader. '• — - 

*■ ■ ^ 

Mr. T. that the himmi birth mi infant jlate « fmCti- 
fei ( by chrifls) a mt true : for thin it would be holy tit 

. Reply, I deny your confequence. There are 
fcveral ca^fes concur to the fame falsification : 
Cbrifts Birth and Infancy ar<? ^iK a remote pre- 
faratory cai-tfe^ ofpowerlul fandification, which 
is ever to tndtzidii^A pcr(ons ; as all things are 
pure to the pure , and when they are capable fuh- 
j^d"s , by natural exigence and Barents cor.fe?a ^ 
then from all the caitfes together refuits theholinefs 
of that ftate : As Chnfts death end n.crits fandi- 
fie us , but not innrediutcly nor alove. But Di- 
vines ufe to take this word \ fa'/i[l:ifyir^r~] in an 
initial preparatory fcnfcj as it fignifieth the making 
of fuch a thing or Jlate fit for holy ufe : As Tem- 
ples and Utenfils are faid to be fandified , when 
defigned to be ufed hoiily ( before the ufe. ) But 
muft they th.refore he fo ufed by all? No, but 
by the Priefls and Worfhippcrs ? So they ufe to fay, 
that Death and the Grave are fanclified by ChriJ} : 
How > Not to all, Or any oUhe u:igodly : But the 
curfc is tah^cn off^ and they are hallowed for the 
holy advantage of the faithful. So is it as to his 
'Birth and Infancy, 

Mr. T*. ^'or do I conceive any truth hut gro(? fa'jhood m that 
fpccch [ Had God excluded the Infmc fracc from the vi- 
fible Church, he would not have ?nad2 the Head firji an 
lifint ~\ For this doth fuftinfe this we only end" or chief 

end and more in Gods eye than the faving sf firi' 


Reply, I prove that grof falfimd to be true, 
thus : 

That jlate or a^e which Cod vifbly included 

\ undaUually made the chief vt/tbleChurcb-mefrf^er 

^ iny he did not exclnde from the vifihle Church : 

, Bnt the Infant ftatc Cod vifibly inclnded, and 

G 4 aUually 


aVtually wade the chief vifihle Chitrch-mtwherinf 
Therefore the Infmit flute God did not exclude 
from the vifihle (^hitrah. 

The reafon of the Major is because to include 
and exclude are contraries. The Minor he con- 
fefTeth. If he fay that it may be included and ex- 
cluded in feveral perfons, I anfwer, I here fpoke 
but of the St(^te 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 {Ihrifthdid been excluded: And 
therefore the A^e is not excluded as fuch^ if in- ' 
eluded in one : For it rauft be a total exclufton ' ' 
And therefore if he will prove our Infants excln- 
'ded^ it muft not be qua tales as Infants , but for ' 
fome other reafon, (when he c n find it ^ and fo; 
the Age or ftate is not excluded. 

2. But what man elfe could have gathered, that 
then this wuft be the only or chief end , and more ' 
in Gods eye than the failing of a fmner ? Is there ,' 
any more included in the affertion than barely thaf^ 
\_ God would not have made an Infant the- chiefs 
member if he would have excluded Infants as In- . 
fants ? ~\ Who c uld hence have found out that 
God hat:.! various fegrees of intention ? And we- 
mufl difpute which is chiefly in his eye : and 
that this WM only or chiefly in his eye more than 
faving finners. Let them difpute what is chiefly 
in Gods eye, that can better diftinguifh of thofc 
volitions which are all but h\s fimple ejfence-^ but 
let them do it on better reafons than thcfe. * * 
.Mr. T, I deny that Chrift as, mav in i^fr^icy was thi Fro- ' 
p^'?t'of- Ins- Church v/fi!?lyj and'm adu exercico : Let Mr. B,' 



when k tvill affaalt, thin r^nll .^pr:ar in bis contradi^Ion, 
vileneji and manifold fal,honds. 

Reply. That one little [_a?id'] was cunningly 
put in to bring you ofF-, by takjng vifthiltty and 
•exercife conjunctly : But are your followers To cri- 
tical as to difcern the knack? i. Neither do wc 
fay that Infants are learners in aCiii exercito ^ 
andfo what is this to the matter ? 2. But Reader 
I cin prove to thee if thou be impartial , though 
not to Mr. T, that it is neither vtle nor falfe that 
Chrift in Infancy was the Prophet of hts Church 
vifihly^ ( though not in aElu exercito : ) 

That which vfos declared by Angels from Hea- 
ven , and by revelation to ^iJMary , Zacchary , 
Anna^ Symeon^'\\A, by Prophccie by them to others, 
is to be called vifthle : But that Chrift was the 
Head and Prophet of the Church, (habitually 
and by defignation2,% Mr.T. calls it J was thus de- 
clared ^^go 

Mr. 71 And for his inference , if an if ant may he the 
chief Prophit of the church , then no doubt but Infants may 
he Vifciplesy I grant both: and yet deny that chri:t iv^ts-vifi- 
hly.y an'dibiy, in aftu exercito, /// his infancy in h>s humane 
nature the Prophet of his churchy or that any Infants area[iu~ 
ally Difciples vifibly^ till they hear the Gofpel and profef? the 
faith: Nor am I aloamed to aver that he is no Prophet that 
prophefuth not, that they are no Difciples that learn 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 ofword^ufed 
fliaraefully to hide what he is forced to confefs. 

I. He. granteth both that an Infant way be 
( and vpas ) the chief Prophet of the Church , and 
infants way be Difciples, 2. This is it that -we 



dilute for which he exprefly granteth. 3. He 
denyeth the faid Pvelation titles as in aciu exerci- 
tOy and y^ do we '^ that is, that Chrift then pro- 
phefied , and Infants learn or believe, 4. He 
talks conBdently 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 [_ vifihly J 
for a paltry fubterfuge, that if we prove Chipift 
vifthly the Prophety we may not prove him audi^ 
bly fo, 6. Yet it is fuch a [ vifibtUty ~] as 
[^ muketh one known 3 that he had in hand ^ and 
before denied \ht\^vifibility : ] as here ^ but if you 
prove that Chrift was vtjibly the Prophet , he 
can fay [^ but not audibly ] If you prove that he 
was audibly foy in that Angels and Prophets ^/z- 
dibly declared it, he can fay \_ but not in aEiu excr- 
cito 3 and by his own Prophefying •, which none 
denieth. 7. And yet in the end he exprefly with- 
out diftindion denieth him to be any Prophet that. 
Profhefieth not , or them any Difctples that learn 
noty when he had m terminis granted the c<yitra- 
ry before , and muft needs therefore grant and 
deny by diftindion. In fumm, our caufe is ex- 
prefly granted us (and exprefly denied^ we plead 
for no other kind of memberfhip to Infants, but fuch 
as Ghrifthad, nor for any other fort of vifMity^ 
than the vifibility of their being the feed of per- 
fons confenting to Gods Covenant, and Godsex- 
prefTed will in his word, that they fhould be of-^ 
fered to him by confenting Parents, and that he 
will accept them, and did conditionally firfi corir 




R. B. A "^ ^^^ ^'^'^ ^^ ^^^^ frocUiwed^ and the 
JLjl General or chief (^on^wander confli-. 
tHtcdy fo next here is a natural enmity pHt ima 
the whole feed of the Vi'ory.an^ or humane race ^ 
again ft the whole pdd of the Serpent that then 
woi^ or the Diabolical natme. This ts plain both 
in the Text^and in the exptrie?ic£ of the fulfilling of 
it. As in the inflrnmental ferpent, tt is the vphole 
ferpenttne nature^ that hath an enmity to the hu- 
wane nature^ and the whole humane nature to the 
ferpentinc nature •, they bcingnjcnerr.eui to m^ and 
■we abhorring them oi njemn.oiu , and as fuch as 
our lives are in danger of : fo is it the whole hu- 
mane nature that ts at enmity to the Diabolical 
nature. Vide Mufcul. Calvin. Luther, in locum. 
jill men have naturally as great an abhorrence of 
the Devil ^ as of a ferpent , they apprehend htm 
to be their enemy y they abhor the very name and 
remembrance of him : If they do but dream of him^ 
it terrtfieth them ^ they are afraid of feeing him 
in any apparition. If they know any temptation 
to be from him^ fo far they diflikc tt and abhor 
it 5 though for the thing prefented they may che- 
rijh it» This is not jpectal faving grace^ but this 
is a great advantage to the work of fpecial grace y 
and to our more effeElual refiftmg of temptations^ 
and entertaining the help that is offered tis againfi 
them^ when our very natures have an enmity to 
the diabolical nature : m now look^ en him a^ ha- 


z'in^ the power of denthy a6 Gods exccutipmr and 
our dejhoyer arid malUiom adverfary, tyind if 
there he any Witch or other vpick[d perfoh that 
hath contracied [nch familiarity and arr.ity with 
him^ OA that this natural enmity u thereby over- 
come , that proveth not that it vpas not naturally 
there , hut that they by greater wick^dnc^ are 
grown fo far unnatural, 5. As this enmity is 
efiahlijlied in the nature of rnankind again ft thedi- 
aholical nature , fo is there a further enmity le- 
gally proclaimed againft the diabolical pravity ^ 
malignity and workj. Vide Parxum in locum, 
God will put an enmity by his laws ( both natu- 
ral and pofitive ) mJ^ng it the duty of mankind 
to take Satan for their enemy ^ to refijl , and ufe 
him as an enemy ^ and fight again ft him and abhor 
his rvorkj, andfj to liftthemfelves under the Gene- 
ral that fighteth againft him^ to take his colours^ 
and to be of his Army : And this being ftok^n of 
the common world of mankjnd^ and net only of 
the ele[i {for it is not they only that are obliged 
to this hoftility and warfare ) belongeth 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- 
my of ma?i^^nd^ 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 \ as it is the bent 
cr by as of our new nature. This God giweth on- 
ly to his chofenj and not to all. And it contain- 
eth noi only their confent to lift themfelves in his 



army againfl Satan , btft jfecWtly and properly n 
hatred to htm as the Prince of hnrighteoufnefs ^ 
and a cardial refolntion to fight againfi him and 
his vpork^ univerfally^ to the death , vcith a com^ 
placency in God and his fcrvice and fonldiers* 
Here take a jhort projpeli of the myfteriom bleffcd 
Trinity, As God is one in three ^ and in his enti- 
ty hath Hnity , verity and goodnefs ^ and iu his* 
buffed nature hath pofTe, fcire, velle, power, wif- 
dom and love^ fo 04 from thefe is he related both 
to his created and redeemed rational creatures^ as 
abfolnte proprietary , as foveraign ruler , and as 
mofi graciom benefa^ior : As Lord of onr nature 
he hath put the forefaid enmity between the hu- 
mane nature and the Diabolical : As foveraign 
J^nler^ he hath by legi flat ion impofed on m a fur" 
ther enmity as uur duty , that we fuonld be lifted 
in his army , profefs open hoftility againfl Sa- 
tan y and fight again fi him to the death* As Be- 
nefaClor^ he giveth jpecial grace to do this, to his 
chofen. As he is Lord ofallfo the fir fl is done on the 
natures of all: Ashe is RcBor of ally but not by the 
fame Laws ( a^to pofitives ) fo he obligeth all to this 
hoflilrtyy but not all a^i he doth thofe that hear the 
Gofpel : z^s he is Benefatlor hv doth with his 
own as he lift , and makes a difference. If any 
fay that it is the fame enmity that is here faidto 
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 cr promife to a 
commiinity^ inay fignifie a difference rf duties or 
gifts to that community^ though thitt differetice be 
not cxprefjcd : For the nature of the fubjeB may 


prove iti And^ 2. 'Eoi^erience of the fnlfilling 
of this fromtfe or covenant , proves the difference 
before mentioned. Aridities we II know n^ i^That 
Mofes is fo concife in the Hiftory of thefe mat- 
ters. 2, And that the myfterte of grace was to 
he opened by degrees , and fo but darkly at the 
firfi 5 that It if no wonder if we find the whole 
fitmm of the Gojpel htre coHcht up in fo narrow 
^ room^ and if each particular be not largely laid 
open before our eyes, 7. That we may certainly 
know that this promt fe Jpeakj not only of the en- 
jjriity that Chrifi himfelf p^uld have to Satan , 
and doth not engage a General without an army^ 
Cjod doth here exprejly mention the woman her 
felfy fnying [^ I will put enmity between thee and 
the woman 3 fo that as jhe flood in athreefoldre- 
fpeSi ; fhi is here her felf pojfejjcd with this three- 
fold enmity, i. As Jhe ts the root of humane 
nature^ fromwhence all mankind mufl Ipring^ Jhe is 
pojfefl with the natural enmity to the diabolical 
nature , and this to be naturally conveyed or pro* 
pagated* 2* Ai [l^e was the root of the great 
Republick^ of the world , or 'that rational fociety 
which God as ReEhor would fapienttally govern , 
and her fef with her hi^^sband ( who no doubt was 
alfo included in the promtfe ) were the whole then 
exiflent race of mankind^ fo did Jlie receive a le- 
gal enmity of obligation^ which Jlie was traditio- 
nally to deliver down to all her pofleriiy , being 
her felf hereby obliged to liji her felf and all her 
Infant progeny in the Redeemers army^ again Ji 
the proclaimed enemy , and to teach her poflerity 
to do the like : For thm obligatory precepts mujt 



be broH^ht dow^. 3. j4s pe Wits one of the cho* 
ftn favourites of Godj (he received the habitual en^ 
wiry of fand:tjication : And thu u -not m her 
poxv(r to propagate^ though file may nfe fome rne an s 
that are appointed thereto , and whether a promt fe 
of any fnch thing be made to her feed on the ufe 
of JHch means , 7 will not novo jtand to dtfcuf, 
8. It PS not all that are pofftjjcd with the natu^ 
ral enmity againfl the Devil himjelf that are the 
Church of Chrifl : For this is but a common pre^ 
piirative which is tn all : Nor u it all that are 
obliged to the further enmity again fi the work^ of 
Satan : But all that on that obligation are diiely 
lifled in Chrtfis army againfl Satan ( by the obli- 
ged per [on ) are vifible members : and all that are 
by fanUifcation at an heart) enmity (habitual or 
aElual ) With the Kingdom of Satan , are mem^ 
bers of the Church called my ft teal or inviftble. 
This I put as gra?ned, 9. Thofe that violate this 
fundamental obligation^ and to their natural pr a- 
vity jJiall add a fighting againfl Chrifl 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 therefl 
of mankind in general againfl Satan ^ yet have 
they therewithal the habitual enmity againfl 
Chrifl. This much I fiippofe as out of controvert 
fie. But whether alfo the frfl original corrupted 
nature it fclf ( before any fin againfl recovering 
grace ) did contain an habitual enmity againfl 
the Kingdom of the Redeemer ? Or whether the 
fins of later Parents may propagate this as an ad- 
ditional corruption m our nature^ I will not now 



fland to difcuf. Only as to our frefint bn/inefi , 
it is certain that the general natural enmity to 
Satan^ may confijl with an habitual frien'^jhip to 
his ways and caitfe. And though as men they 
may have the firfi common advantage of nature , 
and as [uhjeBs de jure may be under the common 
obligation y yea , and as lifted in Chrifts army 
may have many of its privi ledges 5 yet for the 
enmity of difpofnion to Chrifts they may be under 
a greater curfd 10. As it is certain^ that it 
is not only Chrift htmfelf that is here made the 
vbjeB of this pro'mife , 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 notedy that thofe others in whom this enmi- 
ty is put , are called here [ the feed of the wo- 
man, 3 and not the feed of Chrift ( though the 
chief of them are his feed, ) And fo though the 
promife is made to none but the woman s jeed , 
and no exception put in againft Infants , or any 
age of all her feed : TiJl 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 uftng any violence with 
the Text, 

1 1 . Some learned men do ufe no contemptible ar- 
guments to prove further y That the fan&ifying en- 
mity is here promifed to the feed of the woman 
as her feed ( I mean thofe that go the way of 
Dr. Ward , (Lpkfr. Bedford , ^r. ) that is , 
that as the two former forts of enmity are put 
into all the feed of the woman ( as is explain- 
id ) fo the fpiritual holy enmity promifed to her 



feed as jhe is a believer. IZ. And fome learned 

men do accordingly conclude^ that the iwpety of 
Tarents may do much to hinder their children 
from that ble^fing more than by original fin 
they were hindred , and therefore their faith 
may further thcr/:. Of which though much may 
be fuid , / jlmll fiy no more , bccaufe I will not 
fland on things fo much cjuefi toned, 

M. T. This tedious difcourlc of Mr. L. is indeed fcr- 
pentive — 

Refly. They that need a Reply to any thing 
here (aid, Ihall have none trom me. 

Sj1v„. 1. yv±-.l X» 

R. B. T Come next to p'ove from other parts of 
JL Scripture , That the fundamental pro^ 
wife of Grace is thi^ to be interpreted as inclu^ 
ding Infants, i. If the fayne Covenant of grace 
when It is more fully and clearly opened , ^</ ex- 
prefly comprehend Infants as to be Church-mem- 
bers^ then is this fundamental promife fo to be un- 
derflood ( 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-members : The (Covenant made with Abra- 
ham comprehending Infants , was the fame with 
this in Gen. 3. but in fome things clearlier open- 
ed, Which is proved thus : Both thefe were the 
Cyueumt of grace and free jiifiification by faith 

H in 

in the Redeemer y therefore they were the fame. 
For there is hut one fach. If Abraham had fomc 
special pronufcs additional to the main Covenanty 
that makes not the Covenant of free \uftf cation 
by faith to he divers. That this in Gen. 3 . is 
the fromife or Covenant of grace and free jafit" 
ficatton is not denied ^ that I know of* That the 
-promife to Abraham was the fame , ix evident 
from Rom. 4. 10^ II, 12, 13, 14. I. It is there 
exprejly manifefij that the Covenant whereof Cir- 
cumcifion was to Abraham the fcal, was the Cove* 
nant of free jiiflification by faith ^ Circumcifoiz 
it felf being a feat of the righteoufne^ of faith 
which Abxdhim had y yet being uncircitr/icifed ^ 
Wat he might be the fttihcf of belie vers , &c, 
2 . Tea the promife that he fJwiild he heir of the 
world was not mads to Abraham or to his feed 
through the LaWy but through the right eonfnefs of 
faith, . Now it is certain that this Covenant feat- 
ed hy Circnmcifion and made to Abraham and hi^ 
feedy did comprehend Infants, The confequence of 
the major then is ^ evident ^ that the fame promife , 
e X pre Jfcd more concifely^ is to be expounded by the" 
fime expreffcd more jidly : And it is acknowledged 
that the Gojpel light and grace was to he mantfefi 
by certain degrees. 

■ Mr. r. Tliat the fi;?}-:I.imcnt2l Promife of Grace, Gen,':,, 
i<. doth include Infants, vvJ? never denied by me , and 
tlicrefore Mr. ?„ doth but wafie p^i^er and abufe rae and 
Ills Readers by going about to prove rr.- 

Reply, If we be really of one rainci, it is pitty 
we fhould make men think we differ: Mark thisi 
conccjjhn Ilcider , [ The fmidamemal promife of 



Grace doth include Infants. ~] The Grace of that 
promife is our Vnion Relative to Chrifl and his 
Church , and the benefits internal and external 
belonging to Chrills menibers. Do you believe 
that our union with the vifible Church as fuch , 
and participation in its priviledges , is none of 
that Grace ? 

Mr. T. rh's 1 deny, that it includts all Iv.ftnts, or all In- 
j.vits of Bslievtrs, and that any Pif.tnt is made a zifi'ok 
Church-member by that promife .rs the next caafe or foh ifji- 
i.ient, ] 

Ke^ly. It will come to fomethlng 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 , ic 
would' have been all. 

2. The Covenant or Law of Grace giveth vi^ 
fihle Chnrch-memberflnp 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 Fromife ) give both myflical and vifible 
Church-memberfhip to all that hear it that are at 
age and have the ufe of Reafon > (1 fpeak not of 
memberfhip in a particular C-hurch which fomc 
may want opportunity to enjoy, but in the uni- 
verfal, ) Deny this, and you deny Chrifls Go- 
fpel. Doth he not fay , He that believeth and is 
baptiz^ed fhall be faved : whoever believeth fiiall 

not peri fi] whoever will-, let him take the 

water of life freely : He that cometh to rr^e I 
Will in no Wife cafi out : Go into the high-ways 
^nd hedges^ and compel them to ccme in^ dec. If 

H 7. Gods 

( loo ) 
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, f which ic befeemeth none but an Infidel 
to deny , ) ask thy Confcience, Reader, whether 
this bleficd Covenant give no fuch conditional 
right to any I/jfafit in the world ? Are tjiey all 
excluded ? And why ? Are they worfe than tdeir Pa- 
rents? If it give any Right to Infants conditionally as 
it doth to Parents.it muft be on a condition to be per- 
formed by the Parents, or fuch as are fo far entntfted. 
Mr. T/s talking of [ the next canfe, and the fole 
efficient ] feem to me the words of a man that 
knew not what to fay, but was refolved that he 
would not yield : Sir, do yoa grant that the pro- 
mife maketh Infants vifible Church-members , as 
any caitje^ next or remvte^ fole or cooperating f ] 
If nor, 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 think as it is a Beneficial Kelationy the 
Tar cms confcnr and dedication^ and the childs being 
Their Sy are the di/pojttio ryjatcrniy called by fome 
caMfa:, Rcceptwx vel difpoftivcc : and that Gods 
donation is the fole efficient in which his dona- 
tive word ("call it what you will j is the Inftru- 
ment : This is plain Logick. But you thas pro- 
M% that your Church-membcrfhip is it felf no 
b?nenc (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 Chriils me- 
riis, or the Covenant or Promife ar^ givers of 
it to young or old •. For they give nothing hm 


benefits. Be not angry to have your abfiK-duies 
opened,but before you die be fober and reform ihcm. 

He addcth [ I gra>it that, tk Cnvs'jaut to Abraham rr'.-r.c 
the covsiunt of Evangel leal Grace , though mlxt, and that it 
did inrAude Infants-^ and that they -were Church-mmbers^ tn 

wit, of the invifible Church of the Elect — And that 

Abrahams Infants in his houfe were vifihle Churrh-me?KberSy 
, but not by venue of the Covenant barely as Evavgelical^ but 
'i by the tranfeuKt fact : and if in any refpuf by virtue of the 
■■^ Covenant, it was by it as cnitaining hoa'hold or civil 
^V promifesj rather than Evangelical, 

Reply. About 23 and 24 years of age T was 
my fdf in doubt of Infant Bapiifm : But had I 
read fuch a Writer as ih\s agai/ifi it^ I think he 
would have eafily refolved rne for it. i. 77?^ 
Covenant to Abrahams farruly w^j a Covenant of 
^Evangelical Grace ^ he faith, ( And furcly fo was 
that to z^darriy and Noe before. ) And it inclu- 
ded Infants , but only as EUcl in the Qonrch 1%:- 
vifihle. But I he conditional Promife or Cove- 
nant is confeft to include the Non-elcEh at age : 
And what I ISlcne of them in Infancy f Reader , 
How canrhis be called a Covenant, tor God only 
to fay [_Jxvillfave all fuch Infants 04 I elcH: _] 
and yet cfFer Silvacion to none of them in tie 
world on any condition , nor give a tirie 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- 
mife or Covenant, with the adult, but V J will 
•;. fave whom I will five ~\ who would have rak*en 
i this for a Law or Covenant? And what right or 
hope doth this give to Chriftians for their Chi!- 
. dren more than Pvagans ? 

H 3 Ai:;d 

( 102) 

And, Reader, if God have given no condition 
or charader antecedent, as a differencing reafoft 
or qualification of thofe that he mil fave from 
thofe that he will not , but only told us that he 
will favewhom he lift, this makeih Infants no/^^- 
jeUs 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 tu be ufed 
as beafts or ftones, by Divine natural motion as 
he will. And then, how can you fay that any 
Infants fliall be damned, or not faved ? Or that 
it fhall be one of a raillion at leaft that (hall 
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 Lved , it will follow,^ 
I. That God is fas the prophane hy ) better 
than his word, and will fave many to whom he 
never gave right to it by promife. 2. And will 
not the ungodly pur in for the like hopes ? If be- 
fides thofe that Gods Laws condemn or juftifie, 
God will fave many in a neutral ftate, why may 
he not, faith the ungodly, fave me alfo ? for In- 
fants once deferved puniftimcnt 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 '\n Infancy. 

And do all thepromifes to the feed of the//f^V/;- 
fuly in the fecond Commandment, and Exod, 34. 
7. and many another Text, mean no fuch thing as 
they fpeak, as if to be the ktd of the faithfnl were 
no condition^ but only [_ I vpillfave my ele^i / J 

And ' 

^ And why might not this Covenant ["_ I willfave 
my Eleli ] be made with C^irt^ or Cham^ or J^i- 
da^^ as well as with Abraham ? 

2. He faith 5 Abrahms Infants wen vlfible Chiirch-:?:^^' 
kersj but not by the d-npsnavt' baidy ^s Ez'.vjgeflcM,'] 

Reply, What a hare put . off is thar , of a man 
that muft fay fomething ? Is it at all by the CetT- 
fiant 06 Evangelical ? If yea, we have our defirf. 
If not, what meancth \_harely'] but the nakedne(s 
of your ill caufe ? 

3. Tlicn confRth next f And if in .ivy re 'peel by viV' 
tne of the Cmf?iaKt ( vvhicli" it fcciiieth lie yet knowctli 
not after all this talk, or will not know 3 it wjs by it as 
cor.tjilning hoii<j^)old or ci-jil promifiS , rather thafi Evangeli- 
cal. ] 

Reply, See, Reader, fomcmoreof the myfterie : 
Infants were Church-member^ in Abrabana 
houfe, but Church-memberfhip fignificd but hou^ 
jlwld and civil promifes : Do you now perceive 
v/hat the Jews Infant Church-memberfhip was ? 
The Socinians perhaps will (ay the like of the 
Jews Covenant to the adult. 

But we may yet miftake him , For [^ rather ~\ 
is not a negative ; It is V Rather than Evangdi- 
cai J which is but a preference^ not a denial. O 
for plain honefty in things divine 1 

H 4 SECT. 




2,*"^^ Hat the fir fi fundamental promife ii 
i thus to be interpreted , / further 
f'r'OVe by Gods confiant ad'^nni^r ation in the 
performance of it. Concerning which I do make 
this challenge to you (with modefiy and fubmijfi- 
on, ) to prove if you can, that there was ever one 
Church'T/iembcr that had Inf^ints born to him 
while he was in that efiate^ from the beginning 
of the world to this day^ whofe Infants alfo were 
not Churc.h'P?embcrs / Except only the Anaba- 
ptifisj who refufe or deny the mercy , and fo re- 
fufe to dedicate their Jnfants in Baptifm unta 
Chrifl. And whether -their Infants be Church' 
members, 1 will not determijie ajjirmativeiy 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, fnc-e the creation to this day , that 
was not a Church-member , ( except the Anaba- 
ptifls that refufe the mercy or deny it, ) 

Reply. Mr» T/s A^^vveris a retufingco anAver, 
fave a crof> challenge (' oft anfwered ) and the 
inftance of Timothy : To which I iay, that if Ti- 
mothys Father being a Greek countermanded his 
communion with the Jews , he could not be a 
member of their policie or particular Church* 
( Though if he only delayed as ^J^ofes did to 
arcumcife his Son, that Son might be a member 
2s the children in the wildernefs were, ) But his 


Mothers right alone might make him a perfon in 
Covenant with God as a vifible member of the 

S E C T. L I. 

R, B. "VyEfore I proceed to any more Texts of 
JJ Scrifture , / mil a little enquire in- 
to the light or Lava of Nature it felf j and fee 
what that faith to the point in hand. And fir fl 
we fliall confider of the duty of dedicating Infants 
to God in Chrifi'y and next of Cods acceptance of 
them , and entertaining them into that eft ate, 
jind the frfl is mofi evidently contained in the 
Law of nature it felf ( at leaft upon fuppofttion 
that there he any hopes of Gods entertaining 
them ; ) which I prove thm* I. The law of Na- 
ture hindeth m to give to every one his own due : 
But Infants are Gods own due ^ Ergo , the law 
rf Nature hindeth Parents to give them up to 
God. By \^ gi'^i'^^g 1 ^^^^ ^ mean not an aliena- 
tion of propriety^ to make that to he Gods that was 
not Jo hefore •, hut an acknowledgement of his 
right ^ with a free refignation and dedication of 
t e Infant to God, a^ his own ^ for his ufe andfer- 
vice^ when he is capable thereof. If you fay^ In- 
fants heing not capable of doing fervice ^ fwuld 
71 ot he devoted to it till they can do it ^ / an- 
fwer J they are capable at pre font of a legal cblir 
gation to future duty , and alfo of the relation 
which followeth that obligation^ together with the 
honour of a Church'menjb(r(a^ the child of a Noble 



Tfjan is of his Honours and titU to his Inheri" 
tance ) and many other mercies of the Covenant* 
And though (^hrift according to his humanity 
fvas not capable of doing the worh of a cJHedi- 
atoror head of the Church in his Infancy ^ yet for 
all that he muft bt head of the Church then^ and 
not ( according to this arguing ) ft ay till he were 
cafable of doing thofe work^. And fo is it with 
his members. 

Re fly. Here is fo little faid that needs but this 
remarke, that Mr. T. knoweth not how toj;deny the 
duty of dedication handfomly , which being Ac- 
cepted of God is to Church-memberfliip as pri- 
vate Marriage to publick, where pubh'cation is 
wanting : But he denieth that Parents may dedi- 
cate them by 'Bafttfm : But if they may and muft 
do it -privately by heart confent , it will follow 
that they muft do it publickly in the inftitutcd 
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 jiature. 

S E C T. L I L 

R. B. 2.^'T^Helavp of nature bindeth all Parents 
X to do their befi to fecure Cods right ^ 
and their Childrens good, and to prevent their 
fin and mifery : But to engage them betimes to 
God by fuch a dedication , doth tend to fecure 
Gods right, and their Childrens good, and to pre-' 
vent their fin and mifery •' For they are under a 
double obligation, which they may he minded of be- 

( lO'-j) 

times J and which may hold them the wore firo?jg- 
ly to their duty , and difadvantage the tempter 
that would draw them ojf from God, 

Mr. r. Really Infant Bapufm is a difadvantage , i. In 
that it is the occafion whereby they take tliemlelves to 
be Chriftians afore tliey know what Chriftianity is, and fo 
ave kept in prcfumptioHj &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, i. That Infant Covenanting and Baptifm 
is no hindrance in Nature or Reaibn from fer- 
fonal [erioii4 Covenanting with God at age. Wc 
tell our Children and all the adult, that their In- 
fant Covenanting by Parents, will ferve them but 
till they have Re^.fon and Will of their own to 
choofe for themfelves; And that without as fe- 
rious a faith and confent of their own then as if 
they had never been baptized, they cannot befa- 
ved : What hurt then as to this doth their In- 
fant intereft do them ? 

2. Yea doubtlefs it is a great help: For, i. To 
be in the way of Gods Ordinance and Benedidion 
is much. 2. And ( knowing you deny that ) I 
add , to be confcious of an early engagement , 
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 
they belong. 

3. If Children till Baptized have any thoughts of 
dying, according to you, they mufl: have little 
hopes of mercy : And God accounteth not the 
fpirit of bondage beft , no not for Children. 
They cannot well be educated in the Love of 



God, who muft believe that they are damned if 
they die, and that God hath not given them an^y 
promife of hfe. 

4. Experience of many Moors ( fervants ) 
among us and in our Plantations, ( befides ancient 
hiftory) aflureth us, that delaying Baptifm till age 
tcndeth 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 ftridlier, 
and therefore ( as Confla77tine and many more ) 
they will be baptized Chriftians when there is no 

5« And experience afllireth us that it were the 
way to work out Chriftianity and reftore Infide- 
lity in any Nation : For had not Chrift early 
po/Teffion , and were not Nations difcipled and 
baptized, Chriftians were like to be almoft as thin 
as Puritans now : and the muhitude being Infidels 
from a crofs intereft ( fuch as divifions caufe ) 
would be ready on all occafions ( as they did in 
Japan and Monicongo ) to root them out. 

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 ynfpeakablcharm : 
To have a few good words about Confirmation in 
the Liturgie, and fuch as Dod. 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 tend to tlie good of fouls , and the propaga- 
ting Ghriftianity, and the ftrength of the Church, 
for to have both the obligation and comfort of ohr 
Infmt Covenant and Church ftate, and as feriom 
a Covenanting alfo at age ^ when we pafsinto the 
Chhrch fiate of the Adult ^ than to be without the 
former , and left to the expedation of adult ba- 
ptifm alone. 


R. B. nr^He law of nature bindeth Tarents in 
X love to. their children to enter them 
into the nwfi honourable and profitable fociety^ if 
they have bnt leave fo to do : But here Tarents 
have leave to enter them into the Church , which 
u the mofi honourable and profitable fociety. Er- 
go. That they have leave ^ is proved^ i. Godne-m 
ver forhad any 7nan in the world to do this fin* 
cerely^ ( the wicked and unbelievers cannot do it 
fmcerely ; ) and a not forbidding is to be interpret 
ted as leave in cafe of [uch farticipation of be- 
nefits : jis all laws of men in donbtful cafes are 
fo he interpreted y^T drheiKaa^y in the moft favoH* 
table fenfe» So hath Chrtfi tnyght us to inter- 
pret his own : When they jpeak of duty to God , 
they miift be interpreted in the flrithfi fenfe: 
When they Jpeak^of benefits to man^ they mufi be 
interpreted in the mofi favourable fenfe that they 
will bear, 

z. It is the wore evident ^ that a not forbid- 
ding in fuch cafes is to be taksrt for have , be- 



caiife God hath fut the principle of fe If -prefer va-^ 
tion^ a?id de firing our ovpn welfare^ and the wel- 
fare of our (^htldren fo deeply in humane nature y 
that he can no more lay it by than he can ceafi 
to be a reafonable creature. And therefore he 
may lawfully aUnate or exercife this natural ne^ 
ceffary principle of feeking his own or childrens 
real happinefi , where-ever God doth not reflrain 
or prohibit him. We need no pofitive co?nmand 
to feek^Gur own or childrens happinefy but what 
is in the law of nature it felfj and to nfe this 
where' God forbiddeth not^ if good be then to be 
founds cannot be unlawful. 

3. It PS evident from wh^t is f aid before (and 
elfewhere ) that it is more than a filent leave 
of Infants Church-memberjlnp that God hath 
*vouchfafed tts. For in the forementioned funda^ 
mental promife ^ explained more fully in after 
timeSy God figmfied his will that fo it Jhould be^ 
Jt cannot be denied^ but there is fome hope at leafi 
given to them in the firfi 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 int{) the Crvenanty and into that fo* 
ciety that partake of thefe hopes , and to lift them 
into the Army of Chrifl, 

4. It is the duty of Parents by the Law of Na^ 
ture J 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 them, Ergo^ d:c. Fcr the Major, 


thefe frincifles in the law of nature do contain if » 
I. That the Infant is not fui juris, but ts at his 
Tarents dijpofe in all things that are for his good* 
That the Parents have power to oblige their chiU ^ 
dren to any future duty or fuffering , that is cer^ 
tainly to their own good : andfo may enter them 
into Covenants accordingly : And fo far the wid 
ofjhe 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 Honours, and LordjJups , and Immunities to 
htm and his heirs : if he Will not accept this for his 
heirs^ but only for himfelf it is unnatural, Tea^ 
if he will not oblige his heirs to fome fmall and 
reafonablc conditions for the enjoying fuch benefits, 
for the Minor, that this relation ts an allowed or 
offered benefit to Infants is manifefted already^ 
and more jhall be. 

And thts I "ads me i,p to the fccond point, which 
I propounded to confider of-^ whether by the light 
or law of nature we can prove that Infants 
fiwuld have the benefit of being Church-members, 
fuppofing it firfl known by fupernatural revelatt- 
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 tis by nature that Infants 
are capable of this benefit , if Cjod deny it not , 
but will give it them as well as the aged, z,It is 
certain that they are ad:ually members of all the 
Common-wealths in the world (perfedte fed im- 
perfed:a membra ) being fecured from violence 
b^ the laws, and capable of hono}ir5 and right to in- 


heritancesy nnd of being real fab jeBs under oblU 
gations to JHiHre duties , if they furvive* And 
this Jlievps that they are alfo capable of being 
Chnrch-r/jeTTiberSy and that nature revealeth to us^ 
that the Infants cafe much follorveth the cafe of 
the Parents J efpecially in benefits. 3. Nature hath 
aciually taught moft feofle on earth , fo far a^ I 
can iearn^ to repute their Infants in the fame Re^ 
ligi,om fociety -with themfelves^ a^ well as in the 
fame civil fociety. 4. Vnder the Covenant of 
vporkj ( commonly fo called) or the perfect rigo- 
ropi6 law that God made With man in his pure 
nature •, the Infants fhould have been in the 
Churchy and a people holy to Cod , // the Parents 
had fo continued themfelves. And confider , 
I, Ihat holinef and righteoufnef were then the 
fame things as now^ and that in the efiahltfhing 
of the way of propagation^ God was no more obli- 
ged to order it foy that the children of righteous 
parents jhould have been born with all the per- 
fecitons of their Parents and enjoyed the fame 
priv I ledges , 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 the immunities of that fociety, • 2, We have 
no reafon when the defign of redemption is the 
magnifying of love and grace^ to thinks that love 
and grace are fo much lefi under the Gofpel to the 
members of Chrift , than under the Law to the 
members or feed of Adam , 04 that then all the 
feed fljould have partaked with the fame bleffings 
with the righteom Parents, and now theyjhallali be 
turnedout of the fociety f whereof the Parents were 


members. 5. God gives fu hmfelf the reafons of 
hu gr adopts dealing with the children ofihe jnfl 
from his graciom nature , proclaiming even par- 
doning mercy to flow thence^ Exod. 34. and in 
the fecond Commandment, 6. God doth yet fliexv 
m that in many great and weighty rc^eBs he 
dealeth well or til with children for their Parents 
fakes: as many Texts of Scrip are fiew (and I 
have lately f roved at large in one of otir private 
difpHtes 5 that the fins of tjearer parents are tm^ 
futed as part of our original or natural guilt. ) 
So much of that. 

Reply, Mr. T. faith nothing to all, that I think 
the Reader needeth a reply to. 


R. B. ^KTEt before I cite any more particular 
X Texts , / will add this one argument 
from the tenour of the Covenant of grace ^ as ex^ 
prejjed in many Texts of Scripture. <iAccording 
to the tenour of the Covenant of grace ^ God will 
not refuse to be their God ani take them for his 
peopUy that are ( in a natural or law fcnfe ) wil" 
ling to be his people , and to take him for their 
God, But the Infants of believing Parents are 
thus willing y Ergo. Tfse Major is unqueftionable^ 
The Minor isprovedfrom the very law of nature be- 
fore exprejfed. Infants cannot be aiiually willing 
themfelves in natural fenfe^ Ergo, the reafon and 
will of another mufl be thetrs in law fenfe^and that is 
of the Parents f who have the full dijfofe of thepj, 

I • and 

and arc vq if ranted by the law of nature to choofc 

for then} (for their good ) till they come to life 
of re af on themfelves. The Farents therefore by 
the light and lave of nature choofing the better 
fart for their children, and offering and devoting 
them to God J by the obligation of his own natu- 
ral law 5 he cannot in confifiency with the free 
grace revealed in the Gojpely refufe thofe that are 
fo offered. And thofe that thpu come to him 
in the way that nature it felf jfrefcnbeth , he 
will in no wife caft onf^ Joh. . . And he will 
he offended with thofe that would kjep them from . 
him^ that are offered by thofe that have the fower 
to do ity though they cannot offer themfelves. For 
legally this aU is taken for their own. Thm I 
have jhewed yon fome of the fundamental title 
that Infants of Believers have to Church mem- 
berfjip^ and our obligation to dedicate them to God, 
Reply. Mr. T. faith \_ that fome a5is 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 -vi.h my copious proof in my Treatifeof In- 
fanr-baptifm to the Readers. 

' — ' g" — ■— ' 


R. B. ^"^TOu mufi now in reafonexpefiy that in* 
JL fants Church-memberfuip being thm 
efiablifjedy partly tn the Uw of nature^ and part^ 
iy in the fundamental prcmife^ what ts after this 
fpok^n of it fijould not be any new efiablifhment , 
but con frm At ions and mt inflations of what vpas be- 


frre done^ rather giving m the f^obf that fuch a 
lavp and fromife there is that did Jo efiablijli it, 
than being fuch firft eftablijliing laws or fromtfes 
thewfelves, ^nd from hence I may vpell add 
this further argument. If there be certain froof 
in Scripture of Infints Church- memberflnf , but 
none except this bcforz alledged that mak^s any 
mention of the beginning cf it , but all jpeaking 
of it as no nevp thing , then we have great reafon 
upon the forementioned evidence^ to ajftgn this be* 
ginni?:g which from Gen. 3. we have exprefi» 
But the former is true^ ergo, the later. Ton con- 
fef that Infa?Jts 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 y^f ^5 when Khx^'• 
ham frft 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 fromife to Abraham intimate any inception 
then as to the Church-memberfhip of Infants, but 
only an application of a priviledge to him that in 
the general wa< no new thing. 

Reply, To this Mr. T, ftill affirmeth 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 Cod, from all the world eife, even He^ 
mch'Sy Noe's , Sem*s and all from ^dam to the 
end of the world , that thefe Infants only fhould 
be Church-members and no others!' what un- 

I 2 likely 

likely things ( yea againft evidence ) can fome 

believe ? 


R. B. XT O W for the Texts that further inti- 
1^\ mate fnch a foregoing efiablijhment, 
I . There feems to he fome believing intimation of 
this in Adams naming his vpife the mother of the 
living : For it is to be noted what Bijhop Iflfher 
faith y Annal. vol. i. p. 2. Unde turn primum 
( poft femenpromifTum^ mulieri Evae nomenama- 
rito elt impofirum , Gen. 3 . 20. quod mater efTet 
omnium viventium non naturalem tantum vitam, 
fed illud quoque quod eft per fidera in femen ip- 
fius, Meffiam promiiTum : quomodo & poft earn 
Sara fidelium mater eft habita, i Pet. 3, 6. Gal. 
4. 3 1 . J He pi4t this name on her after the fromife^ 
hecaufe fie was to be the mother of all the livings 
not only that live the life of nature , but that 
which is by faith in the ^JMe^iah her feed. So ' 
that 06 fje was the root of our nature , we are 
her natural feed -^ and 06 flje was a believer^ and 
we the feed of her a believer ^ fo is fje the mo- 
ther of a holy feedj and we that are her feed are 
holy^ 06 a people vifibly dedicated to God. 

2. When Cain was born^ his mother called him 
C p^Jf^ffion ~\ becaufe jJje had obtained a ' man of 
the Lordy that isy faith Ainfworth, \ with his fa- 
vour^ and of his good will ^"\ and fo a Son of pro -^ 
mifey and of the Church. And therefore it is to 
be noted ^ that when Cain had finned by killing - 




his brother^ God did curfe him , afid cafl him out 
of his frefence^ Gen. 4. 14, 16. So that he was 
excommunicate and fefarated from the Church of 
Cod^ faith K\n{vjou\\^ \_that ts^ from the place of 
Cods word and worfliip which in likelihood was 
held by AisLva the father y who being a Prophet y 
had taught his children how to facrtfice andferve 
the Lord, So on the contrary^ to come into Cods 
prefence or before him ^ 1 Chron. 16. 29. ts ex- 
plained in Pfal. 96. 8. to be the coming into hts 
Courts, ~\ Very many learned men give the fume 
expofition of it. Now if Cain were now excom- 
municate, then wa6 he before of the Church : nay 
it is certain by his Jacrificing , and other proof y 
however this Text be interpreted : But no man 
can give the leaft reafon from Scripture to make 
it fo probable that he entred into the Church at any 
other time J as we give of his entrance at his na- 

When Eve bare Seih, ^je fo named hiw m a Son 
of mercy in faith, as appointed her by the Lord 
to be tn Abels room^ faithful as Abel , and the 
father of our Lord after the fejJ) , as Ainfwonh 
on Gen. 4. 25. j^ndis there no intimation in tlus 
that Seth wo/S an Infant member of the vifible . 
Church ^ J confej? he that Jljail excommunicate this 
appointed feed , or faith , that Scth was without 
the Church in his infancy^ doth Jpeak^ in my ears 
fo improbably^ and fo unlike the Scripture , that 
I am very confident I jhall never believe him, 

Mr.r-'s AnfwertoalU is a denial : faith he, [Tfhiefs 
vo ir.tl'futlon iiu!; Seth rt>as an Injmt mmhcr of the viji- 
hlc Chijch •-, from which Ifhmacl w.rs rioi excluded: In 

I 2 -■•■- 


vph/ch though I ph:e jwt Seth, I do not thmby excommm^' 
eate htm, or f:iy that hs was nithoat the Church in his IH- 

Reply, But you fay He was vcithoHt the vifihle 
Chnrch : ( orelfe within and without are confiftent 
with you. } And whether Ijhmael was within, and 
Sethy and Henoch , and Sem without , I will no 
more difpute with you. 


R. B. 1^T^**<? ^Ifi t ^^^^ ^ God hadthm cafi 
J_\| out C^ln^ a?7dfHpplied AbeU room by 
Seth, a?2d had given each of them poflertty -^ fi 
Vife find him in a ^fecial manner regiflring'th'6 
fnccejfors of the righteom^ and putting two titles ^. 
on thcfe two diftintl generations^ calling fome the 
fons of Godj and others the daughters of men , 
Gen.6» 2. Suppofing that yon rejeSl the old con- 
ceits that thefe fons of God were Angels that fcH . 
in love with women^ the current ordinary expo-^ ^ 
ftion I thinks will ftand^ that thefe were the prO' 
geny of Seth , and other rremhers ef the Church , 
who are called the Sons of God -^ and that it was 
the progeny of Cain, and other wicked, ones^ that 
are called the daughters of men. Where note that 
they are not themfelves denominated wicj^d, bnt 
the children of men^ 04 being a generation fepa- 
rated from the Church from the birth. And the 
other are not themfelves affirmed to be truly gcd^ ' 
iy ones, but fons of God , a^ being the feed of the 
Saints not cafi out, bnt members of the Churchy or 


the forts of thofe vpho were devoted to God , and 
fo devoted to him themfelves : a feparated gene- 
ration belonging to God as his vifhle Church, 
Where note^ that thefe that are called the fans of 
Gody even the line of Seth and other godly Va- 
rents^ were yet fo wicked that God repe/ited that 
he made them ^ and deftroyed them in the fleody 
(paring only Noah and his family. So that it 
was not their own godlinef, that made them cal- 
led the fans of God , hut their relation , Church 
ftate and vifiblc feparation from open itnchnrchcd 
Idolaters, (Compare this vhrafe with the likf^ Deur. 
14. I. 2 Cor. 6. 18. In the former it is faid 
[^ ye are the children cf the Lord your God, ye 
ihall not cut your felves, &c, \ where the whole 
feople^ Inf^ts and ally are called Gods children^ 
OA" being a people feparated to him fron'i the Idc- 
Icitrotis world •, and fo in the next verf. called a 
holy people unto God , peculiar to him , Grc, 
Arid 2 Cor. 6, 8. Come out from among them , 
and be ye feparare, c^c, and I will be a father to 
you, and you ffiall be my fons and daughters, 
faith the Lord Almighty. ~] So that Gods fans 
and daughters are that fociety that are feparated 
from Idolaters unto the worfliip of God as the vi- 
fihle Church is. And then it appears that the ge- 
neration of the righteotts ^ even from the won^h ^ 
were enumerated to the rejl^ in that they are 
not mentioned as a people called out here 
and there y arid initiated at age ( there is no men- 
tion of any fuch thing : ) but as a flock;, or gene- 
ration oppufed to the daughters of rnen^ or of the 
unchurched y 'whv were fuch from thcir^nf^ncy 

I 4 as 


as all will grant. For it was not the fame men 
that were the Parents ef thofe here called the 
danghtcrs of men and the fons of God ( though 
fame of the later might be excomwtinicate when 
they fell : ) But tt plainly intimates , that it was 
another fort of men that thefe were the daughters 
of J than thofe that were Parents to the fons of 
God, So Ainfworth in loc. \^The fons of God ^ 
i.e. the men of the Church of God^ for to fuch 
Moks faith ^ Dtut. 14. i, dec. i John 3. i. 
Daughters of men , meaning of Cains pofierity- 
that were out of Gods Churchy Gen. 4. 14. U So 
our Annotations^ and many more* 

An intimation of this pri'viledge^ and that they 
were fons of mercy and of the promt fe , appear eth 
in the very names of many of the chHdren of the 
righteomj hoth before and after the flood, which 
J will not (land on par-tic alar ly. 

And when all the world had fo defiled them- 
felves , that Gad was refolved to cut them off-^ 
he feared Noah and his family .or fons. Though 
Cham was to be cur fed, yet wasi^e of the Church 
which worjhtpped the true God , and Jpared as a 
fon of Noah , and one of that fociety. And if 
God fo far fpared him then for his ^ Fathers fake 
as to houfe him in the Arh^ ( 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 
hlejfed himfelf in his iff ue, as he did Adam, Yi'ith 
an [^ incrcafe and multiply J and made a Cove- 
tia^t wi^h him and his feed aftev him. Which 


favenant though the exprejfed part of it he tbap 
the earth Jlwuld be drowned no more ^ and fo it; 
wa^ made vpith the vpick^dfl of Noahs feed^ and 
even with the heafts of the fields yet doth n im- 
port a fpecial favour to Noah^;/^ his feed^ as one 
nhom God wonld fljew a more (fecial refpe^ to , 
as he had done in his deliverance^ and upon this 
[pectal favour to him the creatures fare the bet- 
ter. For though the word \_ Covenant ^ be the 
fame to man and heaft , yet the diverfity of the 
promiffary and his capacity may put a different fen fe 
on the fame wordy as applied to each, ^nd in- 
deed it fhould feem but a fad bleffing to Noah to 
hear an \_ increase and multiply ] // all his In- 
fant poflerity muft be cafi or left out of the vtfi- 
ble Churchy and fo left as common or unclean^ 
This were to encreafe and multiply the Kingdom^ 
of the Devil, If he that was fo mercifully hou^ 
fed in the Ark. Vpith all hts children , mitfi now 
he fo blefi as to have all their tffue to be out of the 
Churchy it were a flrange change in God^ and a 
ftrange bleffing on Noah ! And an uncomfortable 
flablifnng of a. (fovenant with his feedy if all 
that feed mufi be fo thrufi from God and dealt 
with ^A the feed of cur fed Cain. 

Moreover it is cert am that Noah did prophe^ 
tically , or at leafi truly pronounce the bleffing on 
Shem and Japhet. And in Shems bleffmg he 
bleffeth the Lord his Gody fljewtng that God was 
his God and fo in CovenatJt with htm. And it 
ts plain that it is not only the perfons , but the 
po ferities of his three fwvs that Noah here intend- 
ed. It was not Cham hiwfelf fo much as Canaan 


and his fucceeding pofierity that mre to he fer* 
*vantsto Shem ^W Japhet, that is ^ to their pofie* 
rity. And the hie^mg mtifi be to the iffue of 
Shem, as well as the cnrfe te the iffhe ofChom* 
And indeed a Hebrew Dollar would take it ill 
0t that Expofitor or Divine whatfoever that 
floonld pre fame to exclude the Infant feed of them 
out of Gods Oiurch, And well they may , if in 
the bleffmg God be pronounced to be their God* 
Saith Ainfworth in loc, \^under this Shem alfo 
himfelf receiveth a bleffing : for bleffed 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 ajha^ 
wed to be called their 'God ^ Heb. ii. 16. and 
Shem is the firfi man in Scripture that hath ex- 
prejly this honour /\ 

aJ^foreover in Gen, 9. 27. in Japhets bleffing 
there is muchy though in few words ^ to this pur- 
pofe intimated* Firft , note that the Jewijh 
Church is called \_ the tents of Shem. ] From 
whence it appeareth^ that the Church prtviledges 
of that people begun not with or from AbrahaiH , 
but were before : And that it is the fame Church 
that was cf Shem and of Abraham, and after all 
the additional promifes to Abraham, the Jewijh 
Church is fill 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 , muf: be fuppofed to have the 
fame fort of members cr materials : and there- 
fore Infants muft be members before Abrahams 
days as well as after. That Church which 


yoiU Sheras tenU had Infant Church-memhers (for 
the Jews Church 16 fo called , into which Japhec 
Tpas to paf: ) But the Church both before and af- 
ter Abraham vpas Shems tents^ Ergo. 

Tet further let it here be mtedy that it is into 
Shems tents that Japhec muft paf. J fuppofe that 
the evidence is better here for that expofition that 
applyeth the word \^ dwell 2 to Japhec than to Gody 
and fo that this is ]foken of the converfen of the 
CentileSy as waxy Expofitors have cleared at large. 
And foj as Ainfworih faith ^ the fenfe is that J:^- 
phec fhaH be |[ united with the Churches of the 
JewSy the pofterity of Shcm , which was fulfilled 
when the Gentiles became joynt-heirs^ and of the 
fame body^ and ]oynt -partakers of Gods prozufe ijz 
■Chrifly the flop of the partition-wall being broken 
down, dec, Ephef. 3.6. &: 2. 14, 19. Although it 
may further tn?ply the graffing of JzphQis children 
into the ftock.of the Qonrch^ whenShtms pofieri- 
ty (Ijoiild be cut ojf^ &c. ] vid. ulr. Now if it be 
Shems tents even the fame Church that Japhecs 
children wuft dwell in , then as Shems Infants 
Xvcre church-members , fo 7?jufl Japhets, and not 
all his Infarit feed be cafl or left out. So that 
here is a promife of Infant Church-member finp 
unto the Gentiles in thefe words. 

Reply. To alJ this the fumm of Mr. T.'s an- 
fvvers are, i. A denial of the fenfes given 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 bUlTed, God their God , and their feed 
ill the Church; As if Gods open Covenant and 



promife made them not vifible raembeirs but invi- 


R.B. \TrT£ come next to the Promife made 
W to Abraham, nvhkh I jhall fay the 
lef tOy hecapife yon confef it. But again note , 
that whereas your felf make the beginning of 
Gods taking the Jews to be his feofle, and fo of 
Infants to be members of the Church , to be at 
Abrahams call from Ur ^ i. Inhere is no one word 
of that in the Text, 2. Lot came out of Ur with 
Abraham, yeuy and from Haran, and lived with 
htm : were not Lot and his Infants Church-mem^ 
hers then? 

3 . The chief note I intend is this^ that there is 
m more faid then to j>rove Infants Church-mem- 
herSf than what we have (hewed was faid long 
before^ and is faid after of the Gentiles Infants^ 
7to nor fo much. If therefore the pajfage of Abra- 
ham out of Ur, yea , or the -pror/^ife made to him 
in Haran, Gen. 12. 2, 3. will prove Infants 
Church-memberfijip , then have we as good proof 
cf it to the Gentile Church as to the Jews* 

And here I note further , that in the begin- 
ning before the command for Circumcifion , yoH 
plainly yield that Infants Church-memberjJnp is a 
thing fcparable from Circumcifion^ and begun not 
with It , but before^ And indeed I have evinced 
that td yon in my Book, of Baptifm, Abraham 
himfelf was not made a member by Circuwcifiony 


but circumcifed bscanfe a member of Chrifis 
Church by faith, Ifhmael vpas a member before^ 
and fo vpas Ifaac, and the Infants born in Abra- 
hams houfe. 

Whether there were any fromife or precept of this 
( but a meer tranfeunt faEi ) let the Text lafi 
mentioned^ and the follovping bear witnefi, Gen» 
12. 2, 3. In thee fhall all families of the earth 
be blefled, and^ Gen. 17.7,9,10. And I will 
eftablifh my Covenant between me and thee and 

thy feed after thee and I will be their 

God. And God faid to Abraham^ Thou fhalt 
keep my Covenant therefore , thou and thy feed 
after thee in their generations. This is my Co- 
venant which you fhall keep between me and 
you, &c. to njerf 15. In all this let thefe things 
be noted , i. That here is an exprejS promt fe 
vr Covenant to Abraham and his feed af- 
ter him. 2. That it is not only de pracfenti, 
but for the fntnre ^ called an everlafling Cove- 
nam* 3 . That this prcmife or Covenant doth ma- 
'/lifefily imply and include Infants Church-mem- 
ber Jhip (as you confef,) 4. That yet here is not 
the leaft word that intimates an inftttution 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 Qourch'-memberflnp f ( except what in- 
timates the pr omi fed 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 Infayit members yVVL, 
the males , and therefore it cannot be foundation- 


of their ChHrch'Wemberjhip , 'which leaves out 
half the members. 5. Note that the fromife that 
God will be thetr Gody doth exprejly contain the 
Chhrch-memherjliip of the feed, 6. Note that 
this is more than a tranfeunt faB , Ergo , bein^ 
an everldfiing, Covenant, Had it been a natn^ 
rat tranftunt fa5i^ that had left no permanent ti^ 
tie behind it tn the obligation of the Covenant , 
then it had been null and void as joon as fpoken : 
then the word ofCjod is bpit a bare fomid and of no 
further force* 7. Note that the Apoftle ( as is 
faid) Rom. 4. lo, 11, 12, 13, doth fully manifefi 
to HSf that this promife was made to Abraham as 
a believer , and that CircHmcifion was a feal of 
the righteoufnefs of faith which he hady yet be- 
ing line ircurnci fed : and therefore that the chief 
part of the Covenant of having God for our Gody 
and his taking vj as his peculiar people ^ belongs 
to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews, 8. And 
he oft jJjeweth that the faithful are Abrahams 
feed^ and therefore the chief bleffmgs of the pro- 
mife belong to all the faithful. But one of the 
blejfmgs wasy that their Infants jhoald be compre- 
hended in the fame Church and Covenant-, Ergo, 
the Infants of the faithful who are the heirs of 
the fame prcmifey mufi 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. 12.3. 
the blejjing from Abraham in Chrifl is promifed 
to all the families or tribes on earthy all the fami- 
lies of the earth fhall be blefTed, as the Heb. Sa- 
mar, Arabic, or all the kindreds as the vulgar 
Lar, and Chald. paraph, or 'all the tribes as the 



Sept. v7wj«i oil (pvKetu And donhtlefs it is hyChrifl 
that this bkjfwg is fromifed y and fo a G off el 
bleffing ( Ergo, the Syriac. adds and in thy feed, 
and the Arab, hath by thee. ) And the Apoftle 
fully teftifeth that. So that as tribes , kindreds y 
families^ do wofi certainly comprehend the Infants^ 
and as tt vpas to fuch families that the promifs 
was made before Chrifi as to the Jevpiflo Church ^ 
fo is it exprefy to fuch families or tribes that the 
fromife is made as to the Gentiles fince Chrift, 

I o. Note that as Infant Chnrch-memberfhip is 
here clearly implied in Infant Circamcifion , fo 
they are two difiinU things-^ and as the ft^n ii 
here commanded de novo , fo the thing figniftd 
( 1 mean the duty of engaging and devoting to 
Cod as their God in (^ovenant ) is commanded 
with it, though not de novo, as a thing now be* 
ginning as the fign did. So that here is in Cir^ 
citmcifion not only a command to do the circnm' 
cifing oHtward a[iy 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 
Cody and devote them to him as his feparatedpe^ 
culiar people. So that here are two diftinU du- 
ties concHrrent, The one external newly infli- 
tiitcd , the other internal not newly infiitn^ 
ted. And therefore the former may ceafe , and 
yet the later fiand : and it is no proof that 
the later ( Covenant engagement of Infants to 
Cod ) is ceafedy becanfe the fign of Cir citmcifion 
is ceafed ^ no more than it proves that fnch Cove- 
nant engagement did then begin when Circum- 
cifion did begin 5 or that women were not Church- 



members feparate^j engaged, dedicated to God in 
Infancy^ htcanfe they vpere 7iot circumcifed. And 
no more than yon can prove that all Ifrad wai 
unchwrched in the wildernefs when they were un- 
ctrcHmcifcd for 40 years» So that here you have 
a command for entring Infants as Chmch-mem- 
bers. And fo you fee both promife and precept in 
Gen, 12. 3. & Gen. 17. 

And when I confider the Parent Sy breeding and 
tnanners of Rebekah , / think it far more proba- 
ble that fie was a Church-member from her In- 
fancy , than that jhe was entred afterwards at age^ 
or that floe was a heathen or infidel when Ilaac 
married her. 

And as here are before mB?7tioned fiandingCo- 
venantSy fo it i^ to be noted how God intimatetk 
the extent of the main bleffing of them to be fur- 
ther than to Abrahams natural feed^ not only in 
the exprefs promife of the bleffing to all the nati* 
ens or families on earth ( of which before ) but 
in the ajftgned reafon of the blejfmg which is com- 
mon to Abraham with other true believers, For 
Gen. 22. 165 17, 18. it is thus alledged [_becaufe 
thou haft done this thing , &c. And in thy feed 
(hall all the nations of the earth be blejfed^ becaufe 
thou hafl^ obeyed my voice » ] And Gen. 26. 3, 4, 5. 
the Covenant is renewed with Ifaac, and the fame 
reafon afftgned , [^ becaufe that Abraham obeyed 
my voice y and kept my charge ^ my commandment s^ 
my fiatutes and my laws^ j How mans obedience 
is faid to be a caufe of Gods bleffmgj I am not de^ 
iermining •, but taking the words as J find them 
in general , / may (ioncMf ^ that they are here 



given as a canfe or reafon of it fome way or others 
And though a Jpeci.il mercy jr^<iy be given on a 
common ground or reafon , yet where there ts no 
apparent proof of the rejirtiiioTty we are to judge- 
the hlefftng common where the reafon t6 common : 
At leaft 5 // a Jpecial hlejfing be fuptr added to 
Abrahams feed ( upon the freenefi of Gods graccy 
or the eminency of Abrahams obedience ^ ) ye f there 
goes with It a mercy common to all where the 
reafon of the mercy u foun^. It being therefore 
the cafe of every true believer to be faithful and 
obedient ^ yea^ to prefer that before his own Itfe^ 
and not a fon only , it may be hence gathered , 
that God who hleffed Abrahams feed on that ac- 
County Will blef theirs on the fame ^ with the fame 
hlcfpngs in the main ( as to his favour and ac-^ 
ceptance of them ) though not with the fame in 
the variable fuperaddittonals or overplus of extern 
nal things. 

In Exod. 12, 48. there is a law for the c ire um^ 
tifing of all the males of firr angers that fojourn iri 
the landj that will keep the paffover : which com^ 
frehendeth their [hurch-r/ier/ibcrflnp, ai is fliewed. 
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 
iayings, that if [_Mmiffionbe by B^ptifr, I mufl 
make Parents Mmifters to baptize J a child may 
well anfwer. There are more Parties that ad in 
baptifm than one : God by his itJl'finifiers cxpref- 
fcth his Covenant-Gift and Confent, and deliver-^ 
cth it fealcd to the Receiver by the inftituted in- 
\efting fyrabol : The party receiving expreflech 

K hi3 

hss 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 Ca^fe of Reception without being a 


R.B. 'Tp/Zf promt fe to the whole people of If- 
X raei, Infahts anddl^ that they (l}0Pi!d 
h \^a peculiar people , a Kingdom of Priefij^ and 
a holy Nation^ J Exod 19. 5, 6. yon cannot de^ 
ny» This is a promt fe , and not a tranfeunt faB 
yyhich made no promtfe^ And the people are cal^ 
led to keep Cods Covenant ^ that they might have 
this promife fulfilled to them. Tea , // yon had 
faid^ that it vpm a mecr tranfeunt Covenant or 
promife^ reaching but to the perjons then exifient^ 
and dying vpith them, though yon had Jpoken more 
fenfey yet no more truth than when you denied the^ 
law and prowife^ and fubftttuted a tranfeunt fa^» 
For , I , //■ 16 ex pre fly a promife de futuro to a 
Nation, z. Tea ^ and the Jpoflle ? ctcr giveth 
the farK£ titles to believers under the Gojpel^ in^ 
tmatii2g the fnlfilling of the promife even to them^ 
as the promife to Abraham was to the faithful 
who were his uncircun^ctfed feed. However^ 
here is a Covenant granting by way of con fir ma^ 
on the bhffi?ig of thurch-memberfhip to Infants 
with the rcfl i>/ Ifrael : For certainly^ this pec u* 
liarity^ and hf.lintfs , and prie flood here mentio- 
tid^ contairiith thtir ChiiYch'rrterr.berfinp : It is 

UndeniabU therefore , that fnch Church-member^ 
jhfp is here granted by Promt fe or Covenant , not 
4U a thing then beginnings but by way of confir- 
mat ion of the like former grants* And it is to 
he noted ^ that though this fromife is made to all 
Ifrael , yet not to be fulfilUd to any of them ^ but 
on condition that they t obey Gods voice , and 
k^ep his Covenant^ '] verf. 5 . on which conditions 
alfo any other might have then enjoyed the fam^ 
hleffmgy and therefore fo may do now* 

In Dect. 17. i,^. The Infants with the reft 
are called the children of God, and a holy and pe^ 
cnliar people to the Lord their God. 

And Deur. 26. 14, 18. theCovenant is expref^ 
fed [] Thou haft avouched the Lord this day to 
be thy God, and to walk in his ways,^ and keep 
his ftatuces, 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, ere. And thac 
thou maift be ain holy peopk , c^c. Is here no 
promife, when the promife is expreft f and is here 
no Covenant^ where the mutual Covenant is de- 
fcribed ? And t think^you grant that Infants arc 

So Deur. 28.4, 9. Where the promife to the na^ 
tion is J that if they hearken to Cods voice and 
obferve his Commandment s^ they JJjall be bleffsd in 
the fruit of their bodies^ and the Lord will efta- 
blifj them a holy people to him [elf ^ as he had 
fworn unto them. 3 Here is not only a Covenant 
and Promife for the future^ but alfo an oath ton^ 
fming itj as annexed to the fame before. Is 

K i thif 

this eflahlijfnn^ Covenant or Tromife hut a tran- 
feunt fati ? or doth not this confirm their right 
to the benefit promifedj which Vpas received before 
by the fame weans ? 

And Ezra 9. 2» They dre called the holy feed. 

Of that in Deut. 29. / have formerly (poke 
enough. It is called a Covenant, nAll Ifrael 
^ith their little ones did enter the Covenant and the 
eluth with Cody and which he made to them. It 
W/u a Covenant , to eftablifh them for a people 
xh himfelf, and that he may be to them a God, 
as he had before faid and fworn. It is a Cove* 
nmt made even t^ith ther/t that flood not there , 
nhaher It be meant only of the fticceffive Ik^tXats 
( and then it is not a tranfeunt Covenant ) or of 
aU people whoever that will accept of the fame 
urms ( and then it's not proper to Ifrael. ) It is 
a Covenant not fnadeto them as meer Ifraelites:^ 
hut as obedient to the Covenant terms ^ and Co'^r 
iienant breaking would cut them off, verf. 19,20^' 
2 r , 23 , 25, 16. Is not (^hMrch-memberjhip contain- 
ed i:«, Gods being their God , and taking them^\ 
for his people thus in Covenant > Doth not the pro" 
mfe give them an ejlablifhed right in this bleffmg?- 
Is ali this then no promifey but a tranfeunt fa^i /* 

Deut. 30. I9» There is a law and promife y 
dioofe life, that thou and thy feed may live* 
This is the fame Covenant which hh can fed the 
people to enter ^ 2 Chron. 15, and if there had] 
been m law for it^ there would have been no ptf^ ' 
ndty^ and then he would not have made it deaih' 
fo withdraw. It is the fame Covenant which Jo- 
Mkcaufed the people to enter, 2 Kings 23. 2,3 Jl 


2 Chron. 34« 5i, 3^- Of Levir. 25/41,54, 55^ 
/ have Ipoken elfewhere y .and of fome other 

^•^''- . ^•■^■^'^^v-,^^ ' •' ^^--^ 

Mr. r, For, the fo/e effirim. cnuje bein^ a^taUy 

put ("as the Covenant and the Parents fxlieving are? 
IV«f. 2c. j the ejfeU mufi be In act : but it is not fo in tf^ 
unborn : therefore the Covenant and Parents faith are not 

the folc efficient fo that though the Covenant give 

a Right to a bleiling, yet it dodi not make adualiy vifi- 
b!e Church-members 3 witliout foipe other tranfeunc 
faft . ' 

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 almofl done our work. 
It feemeth by this time he could find in his heart 
to grant that the Covenant is an efficient caafe^ 
though not the fole efficient : well , we will not 
ftick on that : Gods love and revelation , and 
thrifts merits (hall be antecedent chief efficients : 
And he feemeth now inftead of faying ftill that 
;{^ It is only by the Phyfcal tranfeunt falh ] to be 
content if we will fay , it is not till or witbjut 
that fad: ^ that is , that men' are not members of 
the Church till they are men. We will not be 
fo fowre as to deny him that much. And indeed 
is this all at the upfhot ? But I will not grant him 
tlie logical notion too eaiily, though we will not 
quarrel about itc I think a canfe materiaUy miay 
long exift before the fffiecl^ though it be not /or- 
maliter caufa till it effed : And I think that Gods 
conditional (Covenant or Tromife^ is but caufa vir'* 
tiialis cr aptitndinalis till it effeB , and yet may 
be the fole proximate efficient of our Right af* 
lerward : I think the childs bein^ born did not 

' " K 3 efsq 

fffeSi his Right to Church Relation, Tior dotii ' 
pur Faith now, nor the Parents faith or confent'^ 
but only as a condition maj^e men capable Recipi- 
ents, And I think the effe5i may begin de mvq 
lyithoyt any change in ihc efficient^ upon a change 
in the Recipient : And that the Sun unchanged is 
the proximate efficient of motion, light and hear, 
to the next exigent wight that received not his 
influx before it did exift : And the Covenant or 
ponatiye Inflrutnent of God which faith \^He . 
that helieyeth ^Imll be JHfitfied^ rpay effeft my 
Juftification when I believe and not before , 
though my faith ejfeB it not at all, but dijpofe th^ 
recipient. But I deny that the Parents faithbc' 
in^ pHt^ all the c^p^city of the recipient is put^y 
even when he is born: For if it be pofiible for 
the Parent to confent for himfelf and not for hi^ 
child , and to devote himfelf and not his child to 
God 5 part of the condition pf re(:eptioa i$ 


As far as I perceive , could I but hope to be 
fo happy a difputant, as to convince Mr. T, that 
Church-memberfhip (vi{]ble J is any benefit at all 
it felf or was to the Ifraelites y he would grant 
me all that I plead for of the conveyance of it by 
Qpvenant. And if I cannot it is a hard cafe, 




il. B. ""T^He fccond Commandment ^ Exod. 2(% 
jL 5, 6. Deur. 5. 9, lo. / thinks is a 
laWy and containeth a fromtfe or premiant fart y 
vcherein he promifeth to fljew mercy to the gene- 
rations or children of them that love him and. 
keep his Commandments : of which I have alfo 
Jpoken elfexvhere, to which 1 refer yon, I fee no 
reafon to dohht but here is a fiandmg promt fe , 
and difcovery of Gods refolution , concerning the 
children of all that love him , whether Jews or 
Gentiles y to whom this Commandment belongs: 
nor to doubt whether this mercy imply Church^ 
membership : And that this is fetcht from the ve^ 
ry gracioHi nature of God^ I find in his proclaim^ 
ing bis Name to Mofes, Exod. 34.6, 7* 

Mr. r. If this mercy here imply Church-meiuberfhip 
to the Infaats of tJicm that love hioi to a thoufand Ge- 
nerations 5 then it implieth it to all the Infants in the 
world But there is nothing to prove that this mer- 
cy muft be Church-memhcrfhip, or that it mufl be to all 
th.e children of them that love God, or that it rni(ft be 

to them in Infancy I incline to conceive this apro- 

mife of temporal mercies, chiefly to the ip:ic'Jtfj 

Reply, I. That it is not only o^ temporal mer'* 
ciesy the words \^ Love and Hate "] as the qualifi- 
cation of the Parents , fceni to prove ^ and the 
joyning the children to the Parents m the retrir 
bution : And all the terms feem above fuch 3 
fenfe : It is the revenge of ajealom God on Ido" 
lafersj and mncy to his Lovers that isfpokenof: 

K 4 And 

And the joyning this Command to tire- firfi; which 
fkleih our relation to God , with the Laws an- 
nexed in Dent, for the curting off whole Cities 
( Parents and Children ) that turn from God to 
Idols, llieweih that it reached to Church-Commft- 
r.ion and Life* 

2. And that it was not only to the Ifraelites 
(whatever you cbitfy meanj is proved boih in 
that it is in the Docalo£ue , and the proclaimed 
name of God ^ Esod. 54. 5, 6. and exemplified 
througliouL the Scripture and in the Gofpel. 

2. As to the extent, we can hardly expeft that 
the world fbould endure a thouland Generations : 
Therefore it- can mean but that God who bound- 
Cth the punifhmcnt to the third and fourth gene- 
ration, will fet no bounds to the fucceiiion of his 
mercies while our capacity continueth. And what- 
ever the mercies be, the expoficion of this conti^^ 
vuAnce ^oncerneth you as much as n}e^ 

3 . As to the conditions, I doubt not but it fup- 
pofech that the child at age imitate the Parents in 
iheir 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 5 
child of Godly Parents turn wicked , the right is 

4. But the Commandment with the forefaid 
cxpofidon fhews, that God meaneth that his Retri- 
b,u ion to Parents that Love or Hate him , fiiall 
extend to their children as fach ^ unlefs they inter- 
rupt it at age by their own ads; And if fo their 
children ^na tales^ then to Infants. 

^ And 1^ fpeaketh fuch a ft ate of mrcy as can- 

not in reafon be conceived to beloKg to them 
without, and can mean no lefs than Gods vifiblc 
favour jby which the Church is diff^^renccd from the 
v/>.rld, when Lovers and Haters are diftinguifhed 

And when God hath 'Recorded this decreed 
gr Anted diJ}wanipHd mrcy to the children of the 
faithful as fnch in the Tables of ftone , fure it is 
a Vifiblc notification^ which will make them vifi^ 
hie favorites and Chnrch'jnerr;hers as foon as they 
vifibly exift. 

And the quatenus feemeth to me to prove that 
it excendeth to all the children of the faithful^ 
becaufe it is to them as fuch. But irfolloweth not 
that it mud extend to them all alikcy as to eqnal 
wercies^ nor yet that the fin of Parents after may 
fnake no kind of forfeiture. But of this I have 
faid more in my Chriftian Dire^ory, 


p.. B. TiV Pfal. 102. 28. It is a general fro^ 
1 mife^ the children of thy fcrvants fnall 
continue, and their feed (hall be eftablifhed before 
ihee, Jt is ufiial in the OldTefiament to expref 
Cods favour, hy temporal blcljl?/gs , ?y,ore than in 
the Gojpel -^ but yet fill they fee lire a^ of his fa- 
zgnr, jis^ I will not fail thee, nor forfake thee, 
wight fccure Jofliua n:ore than m of temporal fiic* 
ccjjesy and yet not more of Gods never failing /<«- 




^here is a flable fromife to all Gods people in 
general that have children^ Pfal. 103. 17. But 
the mercy of the Lord is from everlafting to evcrr 
lafting upon them that fear him , and his righte- 
oufneTs unto childrens children, u4nd to be fe- 
cured by promife of Gods mercy and ri^hteotsfnej^ 
is the fiate of none without the Church, 

And if they were all to be kept out of the 
Church, I fcarce thinks that Children would be 
called an heritage of the Lord, and the fruit of the 
wo^b his reward, Pfal. iij, 3. nor the manhap-^ 
py that hath his quiver full of them. Nor would 
the fucking children be called as part of the fo' 
lemn ajfembly to the htiwiliation , ]oel 2. 16. 
2 Chron. 26. 13^ 

There is a [landing promt fe to all the jt^^fiy Prov^ 
20. 7. The juft man wai1<eth in his integrity, his 
children are blefled alter him. There is no fort 
of men without the Church that is pronounced 
hleffcd in Scripture, A blejfed people are Gods 
people , and thofe are the Church feparated from 
the curfed world. One lower blefjing Will not de-r- 
f^ominate a man or focicty , a blefjed marp or fo^ 

If it were a good argument then^ Deut,^, -i^^^ 
becaufe he loved thy fathers, therefore he chofe 
their feed after them, theyi it is good ft ill as to fa- 
^jour in general. So Deut, 10. 15. Pfal.^, 36. 
Trov.i\*2i, The feed of the righteous fhali be 
delivered. In Pfal. 37. 26. there is a general 
promife to, or declaration of the rightcom^ thatVxl^ 
feed is bleffed, and then they are Church-members, 

la Ih. 61. 8, 9. it is promtfed I think, of Gd» 



fjftltimes^ I will make an everlafting Covenant 
with them , and their feed fhall be known among 
the Gentiles, and their ofF-fpring among the peo- 
ple : all that fee them (hall acknowledge them, 
that they arc the feed which the Lord hath blef- 
ifed. And cap.62. 12, They iTiall call them the 
holy people, the redeemed of the Lord ; and thou 
(halt be called, fought out , a city not forfaken. 
Cofpel promifes then extend to [ people and cities^ ] 
whereof Infants (tre a part, I fa, 6^, 23. they 
are the feed of the blefled of the Lord, and their 
off- fpring with them. This is plain y and full, 
and durable. 

What is neceffary to he faid in anfwer to the 
common ohje^lions ^ ai [_ that experience tells us 
all the feed of the rtghteom are not hlejfed^ with 
the like , I fuppofe already done in my book^of 
Baptifm, All the feed of the righteous are blef- 
fed y though not all vpith that blejfing which can^ 
not f;e lofl and cafi away by themfelves when they 
come to age, 

Mr. T.'s Anfwers all contain the difficulty of 
difcerning the fulHlling of thefe promifes, and fa 
denying that they infer vifible Church-member- 
fhip : and he faith j^ That without the Church a 
per [on may he pronounced bleffed^ is apparent from 
Ifhmaels blejfing^ Gen. 17. 20. when he was ex- 
cluded the Covenant and caftour. ] 

Reply, He was excluded the Covenant of pecu- 
liarity, but not the common Covenant of Grace 
rnade with mankind in Adam and Noe: And the 
Church was larger than the Ifraetites Nation, 
The reft I leave to the Reader, 

# SECTi 


— — ^ —4. 


R. B. TF youfay that the word \^feed^ doth not 
i necejjarily incln^.e Infants* I atifvoer^ In- 
fants are fart of the feed of the righteom , yea all 
their feed are fir fi Infants, If therefore God have 
made general fromifes a^ to age and perfon^ vpho is 
he that dare hmit it , without jufi proof that in- 
deed God hath limited it f Doth God fay ^ that the 
feed of the righteous are not hie ffed till they come 
to age f If he pronounce the feed hlejfedy they mptfi 
he hlejfed , when they are prfi fiich a feed : And 
if any one age might be rnore included than ano» 
therj one would think^it mufi he that wherein the^ 
/ire fi meerly the feed of fich as that they ft and 
not on any diftinB account of their own atlua^ 
faith or unbelief, ' For the feed of the righteous^ 
^ fuchj have a promifed hleffing : But the feed of 
the right eoiu turning them fe Ives to unrighteouf- 
rtcf^ do turn from that hlejfwg ^ and become aC'^ 

I fMppofe I have already been wore tediom 
than you, expeBed: I will therefore add no more 
of thefe paffagcs of Scripture , having faid that 
vifhich fatisfeth me formerly to the fame purpofe j 
and having yet feen nothing that leaves me un^ 
fatisfed. And alfo hecaufe one text either con- 
taining fuch a Law or Covenant as you call for^ 
or declaring to w that God did make fuch a Law 
or Covenant^ is 06 good as a thousand in point of 

' Mr. T, Mr. B. not holding children in the womb un- 
born to be vifiblc Church-members, all this may be retort- 
e(I; They are part of the feed of the righteous. 

Refly. The whole feed f in the womb and born } 
are taken into this relation to God which im- 
plyeth his bleftlng on them as feparaced from the 
wicked, according to their capacity : An Infant iri 
the womb is vifibly feparated to God, if you de- 
nominate 'viftbility froni the notoriety or viabili- 
ty of Gods promife that doth it : But the ferfon 
is net vifihle 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 vifibility of our (late 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^c, is vanity. 


R. B. T^ HE next QHefrion th^t I fpould fpeak, 
JL to tSj whether thcfe Laws , or Cove- 
nants^ or Vro'i'Kifes ^ are capable ej a revocation^ 
or repeal ? and I {hall take this for a quefiion 
that needs no further debate , anion g iKen that 
know what a Law or Promife is. Cods ' immu^ 
tability and perfe^iion may mak^^ jOme Law^ «»- 
repealable y while the fiib;e5i rtmpins : hut other^ 
VPife the thing it [elf is capable of it. Only where 
a, Promife or Law is but for a Imited time , 
rvhcn the time is €xfh(d it ceafeth , and the cef- 



fat ion is oito the nulling of ity equal to a rewP 
CM ion or abrogation. I put in this que fl ion , leff 
yoi fijould hereafter change your mtnd and fay ^ 
that indeed tt is a laxK>^ or fromife^ or covenant j 
by which the right of Church-member jluf is conr 
ferred^ and Infants dedicated to God : but it is but a 
i anfeunt Law or CovenantiJ^ Anfw. Jf fo^thenit 
is either immediately or prefently tranfeunt^ or at 
a certain limited time only ^ vphen it will ceafe. 
Tide former ts certainly falfe and intolerable^ 
For^ i*They are promifes and laws for the future^ 
and therefore ceafe not immediately, 2. That 
Vpere to make God the mofi unfaithful fromifer 
and mutable Larv-maker in the worlds if his prO' 
mife and his laves ceafe as foon as they are made* 
Jslay it makes them to he no laws or promifes» 
3 • It was one ftanding law and promt fe thai be^ 
Imged to the Nation of the Jews fuccejfively. And 
God did not make his promife anew to every In^ 
fant that was made a Church-member^ nor renew 
his law to every Varent to enter their Children in- 
to his Covenant by the fign of Circumci(ion» Were 
not the uncircumcifed Ifraelices in the Wilder ne ft 
rn^ide members by the efficacy of the former Cove- 
nant of God remaining in force. And did for-' 
mer Laws oblige to Circumcifon till Chrifl ? Elfe 
there were but few members^ nor but few that ctr- 
cumcifed warrantably-, if the promtfe and precept 
did extend but to the perfon that it was firji deli-: 
vcred to^ and every one elfe mufi Ukewifc have a- 
perfonal promife and precept. The Mother of 
Chrifl cannot then be proved to have been a 
Qmrch- member in Infancy* If it be faid that 



thefe promt fes were limited in the making of them^ 
to a certain riwe when they were to ceafe^ J fay when 
that is fro'ved we p} all believe ft ^ which I have 
not yet feen done. 

Audit falls in with the laf qneftion^ which is^ 

whether thefe frowtfes be indeed revoked and cea- 

fed y and thefe laws repealed or ceafed, ty4nd 

here it is that J have long expe^ed your foltd 

proofs together with the fatisfaliory anfwer to my 

arguments to the contrary. And fo I Jhall leave 

this task^ in yonr hands. Sure I am that Chrifi 

never came to caft out of the Churchy but to go* 

ther more in : mnch lefs to cafl out all the InfantSy 

even all of that age in which htmfelf wa6 head of 

that Church : But to gather together in one the 

children of God that were fcatteredy Johnii. 52. 

And therefore he would oft have gathered all ]e- 

rufalcm and Judsea, even the National Church that 

then wofy unto htmfelf ^ 06 the true head^ even as 

a Hen gather eth her Chickens under her wings y 

and they would not. It was not becanfe he would 

not ( oi intending a new frame , where Infants 

could have no place ) hut becaufe they would not , 

andfo caft out themfelves and their Infants, Certain^ 

ly it is the joy of the formerly defolate Gentiles , 

that they ftoall have many more children than 

jlie that had an Husband , and not fewer , 

Gal. 4. 25 , 26 5 27. And we as Ifaac are 

children of the promife , even that promife 

which extended to the Infants with the Parents, 

Gal. 4. 28. 

Mr. T. I conceived a Prom/fe not in congrunas f?^fe 

ri^uUbli : For although a promife be a Law to the Pro- 



Jenifer, yet I know hoc how congruoufly it fhould be re- 
pealed : 'Tis true , the ad of proniKing being tranfeunr 
ceafeth j but that cannot be repealed: that which is done 
cannot be Injediim:, no:: done. 

Reply. 1 perceive we mufl: difpute our firft 
principles^ as well as our Bapufm. Reader, Gods^ 
promife in queftion is not a particular promife to 
fome one perfon only , but his Recorded Jnflrti- 
went of Donation^ or ftabliflied written or conti- 
nued word , which is the fi^n of his will : It is 
the fame thing which is called , the Tremiant or 
Donative part of his Law, in one refpeft, and hi$ 
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 floail be faved J 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 7'cfealed. but whether it be repalea- 
hle^ in congruous fenfe. Why m:iy not the King 
make a Law that every one that killeth fuch and 
fuch hurtful creatures ( a Fox, c^c, ) or that kil- 
ieth an enemy in war, (hall 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 Ifradites was repealed, upon their 
fin 1 The non-perfox^mance of the condition depri- 
veth the psrty of the benefit while it is unrepeal- 
ed; but may no: God thereuf on repeal the Law 


or Covenant, and null the very offer to pofterity ? 
Is it not (o as to the Jews policie and peculiari- 
ty? What pains is taken in theEpiftleto the He- 
hrevcs to prove the change of the Covenant as 
fauhy in ccmparifon of that which had better pro- 
mifes? But if you will call it ameer cejfatiorj^dW 
is one sis to cur queflion in hand* 


Ro B. YyEfore I end I fijill he bold to p^t tvfo 
JLJ or three Qjtejiions to yoH out of your 
lafi Letter, Queft. i. Whether the circnnjcffed 
fervants of Ifrael fold at^ay to another nation ^ 
and fo feparated from the Civil fate of Ifrael , 
did eo ViO^mWitceafe to he C'^nrch-memhers^ though 
they forfook^ not God / And fo of the Infants if 
they were fold in Infancy f If you affirm it^ then 
prove it^ If yon deny tty then Infants might he 
QjHrch-rnetnbers that were not ef the Qon^mon- 

. Mr. r. None v;as of right of the Jewifh Cliurch 

who was noc of the Common-Tvcalth. 

Reply, But my Queftion was, when withoui; for- 
faking God, they are forcibly feparated from the 
Jewifli policy and fubjeded to others, are they 
iiot members of the Chnrch-HniverfalhiVyihongh 
not of the Jews ? ^ 




R.B. Queft.2. 1 F ( as yon fay ) ip vaas on the Jews 
1 rejcciton of Chrift that they were 
broks^ off' from being Gods feofle^ vperethofe'thoii" 
fands of Jews that believed in Chrift fo broken 
off. J or not , who continued fucceffively a famons 
Church at Hierufalem, wh'^ch came to be a Tatri^ 
archal feat. Whether then were not the childrefj. 
of the Difcifles and all believing Jews Church^ 
members in Infancy f If noy then it was fomewhat 
elfe than unbelief that broke them offi 

Mr, T. They were broken off from the Jewifli Church, 
not by unbelief, but by faith in Chrifl. 

Reply, This is too fhort an anfwer to io great 
an evider.ce againft you. The Infants of the Chri- 
ftian Jews were the day before their Converfion 
members of the Jewilh 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 whole, fo every member of the 
Jews Church was a member of Gods univerfal 
Church. Now, i. The very Jews pohcy totally 
ceafed not till the deflrudion of Jerufalem at 
kafr. 2. But if it had, I ask, was k no mercy to 
be a' ntcmber 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 no vifible 
Church, than of the univerfal ? The Jews were 

" ~ * ^ ^ broken- 


broken off by unbelief : you lay Chriftians Tb- 
fanes were put out of that and the whole vifiblc 
Church by faith, or without unbelief. 


R. B. Qneft. 3. ''^TTHether it he crediilethd 
VV he who came not to cafi 
out fewSy hilt to bring in CentileSy breaking dovpn 
the partition-xvally and making of two one Churchy 
would have fUch a Lin fey Woolfey Church of fat- 
ty colours^ or fever at forms : fo Oi that the Chureh 
at Hierufalem Jhcald have Infant members , and 
the Church at Ronae jhould have nonel f Jews In- 
fants fljohld be members and not Genties ? 

Mr.T. fo anfwereth as before, and needeihno 
other Reply, 

S E C T. CI. 

JR. B. Quefi:.4. TF unbelief brake them off ^ 
X vpill not repentance grafthe?^ 
In ? And fo jJjould every repenting believing JewB 
Infants be Church-members j* 

Mr. T. Not their Infants • 

}ieply. Then it would be but a part a'i the peo-' 
pie that would be graffcd ine 

ti ^ECT. 



R. B, Qlieft. 5. \XT^^ ^^^ Chrifis Church he^ 
VV ' fore his incarnation Jpiri- 
tital^ and gathered in a jpiritnal way? 

. Mr. T. The invil'ible was 5 the vifiblc Jewifh Nation 
was not. 

Reply» Not in comparifon of the times of matu- 
rity : but the viiible Jewilh frame had the Father 
of fpirits for Soveraign, and commanded fpiritual 
duties, upon promifes of fpiritual bleilings , even 
life Eternal* 


R. B. Queft. 6. TJOrv prove yon that it was a 

.CjL blemijh to the old frame , 

that Infants were members /* Or that Chrifts 

Chnrch then and now are of two frame sin regard 

of the fiibje^j age f 

- .Mr. f,.\t was a more imperfed flatc in that and other 
regards;; • " - • ' 

Re fly. I called for fome proof that the Infant- 
memberfhip was any part of the Church-imper- 
fe(5tion : If it be not a blemifh, why muft it be 
done away : what, was the Church the worfe for 
Infants Rights? 


C MP) 

s E c T. c n^ 

R^ B. Qucft.y.TiV what regard is the new 
X frtume bettered hy casing ont 
Infants which were tn the old /* 

Mr. r. The Church is more fpiri ual 

Re^ly. What , doth Infants Relation detradt 
from its fpirituality ? The adult have fouls and 
bodies, and fo have Infants ? The adult conoe in 
by the fame kind of confent for themfelves, as they 
make for their Infants ? The adult blemifh the 
Church with more carnal fins than Infants do? 
The Kingdom would be never the more fpi ritual nor 
excellent, if all Infants were disfranchised : Na- 
ture teacheth all Kingdoms on earth to take them 
for members, though but Infant-members. 


R. B. Qued. 8. ^^r\J H ether any Jew at age 
VV vvai a member of the old 
Church without frofejfmg faith (in the Articles 
necejfary to falvation ) repentance and obedience f 
And wherein the fuppofed new call and frame 
doth in this differ from the old -^ fave only that a, 
more full and expref revelation ef Chrifi , rcqui* 
reth a more full expref faith F 

Mr. T*. 1 know net wliat profcdion crxh Jew did rnsk?, 
or was to make. 

L 3 ^^Ph* 

Reply. I would you had been as cautelous ancj 
modeft throughout. It is evident, that they wer^ 
to profcfs confent to Gods Covenant^ which thofe 
tjiat denied, .^ would puc to death. ' 


R. B. "VT^^ may fee the voords near the end of 
X your Letter that occafwn the [even 
lafi QueftionSy and towards the rraddle that occa- 
fioneth the firfi. As for your motion of my ful- 
ly defer ibing the fri-viledges of Church-members^ 
I fl)all add no more at thps time to what is alrea^ 
dy elfewhere [aid of it. 

Reply. Here Mr. T". chides me for wronging 
hini by length ; and being afraid the Reader wil| 
do fo too I make hafte» 


R. B. A Nd now I have gone thm far with 
JLX. yoUj in an encjutry into the truth^ I 
entreat you he not too much offended wtth me^ if 
I conclude with a few ^pplicatory ^ue (lions to 
your felf. Queft. i. // it not an undertaking as 
•palpably ah fur d as nioft ever any learned fiber 
Divine in the world was guilty of , to ?naintain 
that [_ Infants were vifihle Church-members not 
ly any promife or precept , but by a tranfeunt 
faB^ and that there was no law or ordinance de- 
termining it Jljould be foy but only a faB of God^ 


which is a tranfeunt thing not repealahle ? 3 
Btit cither by this fath you mean Legi flat ion 
and Coyenant-makin^ , or not : if yon do , x^hat 
a faying 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 f 
If not , either you mnft fay^ that God makes du^ 
ty without any law , and gives right to the bem- 
fit without any fromife^ or Qjvenant-grant Oi the 
caufe ^ or elfe^ that it is no benefit to i^ave right 
to Chnrch-memberfinp, and no duty to enter into 
that relation^ and to accept of that benefit ^ and to 
be devoted to God. Which ever of thefe ways 
you chnfe ( and one you mnfl chufe , or change 
your opinion) hath the world heard of any more 
unreafonable and ridiculom , or elfe more itnbc- 
feeming a Divine , from a learned fober man of 
that profejfion ? Pardon the high charge : Let th<^ 
indifferent jndge. 

Reply. To this I find no anCwcr worth the re- 


R. B, Queft. 2. T5 it not a great difgrace to all 
JL your followers , that they will 
be led fo far into fuch ways of Schifrn, and be fo 
confident that they are righter and wifcr than 
others , and that by fuch unreafonable argttings 
and finfts as thefe , which one Wf^nld thinks any 
man jhould laugh at that knows what a Law ^ 
Frcmifcy or Covenant u f And do yon uot jrovc^ 

L 4. - thai: 


that it is not becaufe of the evidence of truth ^ hiit 
by your meer interefi or confident words , thefe 
people are changed and held to your ojinion ? Do 
they know what \_ a tranfeunt faB is ^ that with- 
out Law or Covenant mah^s Church-members? ] 
^. f'^y -i do they know this? which no man that 
ever breathed till now , nqr ever man will k^ow 
again ? And do yon not proclaim them men of 
df'flempered confciences , that dare go on in fuch 
J Schifm y on the encouragement of fuch fancies 
.ts were hatcht fo long after their perverfion^ and 
never waking man 1 thtnk^did before fo folemnly 
maintain ?~\ 

Reply. I have nothing to Tay here, but Mr, T*, 
feems very angry at this. 


R, B. Queft. 3» T«5 ^^ ^ot a dcjperate underta^ 
A k^'f^^g y ^^d dare you adven - 
ture on it^ to juflifie all the world before Chrijh 
incarnation except the Jews , from the guilt of 
not dedicating their children to God^ to take him 
to be their Godj and themfelves to be his people f 
Tea, to juflifie all Jews again fl this charge, that 
flfould negkth or refufe to engage their children to 
(jod in Covenant 04 members of his Church ? 
And doth not he that faith there is no law , fay 
there is no tranjgreffion ? ' 

Mr. r. He doth — Let him tremble at his defperatc 
undertaking to uphold his Lie of Infant Church-raem- 
berfhip and Eaptifra by liich Lies as thefe, and fear the 
ate of Liers. ' i?^« 

Reply. Charge not your felf, and I will not V 
I propofe it to your confideration , whether the 
peirfons that folcmnly take God for their God 
Recording 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- 
verfal? And whether he that faith, There is no 
Law of God binding to do thm for his children y 
do not infer that they fin not by not doing it ? 

S E C T. C X I. 

R. B. Queft. 4. Tn\-^^<? yon yet jufttfe alfo at 
3l_J the Bar of God^ all the 
•world fince Qorifls incarnation from the guilt of 
fin J in not dedicating their children to Chrift ^ 
and entring them into his Covenant as members of 
his Church ? Dare you maintain that all the vporld 
is finlefs in this reJpeB f 

Mr. 7; I dare juftifie the Non-baptizing them 

Reply, Here you make a modeft flop. It fcem- 
cth you dare not juftifie men for not foiemnly 
dedicating them in Covenant to God , and vifi- 
bly engaging them to Chrift as members vifible of 
his Church. 




R. B. Queft. 5. TTAve you well confJered of 
iTX the fruit pf your vs^ays af- 
farent in England and Ireland at tht: djy ? Or 
have you not feen enojigh to make you fnfpe^i and 
fear whether indeed God own your way or not ? 
jind is it any wonder if poftcrity he left in con* 
troverjie ahoM the Hiftory of jormer times ^ when 
you can ve?2ture , even in thefe times when the 
perfons are living in our company^ to tell me that 
^you think, J am mtfinformed that they are Ana- 
taptifts , and you tbink^that there are very few 
of them that were ever baptiz^ed^ ] when of many 
that we know > and multitudes that we hear ofy 
there are fo few that were not before againft In- 
fant Baptifm ^ and the Seekers firfi fuch^ and 
when the Quakers themfelves commonly cry down 
Infant Baptifm y and it is one of the quefiions 
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 VrO' 

Reply. The anfwer to this I leave to the Rea- 
ders judgement. 




R. B. Queft. 6. T T ^^/g you felt the guilt which 
XJL rv§ too flrongly fear you 
have incurred , of the perverting of fo many fonlsy 
opening them fuch a gap to fchifm , contempt of 
the <iJ^/intftryj and Apojiafie^ defraying a hopefnl 
reformation that cofi fo dear : or vpeaknmg our 
ha?7ds in the work^^ and filling the adverfaries 
woHths vpith fccrn^ enticing the Jefuites and Fri^ 
afs to feem your profelytes , and lift themfelves 
4mo7Jg you^ as the hopeful party to befriend their 
caufcy hardning thoufands both of the Pafifls and 
profane y and fetling them again on their dregs , 
rvhen many once began to jhake ! O what a Church 
might we have had^ and were likely to have had ? 
Had it not been for the Separatifls and you ? 
jind what a lamentable confupon are we now 
brought i7jto by thefe f Have thefe things toucht 
your heart f 

Reply, Mr. T, here is angry, and I wonder 
not •, one ftone he fnatcheth up from Dod. Owem 
Appendix , and one from the Scotch Church , 
and Elders, and the Church at Kederminfter^ and 
the Worcefterflnre Aflbciation , which few before 
|iira I think have faid much againft. 




R. B. Queft. 7. T5 [| a tranfemt faU , making 
JL Infants Church-members mth- 
cut Law, Tromife, or Cpvenant~]^ afufficientmC' 
dium to encourage you to ^jenture on all thefe hor" 
rid things , and run fuch haz^ards m you have 
done, f Or is it fofflble that an humble fiber man^ 
and a tender confiience , durfl make all this ha- 
vock^y and fland out in it fi many years confi- 
derately 04 you have done, and this upon fuch a 
palpably unreafonable pretence / JVhen you fljould 
prove to us the revocation of Infants Church^ 
memberjhip , to tell m that they had it only by a 
tranfeunt faU ? Is this a fafe ground to build fo 
great a weight on ? Sir, my confcience witneffeth, 
that it is not your reproach that is the end of 
peaking thefe unpleafmg words to you , but fome 
compajfidn on you ( do not fcorn it ) and more on 
your poor followers ; and mofi on ths Church of 
God which you have fo much injured and troubled^ 
Reply, HereMr.T. is angry again, which is the 


R. B, Queft. 8. /^^« you prove that ever there 
Vv was one age , or Church 
{particular ) on earth fince Adam till about 200 
years ago^ that the Anabaptifls rofe, wherein In- 


funis vpere not de fado taken for members of the 

Church f Jf you can do it : Let pu hear your froof„ 

Mr.T' I can •, and for proof look back to Seft. 503 $1. 
and bcfides Cori^ar.tim^ Auguflm:, Na^^, Hicrom 

Refly. 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. 


R. B. Queft.p. /^An yon bring us }r oof of any 
V^ one Infant of true Church- 
member i^ that "was not rightfully a Church-member 
himfelf from the creation tiU Chrifis days ? or 
from the creation till this day f except the Ana^ 
baptifts^rvho rejeEh the bene ft •, whofe cafe(a6 Ifaid 
before ) I will not frefume to determine ^ 

Mr.T". lean, look back to Sed". 5c, 51, 52, 57.- 

Refly, I have done, and I find no fuch proof* 


R. B. Queft, ic. Q^Eeing that Infant shave been 
O dc fado Church-members 
from the creation to this day ( as far as any re- 
cords can lead us ) is it likfly that the Lord, 
and head and all-fufficient Governour of his 
Churthf would have fermtttcd his Church till now 


h be aBnally made up af fitch fuhjeBs^ 04 in regard 
of age be difallovped ? Jnd jujfer his Church to be 
vprong frar^ted till now ? Or is it a reafenable , 
wodep and lawful undertaking > to go about now 
in the end of the world to make Cjod a new fra^ 
med Chnrchy as to the age of the fnbje6ls /* jind 
is it not more mode ft and fafe^ to live quietly in 
a Church of that frame as all the faints in Hea- 
ven lived in ^ till the other day ^ as a few Ana- 
haptifls with vile and ftnfdl means , and Mfera- 
hlefnccefij did attempt an alteration ? 

Mr. T. here deniech the fuppofitions 1 I leave 
the Reader to judge how truly. 


R. B, O/^, pardon the Weaknefy and bear w it f) 
' i<3 the plainnef and freenefs of Yonr 

faithful Brother (though not as is meet ) Rich. 
Baxter. May 14. 1055. 

5/>, // you have any thing of momeht to fay\ 
in reply to thefe^ which you have not yet in your 
writings brought forth , / foali be willing to con- 
fider of it : But if you have not , / pray you tell 
me fo in two words , and (pare the reft of your 
pains ( a^ for me ) and trouble me no more with 
matters of this nature. For truly I havenofuf^ 
ficient vacancy from greater works. Tea y J ark 
conftrained to forbear much greater than thefe, 
R. B. Jfter this he tells me , that whereas I 
preached a Sermon at Bewdley , in which I re^ 
fated bj mmy argument i Infants vifble Church^ 

member jhif^ 

memherfi'nf^ J mufi be either mntahle or hyfocriti^ 
valj if JdenyfHch a Law and Ordinance vphich / 
took^ on me then to refute , and defires a Copy of 
that Sermon , that he may fhcw the fad miftakes 
and vanity of thofe my arguments. 

Reply. Reader, to Mr. T/s anger at thefe ten 
Queftions I muft fay, i.That the dolefulnefs of 
the Churches cafe conftraincd rae in grief of 
heart to deal, plainly with him. 

2. But it was in a private letter , extorted by 
his importunity , and publiflied 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 now 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 muft here take notice that I am 
not here called to prove Infants Church- 
memberl>.ip out of the New Teftament, but to 
(hew out of the Old that they were vifible Church- 
members before by a Grant or Covenant , which 
thrift hath not repealed. The reft ( out of the 
New-Teftament ) I have done long ago in my 
Treatife of Infant Church-mem feerfhip and Ba- 
ptifm, which Mr.T. is fo much difpleafed at. 
And indeed I think that the proofs are plain, though 
taany objgSions may be difficult to be anfwered^ 



i-rpecially by'thofe who have not throughly coti^ 
fidercd the cafe. When I fee together Chrifts 
own Infant memberfhip, and his kind reception 
of Infants, and his chiding ihofe that would have 
kept them off^ and his otfers of taking in all the 
Jewifli Nation into his Church , and that they 
were broken off by tinbelicf, and confequently the 
feed of Believers not broken off from the Church 
univerfal , and that whole houlliolds are oft faid 
to be baptized, and that Paul pronounceth Belie- 
vers children holy , and that Chrift exprefly y 
zJ^atth, 2S. commandeth his Miniflers as much 
^s in them liethto Difciple all iV^^^o^j 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 arc not members of-. 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, fa he doth not now exclude them. 
And it is exprefly faid of the Jews that they were 
2M haftiz^ed unto Mofes in the cloud and in thefea^ 
I Cor. 10. 2, where doubtlefs the Apoftle in the 
name had refped to our being hsptiz^ed into 
Chrifi , of which theirs was a typical Baptifm ., 
And it is not faid in vain that they were {_all ba- 
ftiz^ed'} including their Infants, but as part of the 
Analogie, as if he had faid [] c/^s vpe now are all 
baptized intd Chrift, 3 

Thefe things feem to me a certain notificati- 
on of Gods will herein • which in the forefaid 
fofmer Trcatifc I have iullier opened and 'im- 
provedy And fliould I ftand to anfwer all the 

" r Vfordi 

words that Mr. Tomhes hath faid againft it , j 
(hould needlefly tire the Reader and my Self, and 
lofe that time which I cannot fpare. 

A Confutation of Mr, Tombes'j Reafons SeB, ^ik 
by "which he pctcndcth to ^rcVe that Ififants 
were not reckoned to the uifihle Church-Chri" 
fiian in the Primitive times^ nor are now* 

Mr» T, I. V cydrgue thtu : If ?7o Infants were 
L -part of the vifible Church- Qjrifii- 
AH in the Trimitive times^ then whatever Ordr 
nance there were of their viftble member f}fp be- 
forcy mnfi needs be repealed : B^t the antecedent 
is true^ ^rgo, the conftquent ■— The Antece^ 
dent I prove thm^ . If in all the days of Chrifi 
on earthy and the Apofiles^ tio Infant was a part 
or ntcmber of the vifible (Ij^rch Chrifiian , then 
not in the primitive times : But, dec. Ergo, &:Ca 

The A^inor proved i . All vifihle menc-heri 

f the Chirrch-Chrifiianwere to be baptiz^ed : But 
/:o Infa'nts were to be baptized : Therefore" no In-- 
fants were vifible members of the Chrifiian 

Anfw. I. To the Major ; they were to tfe ba- 
ptifed after Chrifts baptifm was inflituted, Mato 
28. 19. but not before 5 when yec the Chriftiart 
Church was exiftent in Chriftandhis Difciples: 
Therefore Chrift was not baptized in his Tnfancie. 

2. To the Minor, If his bare affirmation would 
prove that Infants were no:: to be baptized, what 
need he write his books ? 

M Mr.T^ 


c>^r. T. 2. They were not 'viphle Members of 
the Church-Chrtfiian vpho were not of the body of 
C^rifl: But no Infant was of the vifible body of 
Chrifi, f roved from i Cor. 12.13- AH that were 
of the body of Chrifi were made to drink, into one 
Ifirit in the Cuf of the Lords Snpper : But no In-' 
fant rras made to drinks into one (ptrit ^ for none > 
fif them did drmk that Cupy 6cc. 

ey^nfw. Denying ihe Minor, I anfwer to the 
proof : I. To the Major ; i, Mr. T. elfevvhere 
pltadeth that i Cor» 12. fpeaketh of the Church- 
inviiible only , and yet now he maketh it to be 
the vifible, 2 [All] is oft put for the Generali- 
ty and not a proper miverfality : And it feemeth 
hard to prove that every vifible member hath the 
Jpirit^ which is exprefiy there faid of all the mem- 
bers, though whether Baprifm and the Lords Sup- 
per be included, Mr.T. elfewhere maketh difpu- 
table. But I grant that it is fpoken of the Church 
as vifible , and that all the members ordinarily 
having Spiritm SacramentHrny are in judgement- 
of charity faid to have the Spirit. 3 . But if Sa- 
craments be indeed here included as he alTert- 
cth, then Baptifm is firfl: included : and fo if we 
prove Infants Church-members , this Text will 
prove them to be baptizabie, according to Mr. T. 
Kemember that. 4. But that Mr. T.'sexpofition ' 
is nottrue^ that every member drinketh of the Cup 
in the Lords SHpfcr^ he may be turned about to 
confefs himfelf : For, i. Doubtlefs he thinks that ^ 
this Chapter fpeaketh of the Church not only as 
vifible ( if at all ) but as invifible alfo ^ and he 
oft faith that many real members of Chrifts bo- 

dy have not the Sacrament. 2. By this his ex- 
pofition, his adult Baptizing (hould not make or 
prove any to be vifible Church -members till they 
drink of the Cup 5 though it were a year cr ma- 
ny years. 3. And no one that liveth without 
the Lords Supper through fcruples fabout Church- 
orders, or their own iitnefs, which 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 Popifh Churchy 
where the Cup is denied the Laity* 

2. To the Minor, Infants might be baptized in- 
to one fpirit by the initiating Sacrament, in ordet 
to the reft to be partaked of in due time : And 
as not every C^Hrch-fHffenfion^ fo NatHral-Jiffpsn- 
fion of further priviledgcs, nullifieth not mem- 
ber (hi p. 

cJ^r. T. 2. From i Cor. 10. 17. Allth.it were 
one body and one bread did -partahe of that one 
bread which was broken •' ^nt no Infant did p?er- 
take • 

Anfw. I. Chrift and hi^ Dt fci pics did not pir^ 
take of it before the inditution : 2. No baptized 
perfons partake of it in the interfpace between the 
two Sacrsmerirs ; which with feme is a long time i 
3« A baprizcd perfon may die bcfore^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 fpeakech not of everv member , but of the 
ordinary comm.unJon of capable perfons. 

<L^/r* T, Eph«4. 5. The whole Church is one 
bodie^ and hath one Lord, and one faith : Bftt 710 
Infant hath one faith ] M 2 Anfwi 

( 1^4 ) 

y?A7/W. I. It is fpoken of the generality of the 
noblell' and capable men[ibers, denominating the 
Church : The Apoftle faith not that every mem-^ 
ber hath all thefe, but \' There is one Lord^ one 
faithj &:c.J Chrift ha3 not one Lord C being 
Lord himfelf as here underftood ) and yet 
was a n[iember : Chrid in the womb cannot be 
proved to have adually had that: one faith; and 
he was long the chief member before he was ba- 
ptized ; And whether ever the twelve Apoftles 
were, is uncertain. 

2. The Text feemeth chiefly to fpeak of the 
Docirine of faith\ called objeEii've faith ^ one 
Creed : And this the Church might have, and yet 
not each member adually 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- 

aJMr.l^. 3'. They were no members of the vi- 
fible Churchy who were left out of the nnmher of 
the whole Churchy all the Believers^ the multi- 
tude of the Difciples , &C4 Bnt Infants are left 
vpit of the number in all "places in the New Tefla- 
ment^ Ergo : 

Anfw. I* Many texts fpeak of all that were 
frefent only •, and many fpeak only of fuch as 
the prefent matter did concern .* And it is moft 
ijfual to denominate All or the Body from the Np-- 
ilefl and Greatefl 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 Relatioi^s of King and Subjeds 
: - " "^ ani 

and the duties of each for the common welfare ^ 
You would fo define it as that Reafon^ [onfent 
and Intention {how\^ be in the definition. Infants 
have none of theie in ad, and yet who doubteth 
but Infants are members of the Kingdom f of eve- 
ry Kingdom under Heaven that I have read of? ) So 
you know that we take Infants to be members of 
tur Churches now : And yet is it not ufu- 
al with us to fay that all the Church met to hear-, 
or to do this or that ? When yet the Infants and 
many others might be abfcnt. 

The Texts Mr. T, alledgeth are. Ads i. 15. 
The ntimher of the names together were ^hont 

A?if\K>,, Though I take not the Church then to 
be fo numerous as fome do, yet reafon is Veafon : 
Can we think that when ChriO: was feen after his 
refHrren:ion of more than 500 Brethren at once ^ 
that only 120 of them were Chriftians ? And can 
we think that Nicodemm and Jofeph of Arima^ 
thea and many more , were not timerous faint- 
hearted Chriftians ? It's like that the text mean- 
eth that this 120 was the number of thofe hold 
confirmed Chriftians who fo quickly after Chrifts 
death appeared in open profeilion and conjundioii 
with the Apoftles, and had opportunity to afTem- 
ble at that time and place. 

The next is Ad. 2. i. They were all with one 
accord in one place. 

An[vQ, This needcth no other, anfwer than as 

before. The other texts, AEl. 2. 41, 44. d- 4. 4, 

:^i5,24. & 5. 11,13, 14. c^6. 1,2,7. CT- 8. i» 

0^15.22. I Ccr. 14.23. need no other anfwer: 

M 3 . His 


His expofition would foraetimes exclude women , 
and fomeriraes many of the men : Doih he believe 
no man or woman was a member of the Church, 
ui!^, 15.22. who did not fend men of their oven 
comfa»y Z' Nor any manor woman a member of 
the C^aii'ch at Jemfdem^ that did not being fcac- 
tered go ab- uc Preaching, Aci, 8, i, &c, i Cor^ 
J 4. it is <a;d, Ton way all prophefie^ and yet wo- 
rn n ai :f loi bidden. 

>//,T- 4. They were no part of the Chrijlian 
Church vtfible to whom the things nfcrihed to the 
whole Church did not agree : But the things afcri^ 
bed to the whole Chrijtian Chnrch vifble did not 
agree to Infants : Ergo 

A^fiv. This is fully anPvVered already. It is 
moft uftial to afcribe iluit to a Church or other 
Society which is done only by the moft confide-, 
rable part. As 1 laid before, when rational Con- 
fenr, Contrad, Intention, are afcribed to a King- 
dom-y which is conftituted by the confent of King 
and Subjects : and yet Infants are members who 
confent nor, fave by iheir Parents. The Chnrch 
meeteth to choofe a Paftor^ when yet the women 
rneet not ; The Church admonifheth a faulty 
member, when every woman doth not admonifh 
him : Our Churches meet all to hear, when Chil- 
dren meet not, whom we take for members: 
Thefe are not fatisfadory allegations, being con- 
trary to common ufe of words , and to many 
texts of Scripture. 

<iJlir, T. The Minor is proved , Matth. 16, 
J Bo On tki^ Rock^ vpill J bmldmy C^urch^ viz. by 

'j4^jfw. When Preaching converted the Pa- 
rents, they devoted then^ifelves to God, and all 
that were in their truft and power- and that 
Preaching brought in by confirquence ihe Infants 
that did not hear. I prove it, r. Chrift cora- 
mandeth the difcipling of Nations and baptizing 
them ( that is, as much as in the Preacher heth : ) 
But Infants are part of ihofe Nations: There- 
fore he commandeth the difcipling and baptizing 
of Infants, (as much as in the Preacher lay, 7 
which could be done but by the fuccef> of preach- 
ing on the Parents. 2. The Kingdoms of the world 
iire nade the Kingdoms of the Lord and of his 
Chrift : But Infants are members of all thofe 
Kingdom i : But this is done at large elfe- 

(L^/r. T. I Cor. 1.2. called to he Saint's-^ Ad. 
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 anfwers to the like things. 

Mr. T. 5. They who are not reckoned Chrifls 
Difciples were not vifible Church-members : Bnt 
Infants are no where reckoned as Chrifls Difci- 
-fUs : ergo. 

j4nfw, I. What is faid before to the other 
Texts anfwereth all thefe. The Adions of adule 
Difciples only were in mention. 2. Infants are 
called Difciples, Atis 15. as I have elfewhere 
proved, on whofe neck the yoak of Circumcifi- 
on was laid • And in Matth. i8. 19. when Na- 
tions are to be difcipled, 3. Mr. T. himfelf confef- 
fcth that Cbfiil was habitually and by defignation a 

"M 4 Fro- 

Trophet in hfancy^ and that fo may Jnfants ht 

Air, T. 6, If i'fi the difiribntion of the mem- 
bers of the Church thcn^ Infants are not comj>re- 
hdnded^ thai Infants were not mpble Church- 
mevf'/oers — - ■ Biu^ ike, 

Anfw. I. Here he inftanceth in i. The fex. 
Men and Women, 2. Jews and Gentiles , 5. Cir- 
cunricifion and uncircumcifion, n:ientioned, but noc 
Jnfa?:ts, But if Infants be of neither feXy male 
nor female, nor of Jews or Gentiles, nor circuKi- 
ci (ion nor iincircumcifion, I plead not for them. 

2. If thole Texts cited by you mention not In- 
fants , others do , as I have elfewhere proved ; 
Qur children are called Holy, and a blefled feeda 
and received by Chrift, and of fuch is the King- 
dom of Gcd, ^c. And you^ confefs it of Chrift 
himfelf in his Infancle, and yet. npw forget it , 
or contradid your felf. .... 

Air, T. 2. / argi'ie from the common received 
definitions of the vtfible Church , Ads 19. of the 
fhurch of England : A congregation of faithful 

men &c, ' - . 

Anfw. And fo Kingdoms and all Societies that 
Infants are members of, are accordingly defined, 
as is aforefaid. You cannot deny ir^ And was 
not the Church before Chrifts incarnation a y^f/>- 
ty of faithful men , when yet you confefs that 
Intanis were vifible parts of is ? 

Mr, T. 3, / argue ^ They are no vifible members: 
of the Chrjfiian Churchy to whom no note where-- 
hy a vifible Chriftian Church cr ChHrch-member" 
pnp i4 dtfcernable^ doth agrfc V B^tP^^X* Crgo- — 


Jirffxv. When a man thinks only what to fay 
for his caufe, and never thinks what can be faid 
againft it, his judgement is of little value. !• All 
that agreeth to Infants which was requifite to a 
vifible Infant member before Chrifts coming ^ 
And do you noc confefs that they were members 
then among the Jews? 2. Did nothing in Chrift 
himfelf in Infancy agree wiih vifible mtmbcrlhip ? 
Yts . the open Revelations of God as to a vifible 
perfon : You confefs before as much as I need. 
3, The effentiating qualiHcation of a Churchy 
member, is Covena'dt-confcnt^ 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 dido 
Mutual confent of Gcd 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 Heart'Cenfent to the Baprtfmal Covenant of 
Grace makeih a fincere member of the true Church 
( which the Infant doth by the Parent , ) and fro- 
fejfed confent to the fame Covenant maketh a vi- 
lible member (which regularly mufl be by Ba- 
ptifm for inveftirure.) But a true Church may long 
by perfecuticn be hindred from publick affem- 
blies , Preaching , S.icraments and Difcipline ^ 
And may have much corruption in all ihefe. 

Mr, T. maketh this mutual confent a.s tVfo 
eiifijntl pretended Notes , denying either of them 
to bf true mark^^ jinfvc^ 


Afifxr, Neither the Princes confcnt alone, nor 
the Subjtds alondiiaketha Common-wealth : Nei- 
ther the Husbands confent alone , or the Wives 
ciaketh a marriage •, but both conjund : So here : 
Mutual confent maketh a Church-member : But 
fo , that Gods Confent is the Donative efficient 
canfe , and tKuns confent is the receptive canfe y 
which is conditio fme qua non. They that will 
not impartially f^^>7i^ c/p/^/« cafes c^;?«(?rundcr- 
ftand them. Your unthankful denying that God 
bath made any fuch Promife, Covenant or Con- 
fent , is elfcwhere confuted : And if I (hall fay 
with Davena.nt 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 jlionld not 
doubt cf the Salvation of their Children dying in 
hifancy ( nt Synod, Dor t, Art* l,c,ij.) I could 
better with them bear the confequence ( of the 
fofs of Gratia Infantilis in fome at age ) than 
the confequ^ius of your turning them all out of 
the viiibie Church* The former I know noChri- 
ftian that ever oppofcd for maiiy and many hun- 
dred years after Chrift ^ and the latter the uni- 
verfal Church as long oppcfed ; And yet 1 will 
not fubfcribe that [ Jt is certain by the word of 
God that baptiz.ed Infants dying before aQnal fn, 
are certainly favedy~\ without excepting the In- 
fants of Heathens or Infidels ^ wrongfully bapti- 

Mr. T, 4» / argue : They who have not the 
form conftituting and denomirimng a mfbU 


Church-member^ are not vifhle Church-wemhers^ 
Bnt, Ergo. Prof ejfwn of faith ^s the form con flitH- 
tirtg^ &.'c. 

^nfvQ. I. Covenant Confent is the forna con- 
ftlcuting ex parte Recipic:7tis^ and this they have 
reputa[ive!y in their Parents , whofe will is as 

2. The Jews Infants had the form conftitu- 
ting a vifible member as youconfefs. And that 
wa< not circumcifion -, For th;'. 'jncircumcifed fe- 
iP-iies , and males too in the wildernefs were 
vifible members ; Ncr was it to be born of J^wj^ 
For apoilate Jews forfeited it, and Profelytcs of 
other Nations obtained it : But it was [by confent 
to Gods Covenant. 

3. And Chrift was a vifible member by Divine 
Revelation. His arguings wculd make againfl 
Chrifts Righteoufnefs Imputed to believers, and 
jiJ.an7s or the Parents fins imputed to them. 

Mr. T. 5. /f Jvfants be vifible Chrifiiati 
Church-membcrs^then there may be d vifible Church- 
Chrifttan which coriffs only of Infant i ofbelie-^ 
vers — Bnt this is . bfttrd : Ergo. 

A}^fvi\ Such quibbles feem fcmething when 
the Will giveih them their force, i. Infants are 
members of all Kingdoms under Heaven : And 
yet there neither is nor can be a Kingdom of In- 
fants only. 2. Members are EJfential or Inte-* 
gral. Becaufe 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- 
yerned Society , Kingdom or other proper Poli- 

( ^7^3 
cy of which men that have the ufe of Rcafonare' 
not members : than there be feme fuch to be 
the Adive part is EfTential to the Society : But' 
yet Infants that are yet but viniially fuch , . are 
Integral members, 

Mr. T, 0. / argue ; If Infants be vlfible 
Church-members , there is jome Qmfe of it •* But 
there is no Caife ; Ergo 

A'^fw. The Caufe efficient is Gods Revealed 
Donation and Covenant Cbnfent ; The Caufe Re- 
ceptive or the Condition of Reception, is Thaf 
this he the Child of a Confenting believer, 

Mr. T. To this i, Mr. T, denycth any fuch 
Covenant of grace to the faithful and their feed 
. ( which is foon faid. ) 

2. He faith n^ (Conditional Cove ttant fromifeth 
Jufiifcation J Salvation , on Condition of faith y 
and not vijible {^hurch'memberjhipj and fo belongs 
to all as Mr. B. o-c, 

AnfvQ, I. It giveth both Juftification and vi- 
fible memberfhip^ that is, Right to boih and 
many other Covenant benefits, 2. It belongeth 
Conditionally to all , and Conditionally gives 
union with Chrift and his Church, and Pardon and 
life to aH : But aB:ually to 'none , till the condi- 
tion be performed •, which is a believing Parents 
confent , and regularly his Baptifmal dedica-^ 

Mr. T. If there were a Covenant to the faiths, 
ful and their feed^ to be their God^ yet this would 
tjot frove their Infants Chriftian vifihle Church" 
memberfliif : jis he is. the G,od of Abraham, of 
Infants dying in the vnombs of bdisveriat the hour 
ofdsath--—^ ' " Artfw^ 

'Anfw, lis true, if they be not tbe Children 
ef njifbh belicz'ers ^ becaufe they are not vifibly 
capable fubjeds. But it bting fuchthat we fpeak 
of, your three inllances are abufive. i, Ahra- 
ham is a viliblc Church -member of the Church 
Triumphant where he is. I will not beHeveyou 
if you deny ir* 2. Infants of vifible Chriftians 
dying in the womb , are in that degree vifible 
Church-members as they arevilibleperfons : that 
is. It is a known thing that they are the children 
of God according to their capacity. 3. One vi- 
fibly believing at the hour of death is a vifible 
Church-member : One not vifibly believing be- 
longeth not to cur cafe. 

Mr. T. Jf all the fe which Mr. B. makes the 
caitfe or condition^ may he in aci^ and the effeEh 
not be^ then the caiife which Mr, B, affigneth is 
7iot fnfficienti But c^c, For they may dibs bC" 
fore the child is lorn. 

Afifw, A me r quibble, i. Before he is born 
I tell you as far as he is vifibly the cliili of a 
vifible Chriftian, fo far he is a vifible unborn 
member : But as to .hat degree of vifible mem- 
berfhip which is proper to born baptizable In- 
fants , two caufes *re wanting to the unborn : 
I. Gods confent or donation : For though the 
Promife as a donaii v Inftrum^nn was exilient a 
thoufand years before, m effecteth net the gift 
till the fubjed be Receptive or capable : God 
may promife a thoufand years before in diem or 
fnb condittoy;c , which fign^fyeth his qonfent that 
fo and then itfhall be due , and not othcrwifeor 
before. Thefe eafie things fhould not be thus 


winked ar. 2. The Tar ems confent Is wanting l 
For though the Parent dedicate the child in the 
womb to God by promife, yet he doth not de- 
liver him up in the bapcifmal Covenant as a vifi- 
ble perfon till he is born. 

Mr. T, reciting my anfwer elfewhere faith 
^It deferveth a [mile : For I r/!ake Chrifi hy his 
Law or Coven ant 'grant the only caufe efficient J 
The reft of his words are i. 71? tell m thatjhfti^ 
f cation c^c* hath a further efficient after the Co- 
venant ; which caufeth Jnfiifcability^ but not aQii- 
al Jufttfication without mans faith, 2. That 1 
err in taking vifihle memherjlnp to be a Right, and 
moral effed. 

Anfvp, I take not that for the pi dure of the 
wifeft man, whom the Painter draweth laughing 
or fmiling. And I am now confirmed in that 
fancy, i. A Tei^ament or V>^td, of Gift in di-^ 
em which faith At [even years end that landfall he 
yoursX^z-^ be the only efficient Inftrument,long be- 
fore exiftent, and yet give you no right till the 
time ^ and then give it •. Becaufe it effedeth but 
by fignification of the Donors will. Muft the 
Chriftendom of Kingdoms be impetuoufly que- 
ftioiird by men that know not fuch rudiments as 
thefe ? 2. That Juftification which is given us ar 
Gur believing, which is \_ our Right to Imptni-- 
ty and Life ] is the Immediate effed oftheCo^ 
venant Donation ^ and mans faith is no efficient 
but a Recipient caufe of it ( As even they confefs 
that call it a Receiving Inftrument : ) And yet 
we have it not till we believe or confent. Who 
would have thought that fuch am n as you had 

., t' taken 

tak^n your ovon fdth to be an efficient ciufe of 
your ovon Jnfiification , and fo that you jttfiific 
yoHY fclf 'f And what if one give land to you and 
vour heirs ? It is none of theirs till they are in 
being : And yet their hirth is no efficient caufe^ 
but only the caufe of the fubjeds receptive capa- 
city. I am afhamedihac you put me thus to cate- 
chize you. 

Mr.- T. 5. //^ vifihle Chunh-wemherjlnf be 
antecedent to the inter efl u fcrfon hath in the 
Covenant-^ then the Co'venant is not the canfe of 
it. But ere. Ergo 

Anfvc, Theword[Intereftlmay fignifie ihelnte- 
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 Interefl you 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 aker : but when I confenr,then 
I am the perfon to whom the Covenant giveth t 
frefcnt Right to union with Chrifi^ in the Brft in- 
fant and confequcntly with his Church or body 
in the fecond : fo that here is no iuch thing as 
your feigned memberfhip before Covenant in- 
terefl, that is, before a Right to that Relation 
by Gods donation. And as to your former 
dream that this is not a Right and n;oral effcd 
but a fhyfical , it was your felf a ad n^t t that 
fubjeded you to the fhame of fuch analfertion, 
which 1 will no more confute. 

Mr. T. 6. If the Covenant ^c, be the only 
efficient ^ then Infants bought Orphans p/ Turks, 

117 W- 

t^hofly at our difpofe , are no vifihle member f^ 

j4nf\v> No friend of truth will run into the 
dark with a conrroverfie, and argue a minm mtis^ 
Many judicious Divines think that Gods Cove- 
nant with Ahrahami Infants born in his houfe , 
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<; 
Tha^ he be offered or dedicated by a C^rifenting 
Ovpn^r* Now their reafon is becaufe if they be 
our own, v^e have the difpofe of them for their 
good, and our wills are theirs. But the cafe is 
moft clear about thofe that by Generation are our 
oiv/Zjand darker about thofe that are by Adoption or 
fiirchafe our own. Now here you do nothing but 
deny the darker f which you cannot difprove ) and 
thence the plainer which we have fully proved, 

Mr. T. 7. // the (Covenant or Law with the 
Tarents aBi'tal faith without frofeffion , make not 
the Varent a vifihle Chnrch-rnemhery neither doth 
it the child. But — Ergo. 

Anjw, I grant both major and minor : He 
that is not known to have faith, is notavifibfe 
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 my ft leal or invifible Chriftian and mem- 
ber , and Profeffed belief ( that is , Believing 
Confent ) maketh a vifihle member of .the pa- 
rent , and is necclTary to the vifible member/hip 
Qi the child : If I may call that Making them^ 


which is but the Difpofition of the material Re^ 
eeftive conflitutive caufe. It's pitty we fhould 
haveneed toa'kac this rate. 

Mr. T. 8.7/" ferfons are vifhle Church-menj'- 
hers and not hy the (/yvenant vf Graces then it 
is not true that Chrifi ly his Law or Covenant 
is the fole efficient of vifible Church-memberjhip* 
The minor is -proved in Judas and hypocrites, 

Anfw. I . They are not the fole efficient •, Gods 
Love and mercy alfo is e(ficient. 

2. You profefs your felf that the name [] Chri- 
ftian and Church-member ] are equivocal as to 
the fincere and ihe 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 
memberfhip, and yet not of Equivocal. 

3. God who is our Paternal Beneficient Ru- 
ler doth give fome of his benefics by his Law or 
Covenant abfolutely and antecedently to mans 
conditions , and fome confequently as Rewards : 
And Gods Laws having firft a Preceptive part, 
as ^well as a Donative or Premiant , a Right m.ay 
accrue in foro ecclef<& to an hypocrite from than 
precept : As e, g, God antecedently dorh by his 
Covenant give the world an Impunity as to the 
punifhment of Drowning it : And fo by Ji is com- 
mon Law of Grace he givcth 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 
Miniflers to offer it, and All men to Accept it, 

N and 

and bis Minifters to judge by mens profeffion, and 
to ufe profeffed Accepters as real ; becaufe we 
cannot fee the heart. This being fo , when the 
hypocrite profelTeth his confenr, the Law obligeth 
the Minifter and Church to receive it , by which 
in foro eccle/tah^ hath aright to his Church fta- 
tion. And Chrift himfeif called Juda^^ and fent 
him out to Preach , and his mandates were as 
Laws. So that the Right that an hypocrite hath, 
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 fniids 
was called immediately by Chrift himfeif •, and 
his {^follow me ] was a precept which gave him 
a Right to his Relation. 

Mr. T. 9. Jf Infants are vifble members by 
the Covenant on Condition that the Parents 3cc„ 
then either the next Parents or in any generati^ 
en precedent &c. 

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 !• THat Prof riety^ 
and 2. That tntft and power. 

Mr. T. 10. J f an Infants vifthleChHrch-meni' 
herfhip be by the Covenant on the Parents aUaal 
believing , and not a bare profepon^ then it is a 
thing that cannot be knovpn^ &c. 

Anfw. I pitty Readers that muftbe troubled 
with fuchkind of talk. i. The Right pi the 
child is upon |~ the Believing Parents dedication 
of that child to God by coafenting that he 
be in the mutual Covenant, ~} 

2. Heart 

2. Heart confent known only to God givcth 
no Right coram ecclefia^ known to men, but only 
tofuch mercy as God who only knoweih it, givcth 
without the Churches judgtraenr. 

3. Believing and profeiiion qualifie for Right- 
in the Judgement both of God and of the 

4. Profefiion without confenting faith, quali- 
fieth for Ri;i:^ht, in the Churches judgement accord- 
ing to Gods Command, who biddetli them To judge 
and do : Wrangle nor againft plain truth. 

Mr. T. II. If other Chriflian ^riviledgeshe 
not conveyed by aC^ovenant ufon the Parents f^ithy 
rvithoHt the pcrfons own ath and confent^ then 
mither this. But &c. Not to be a Bdievsr ^ a 

difctphy a zJ^inifier.j a Son oj God — Thsre is 

the like reafonfor them as for this. 

zy^nfw. Priviledges are i. Proper to the adulr, 
( thofe concern not our cafe, as to be Alimfters) 
or common to them with Infants : 2. Priviled- 
ges confift either in Fhyfical qualities or other 
rhyfical accidents ( and chefe are given by phyfcal 
jiciiony and fuch is Knowled^e^ Belief Love , 
Gifts of utterance^ healthy Sec) Or in Rrrht 
and Moral Relation^ ( Ji^i Debitum^ oblt^atto ) 
Thefe are given hy Moral means ^ that is by Z^- 
nifcation of the Donors willy by precept ( obli- 
g\ngy) prom if e ox ftgnal Donation y which is the 
Inftrument of conveyance by that fignificatioii 
( As a Tcftament, Deed of Gift, Ad ofpardon 
a:id oblivion, &c, are among men. ) Now do v-u 
think thatthereafonof P/n'/2L-^/^<^/m>/ andi^/<7- 
ralRighiSjRelattons and dunes is the lame ? 

N 2 2. As 

2. As a Difciplc , or believer, fignifieth one 
that is Repmacively fuch jure Relattonisy and as 
a Son 0/ G'j^ liguiiieth an Adopted heir of heaven^ 
loved of God as a reconciled father in Chrifl ] 
fo Infants are fuch : You fay f after J that Chrtfl was 
habi:k.alLy and by defignsLtion the Head and Prophet 
of the liourch in Infancy , 2nd /^ mihgt Infants 
be difciples : And will you now deny it ? Again 
I will fay though it offend you, that there is no 
trufcing to that mans jndgement that looketh all 
( or partially ) on one fide , and fludiech fo ea- 
g2*'ly what will ferve his caufe, as that he can- 
not- nr'rid what niay be (aid againft it. See here 
what two abhorainations you thruft onyourpit- 
tiful followers (which yet I know you hold not 
your felf , but the heat of your fpirit in dcfire 
of vi(5tory draweth you to fay you nnind not 
what) You conclude that none is \ A Son of 
God J without hi< own confent : And fo I. AH 
Infants are certainly fhut out of Heaven : for 
they are no Sons of God without their confent 
( neither by Eledion, Chrifts intercellion , Co- 
venant or Gift ; ) And I think you will not fay 
that they confent : And if no fons^ no hetrs ; For 
the Inheritance is only of children : And if no 
fons ^ 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 a^mlly confcnted 

. in 

in the womb or in his Infancy. But partralay 
is rafhand blind. 

Mr. T. 12. Jf there be no Law or or din mice 
of Cjod unrepealed by which either thi<s Infant 
vifible Church-member flip is granted^ or the lifi- 
ing of Infants or entring into the vifible Church 
Chrijiian is made a duty , then it is not a canfe 
of Infants vifible Charch-memberjloip which Mr« 
B. ajfignsydcc. 

Anfw, I have here proved to you fuch a Law 
and Covenant before Chrifts Incarnation , and 
formerly at large proved it to becominued and 
renewed by fpccial fignification of Chrids will 
fince his Incarnation in the Gofpel. Review 
now your pittiful Reafons againft it. 

N 3 

The Second Tart : 



I Strange Forgeries 

Againft ihe 


O F 

Infant Baptism^ 

And of his many Calumnies ag;ainft 

iTiy Self and my Wiicings, with a Cata- 
logue of 5 6 New ComiTiaadments and 
. Dodrines^ which he and the Secta- 
ries who joya with him in thofc 

Calumnies fecm to own. 
^ 1 — — -- - - 

By ^chard 'Baxter. 

LONDON^ Printed for Ncvil Simmns 
and Jonathm Rch^nfon. 1675. 


The P R E F A C £• 


1, of Co?itroverfies : 2. Oftheivetght 
of this Controverfie. 


^* I. 'T^T is a thing that all are not duely irt^ 
formed oi^Howfar ControverfialWri^ 
tings and DijpHtes are to be fra^i^ 
fed by pous and feaceable men ? 
And here ( as in almoft all things elfe ) men are 
hardly cured of one extream but by another. 

L No doubt but the extream which hath 
far moft injured the Church of Chrift, hath been 
the excef of Dijputing s and given juft occafion to 
Sr. H. W.'s motto, [_ The Itch of Dijputing makes 
the Scab of the Church , "1 which is eafily dif- 
cernable, both in the Caufe and the Effects. 

5^. 2. I. In the caufe it is too notorious , that 
ordinarily it proceedeth from the depravation of 
the three faculties of the foul , Toteftative , In- 
tslUBrje , V<ilitiv€ , ia the three great Prin- 


cipks of iniquity, Pride , Ignorance and wrath: 
0. 3, !• Did not Pride caufc men much to 
overvalue their oven farts 2lx\^ worthy Cohtrover- 
fie would have fhrunk into a narrower cdmpstfs 
before this day : Men would have come to one 
another as friends to be viformed of what they 
know not, by enquiry and gentle conferences, if 
not as children to School, to leai*n : And if. grace 
by hard fludies had given one man more infight 
intc^ any matters than another, hunlility 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 y the Chil- 
dren of his family would have been ready to 
work by it t It v<^ould not have httw fo hard as 
now it is for an Ignorant man to know his Igng- 
rance^ nor to difcern when another knoweth mofe 
than he. 

^. 4. But now , alas ; a multitude that under- 
ftand not half their Cacechifm hear their 
Teachers as Matters hear their Scholars , to know 
whether they fay their lefTon welJ or not : And 
the Preacher that faith as they would have him, 
may pafs for orthodox at leaft, if not for a very 
wife man, becaufe he is, fo far, as wife as they: 
But if he will prefume to teach them more than 
they know, they fufpec^ 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 Preached 
hath fome dangerous errors, ( and doth not know 
fo much as they-, ) unlefs it be fome lufciousun^- 


wholefom notions that he offereth them, or be a 
militant wrangler and would lift them under him 
as his troop , to ferve him in fome new raifed 
war, and then corrupt nature can magnitie novel- 
ties as if they were new revelations from Hea- 

^. 5. And O that the TV^c^^rj Wanted not the 
fenfe of their intellectual imperfedions , as well 
as the people I But too many think that when 
they are all ordained into the faire office^ the ho- 
nour of the fame office is equally due to them all, 
and confequently all that honour of Knovpledge^ 
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 underftocd, mull 
pafs according to the major vote , or at leaft, they 
mufl not be contradided , nor their igno- 
rance made known : And therefore when they 
have owned or tittered a Dodrine or Sentence , 
their honour is engaged to make it good •, And 
they find a far eafier way to make oftentation of 
the Knowledge which they have not , by robes , 
titles and big words, than to macerite their bo- 
dies by imploying their minds in (crious Icng un- 
wearied ftuilies, 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 ) whoii^er will be wiftr than they ^ 
iVall be a heretick. But if it fall out better, and 
they be the weaker fart^ they will make up their 
honour by the way oi [jnguUrity among fem^ny as 


they can get to believe, that they arc mafters of 
fome excellent truths which almoft all the Chri- 
(tian world is unacquainted with. 

^. 7. And even in men otherwife truly pious, 
there is fo much remaining j)ricie as is greatly 
gratified by /insularity : SelfijhneJ^ and the Old 
man are but One^ And an opinion that is peculi- 
arly their o\vn^ is as lovely to them, as their own 
Children in comparifon of others: Ifthey can fay, 
ego frimtu inveni , 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 
worfliip than all others, is very comfortable to 
tbem^ that by taking the eleA 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 pf good 
and evil in the cau[e of thefe effeds. 

And from hence we now live among many that 
fall into various kinds of Sefts , and every one 
hopeth for the comforts o^ fingularity in their 
way. Many turn Quakers, becaufe they diXtfingalar^ 
in their aufteritics : And many Congregations will 
not endure the finging of Gods Praife in Pfalms, 
at leaft 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 Dodrine of denying all Chriftians In- 
fants Church-member fliip hath profpered. 

^. 9, And 

^. 9. And too many honeft perfons in oppo- 
ficion to ungodlinefs , are difaffeded to lawful and 
laudable things in the worfhip of God meerly 
becaufe the Vngodly ufe them : When as expe- 
rience telleth all the world , that they that have 
no Religion in fincerity, will ufually joyn with 
the Religion that is uppermort ; And fo if good 
Rulers and Teachers fet up that which is beft, 
the befl: will be outwardly the way of the ungod- 
ly •, and if we muft needs be (ingular from them 
wc muft take the worft , and leave them the 
beft : to their felf deceit and our fhame. 

5$ 10. I have thought by this weaknefs of fome 
fingular people , that, if God fhould but let us 
have a King and other Rulers that were Anti- 
nomians , and againft Infant Baptifm, and againft 
finging 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 prefently 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 feena 
eminently Good^ by a more notable and confpi- 
cuous difference from the common fort of Chri- 
ftians than God in Scripture or reafon doth al- 

2. And how much Jgrnrance hath to do in all 



our controverfies , would foon be acknowledg- 
ed if the queftion concerned hot our felves : 
For every difputer accufeth his adv erf ary of J^- 
norance : If they be of ten minds ( inConfitknt^ 
nine of them muft needs be erroneous , and there- 
fore Ignorant , and yet every one chargeth it on 
the reft, and thinks that he alone is free. , Alas, 
that mans foul, which here muft ;^d in fuch a 
puddle of brains , and in fo frail a receptive en- 
gine as it here ufeth. (hould have fuch high and 
confident thoughts of its own untryed and un- 
digefted conceptions that will not let Ignorance 
be acknowledged or cured / Moft certainly we 
are all fo dark and weak, that it is but a/(?W7 G'r^^t 
necejfary things, or fuch as are very fldn , which 
we have caufe to be confident of , without all 
fufpicion of miftake. Moft certainly natural dulnefsy 
or fhort and fuperficial ftudies ,-through (loth or 
diverfions, or want of right teachers, or an ear- 
ly reception of wrong methods or opinions, lead- 
ing unto more, and many fuch caufes, doih 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 controveriies : And yet 
fad experience telieth us, that he that h leaft able to 
fpeakjis oft leaft able to hold his tongue ^ And it's too 
rare to find a man that is not Ignorant of his Igno- 
rance,and that chargeth not him with Pride that will 
prefumc to contradid him. What wonder then 
ifdifputes beendlefs? 

<^. 12.?. And that wrath is in the caufe neetfs 
no proof but experience, v/hile we fee men come 


ynh with^ militant difpofitions, and animofitv 
is their valour, and how to make their adverfaries 
feem contemptible or odious is their work. 

0. 13. 2. And if I fhould but open to you 
the Difputing evil, in the effen:s as I have done 
in the Canfis^ what a woful tragedy, of 1500 
years duration , ihouldjl prefent you with ? Bur 
I rtiall put off that part of the work, fuppofing 
that fight and experience do inform you more 
eiledually than words can do. 

^. 14. On all thefe accounts I flili fay as 
Tafil, The fervant of the Lord nuifl not ( need- 
lelly ) flrive^ nor meddle with thofe wranglings 
which minifter jQHcflions rather than godly 
edifying which is in faith : For the end of the 
Commandment is Love out of a pure hearty and 
^ good Confcience and faith tmfeig?ied : And the 
high pretenders are too often ][^ frond ^ know- 
ing nothings but doting about <^ueftions and/rz/e; of 
words '^ whereof cometh envy ^ ft^if^ -i railing y 
evil furmijingy perverfe dtfpiittngs of men of cor^ 
y-upt mmds and deftttuteof the truth, 

<. 15. II. But yet for all this, as Politici- 
ans ufe to tell Tyrants , that if God and wm\ 
did but fecurethem from all refiftancc, men would 
flie from them as from Tigers or Crocodiles, 
and fuppofc their boundlefs uncontrouled pride and 
cruelty would be infatiable •, fo I fay or Hereti- 
lical and truly Schifmatical Contenders, that If 
they were oncefecured that whatever foily ^ he- 
reiie, or ungodly mifchievous conceits they vend, 
and that with the greateit induflry and turbulen- 


cy to deceive the people , no man yet muff: 
contradid them, nor open their folly that it may 
be known to all, and go no further, for fear of 
being taken for a nian of difputation, controver- 
fie and ftrife , this would fo embolden them to 
attempt the fedudion 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 filence 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 f wea- 
rers , curfers, fcorners , and fuch other prophane 
finncrs , and not give them a clofe reproor or 
admonition, fo much more is it to fee or hear 
hurtful falfhoods publifhed as the precious truths 
of God, and not to contradid it, nor endeavour 
to fave mens fouls from the infedion. If Sa- 
tans work mull be done without refiftance as oft 
as a miftaken well-meaning man will do it, there 
will be little fafety for the flocks. 

^. 17. When Paul fore-told the Ephefians 
of two forts that would affault them, viz.. Grie-^ 
vom devouring wolves, and men arijing among 
themfelves that would (peak ferverfe things ta 
draw away dtfciples after them^ his conclufion 
is ^Therefore watch ] .• And what that watching 
is he tells Timothy^ The mouths of fuch deceivers 
ciuft be fiopped : not by force^ for that Timothy 



had no power to do ; but by evidem trnth. And 
Trmh hath a fower 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, faiihtully and clearly to vindicate truth, 
and defend found dodrine , and hold fall: the 
form of wholefome words, and (lop ihe mouth 
of ignorant prtde that wrangleJi againft them, 
what had bexrome of us long agoe ? And though 
illdifputes 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 alJ 
fuch abufes 5 Truth mud be defended, anditfind- 
eih fomething even in nature (as bad as man is ^ 
to befriend it •, few love a plain falil.ood, unlefs 
where intereft greatly bribeih them : And upon 
tryal Truth will at lafb prevail , where fin doth 
not provoke God in judgement to leave men to 
thcdelufions which they chufe. 

^. 1 8. If then the way be to Teach and 
Learn , and quietly open the evidence of truth^ 
and in meek^efs to inftm^ thofe that oppofe them- 
felves , and to avoid contentions as we avoid 
vpars , till other mens afTtults do make them 
unavoidably neceflary •, and yet not to be cow- 
ardly ^err^ytri of the Truth and Church of God, 
nor fuffer Satan to deceive men anrefifted, but 
earneftly to contend for the faith once delivered 
to the Saints^ It muft be confidered, I . To v/hom 
this earneft contending may be ufed, . I J. And 
by whom. 

Q 4. 19. 

it 1 

f iP4 J 

f. 19. I. We muft not be ever Jharp or 
■ earnefiy i. With ihofe that are yet/r4;z^eri ro 
Religion , of tv^op converfion there is hofe^ and 
who are liker to be won by a gentler way, which 
more dcmonftrateth love and tendernefs, 2 T/w. 

^. 20. 2. Nor with Go^ly Chrifiians who 
fall into fuch (ins e/ infirmity as we are I y able 
to , and whofe tendernefs maketh conapaffionate 
tender dealing fitteft to their recovery, GaU 6. 
I? 2, 3. 

5^. 21. 3. Nor with humbled de jelled Chri- 
ftlans who are apter than we to aggravate their 
o,wn faults, and have need of comfort, to reftrain 
their forrows and keep them from defpair, 2 Cor* 
2. 7. 

55. 22. 4^ Nor with finners that under con- 
verfion and repentance are humbHng themfelves 
by confeflion to God and man, Luk. 15. Philem, 

^. 23. 5. Nor with Chriilians 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 

p. 24. But in thefe cafes we muft ufe flain*[ 
nefs y jharfncfs and earneftmfs, 1. When in • 
fecret ( where mens honour with oihers is not 
concerned^ it is neceffary to mens convict: on and 
repentance ^ i, Becaufe of the Greatnefs of the 
fin or error , which will not be known if it be 
not truly opened and aggravated. 2. Or by 


reafon of the hard-heartednefs or obftinacy of 
the (inner , that will not be convinced or humbled 
by eafier means. 

5^. 25. 2. And when we arc called fo to ad- 
monifli a publick Tinner for his crinles or here- 
fies , which muft be opened as they arc, before 
he will be convinced and humbled openly before 
the Church. 

^. 26. 3; And when the people or Churdi 
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 the (inner rehnk^d before ally that others 
way hervare* 

0. 27. 4. When the offender or he- 
rerick (heweth us by his obftinacy , that we have 
no caufe to cxpcft his cure and convidion, but 
are only to defend Gods truth and mens fouJs 
againft him , then he muft be ufed as Chrift did 
the Pharifees : and as Rulers execute malefadors 
not for their own good^ but for the warning of 
others aad prefervation of the innocent » 

^. 28. 5. And when our gentle fpeechcs 
tend to fcandalize thofe without , and make them 
think that we prevaricate and favour Chriftians 
in their fin?. 

<• 29. All thefc cafes you may fee proved 

1. In Nathans dealing mth David, andChrifts 
with Pmr, Matth. j6,2Lnd Pauls^ GaL 2. &C» 

2. In Panls dealing with the ince(^uous man , 
I Cor, 5. and Peters with Ananidi and his wife. 
I Tim, 5. 20. Thim that fm rebuke before all^ 
C^Ct zTim, 4. 2,Tit,i. 13. Rebuke them jliarply 
that they may he found in the faith ( cnttingly ) 

O 2 Ttt, 

i i 

Tit. 2. ly. Rehnks W'/V^ all ^wfW/Vj' ; efpecially 
when we deal with Tnttriors who muft be hum- 
bled. Tit, 3, 10, II. Mat. 23. throughout: 
And Eit's gentlenefs or remifnefs is our warn- 

<C. 30. IT. And as to the ^erfons who n:iuft 
ufe this jharp^efs and earneftnefs againft errors 
and finners in contending for the faith, i. It is 
not thofe who overvalue their own conceptions, 
and grow fond of all that ispecuUarly their own, 
and infolently take all men to be enemies totriith 
and fairh and godlincfs, who are adverfaries to 
their odd 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 fhouid unftudyed Chriftians prefently think 
hardly of any party and backbite them, and in-. 
veigh againft them , becaufe their Leaders call 
them hereticks or reproach them as erroneous 
dangerous men : ( asalmoft ail parties do againft 
each other, ) 4. Nor fhouid ihofe Miniflers 
who have not a through infighx into a Contro- 
verfie , meddle much with it , nor be too for- 
ward to reprove and reproach where they dio 
not underftand, nor to undertake difputes which 
they cannot manage. 5. But as God doth in- 
dow men with various gifts, if each man were 
imployed according to his talent, aii would have 
their honour and comfort, and the Church the be- 
nefit of them all. ^'Si* 

^. 31. We have notorioufly all thefe forts 
ofMinifters in the world, i. Carnal, proud and 
worldly hypocrites , who are enemies to that 
which is againft their pride and worldly intereft : 
Thefe contend malignantly againft Godlinefs. 
2. Ignorant, idle, fleflily droans , that eat and 
drink and mind the world, but meddle not much 
with controverfies. 3, ProfefTors 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 ftudied in fome controverfies, 
are yet as forward and bufie in difputing , cen- 
furing and reproving diflfenrers, as if they knew 
as much as the caufe requireih. I would ail thefe 
would meddle with no controverfies , but what 
great neceflicy : in plain and certain cafes calls 
them to. 5 . We have many humble truly God- 
ly men, who as they are confcious that they 
are not well ftudied for controverfie , 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 quietnefs 
and peace : Thefe are the men that the Church 
is mofl beholden to, 6. Some are judicious 
and very fit for controverfie, but too cold in the 
pradical part of Religion. 7. Some excellent 
holy men ("like Jii^uftine) have fo digefted the 
matter , as to be able to defend the truth againft 
all adverfaries and live accordingly. Only thefe 
two laf^ forts fhould be imployed in fuch difputes. 
O ; SECT. 



Of the weight arid nature of the frefent contra-; 

^. i.T think it a matter in this diftrac^ed age^, 
JL which you may be much concerned in , 
to know what weight is tobe laid on thecontro- 
verfic about Jnfant Bapcifm 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 Scripturje hath intru- 
fled the Infant , doth heartily dedicate him to 
God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft, and con- 
fent that he ftand 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 want of it. And 
though I cannot fubfcribe to as much more, as 
fome would have me ( who think fo much bet- 
ter of their own underftandings than ever any 
evidence perfwaded me to do, as to judge them- 
felves worthy to be Creed-makers for all others, 
yea and to be called The Church it felf^ ) yet 
I approve of the fcvcnteenth Canon of the Sy- 
nod of Dort Art, I . that \_ faithful Parents have, 
710 caufe to doubt of the falvatiof of their children 
dying in Infancy 7\ 

^. 2. And I hope all the pious Anahap^ 
tifis themfelves do virtually though not adual- 

f Ipp) 

ly devote their children to God, and confcnt to 
their Covenant relation, while they vehement- 
ly plead againft it. For furely they have fo 
much natural afFeft 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 
moft of them would fay , |^ / would do all that God 
intrufieth and enahkth me to doy that my child 
may be a child of God^and I would give him up 
to God and accept any mercy for him as far as Gdd 
doth author iz.e me fo to do,^ 

^» 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 cfFed. For 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 baptifra» 
I • He muft fhew me that text where this promift 
is, 2. And when he hath done , he will leave 
me perfvvaded that God will fave all Heathens 
Infants whether baptized or not. i. Becaufe I 
and ten thoufand more Chriftians would fit in 
our clofets and offer to God a\l the Infants in 
the world •, that is, confent that he be their re- 
conciled God, and they his children and in Gove- 
qam with him ; what good roan would not defire 
O 4 their 


their falvation? 2. And I fhauld not eafily be- 
lieve that God will damn them all raeerly for wane 
of a ftrangers confent to favethem, were that 
wanting. 3. Much lefs that when we do con- 
feiit a thoufand or ten thoufand miles ojf^ that 
aH the children e. g. in China or Siana (hall be 
baptized and faved , that this ilall not hinder 
their damnation meerly becaufe the Infants and 
we are fo diftant that we cannot in fight and 
prf/ewc^ offer them to God : furely if my confent 
thac a TarlqdciM 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 fhall never believe 
that the bare wane of the -water will damn him, 
who hath all things elfe that God hath made ne- 
ceffary to his falvation (zs I fiid before. J I think 
they give too much to Baptifm , who fay that 
God will either fave any one by it , who want- 
eth other things neceflary 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 fuperftition, laying 
mens falvation on a ceremony as of abfolutc ne- 
ceffity : And I am confident it is contrary to 
Chrifts redoubled leffon. Go learn what that 
meaneth^ I will have mercy and not facrifice : 
And no men Oiallunteach me this great and com- 
fortable leffon , which Chrift hath fo induft^i- 
oufly taught rae, and which hath been long writ- 

ten fo deeply on my heart , as hath made all 
unmercifnl ferfecuttons and feparattons^ and ali- 
enations very difpkaling lo me, 

<^. 4. I have proved afterwards that even 
(tAngiijiine himfelf doth as on great deliberaiioa 
alTert that where the Miniftry of baptifm is not 
defpifed, Heart converfton without it fufficeth to 
falvation in the adult : And no fcripture or rea- 
fon doih make it abfolntely ncccffary to InfantSy if 
not to the adult, 

^. 5. And if Heathens Infants are not dam« 
ned metjrly for want of outward baptifm, nor yet 
for want ohht confent of others (either becaufe 
that other mens confentwhoare (Irangers toihem 
is not necefTary to their falvation , or if it be 
neceffary they have it at a diftance ) then it will 
follow that all the Infants of Heathens are in a 
ftate of falvation, unlefs fomewhat el fe be yet pro- 
ved neceffary to it : And if they are all faved, 
then fo are all Chriftians Infants alfo , or clfe 
they are more miferable than Heathens, And i£ 
you can firft believe that the Infants of all Infi- 
dels, Athcills, and ungodly Chriftians^hypocritesJ 
have a promife of falvation, you will next be in^ 
dined to think better of their Parents flatethait 
God alloweth you : And where is this pro- 

^, 6. Some fay that the new Covenant gi- 
veth grace and life to all that do not ponere obicew. 
'But I mufi have Gods Covenant in his own terms^ 
that I may have it in his own fen fe^ if I will be 
alTured of the benefits, Nen ponere obicem (ig- 
nifieth plainly no A^tm or pofittvc qualification 



asneceflary, but only zfte^ationof hmtcontnty 
adion : And it is certain that the terms of Gods 
Covenant to the adult are clean contrary ., It is 
not. he that neither Believeth nor oppofeth faith 
jhall be faved^ or he that doth neither good nor 
harm , as a man in an apoplexy , or afleep ; 
But r he that believeth fhall be faved , and he 
that velieveth not jhail he damned ^ And except 
ye repent ye jhall all perijh ^ And without holi^ 
nefs none flmll fee God : J But a meer negation is 
no holme fi, 

^. 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 graccj 
which taketh in the Infants with the Anthoriz^ed 
ParentSy whofe members or Ov^n God taketh them 
to be, and requireth a pofitive believing confent 
and dedication to God, as the pofitive condition : 
which is more than a Negative ( non ponere obi* 
cem , ) though performed by the Parent for the 
child : And fo the promifes throughout the Scri- 
pture run io i\\t faithful and their feed. 

5^. 8. I know that God promifeth to blefs 
children ^^r<?//^/? many generations ^iot their faithful 
Anceftors fake : But that is on fuppofition that fi- 
delity continue in the line, and that apoftafie 
make no intercifion. Elfe all fhould be blefTed 
for the fake ofiVt?^, even C^4w's poller ity as well 
as Shem*s, 

^, 9. What then is the thing madenecefla- 
ry ( and fufficient ) by the Covenant to their 
falvation , but that they be the /^f^ of the faith- 
ful devoted by them to God^ that is , that their 



Tarents nainral , or at lead civil , whofe Ov^n 
rhey are , and have the power of difpofing of 
them for their good , do enter them by con-» 
f(ent into the Covenant with Chrift ? which it 
is fuppofed that Faithful Parents virtually did 
before, and will aSinally do when God doth call 
them to ir. 

^. 10. As to them that fay , ]jhc thing 
further neceff^ry as the condition of the Infants 
acceptance and falvation \s [^ A fromife to edu^ 
cate the {^hild as a Chriftian if he live ] I an- 
fwer, J. That promife indeed is included in his 
dedication and confcni; •, 2. But who but the 
Owners of the child are capable of making fuch 
a promife ? funlefs is feconds promifin^. chat the 
Owners iha^l do their duty ) : For only he that 
pwneth him can edccace him ( by himfeif or 
others) or dtfp^e, oi him for his cducadon : 
who hath power > Jifpofe of another mans child , 
and educate him ? faey that undertake as fure- 
ties to do it , in cafe ihe Parents apofiatize or 
Me , do plainly imply, i. That till then it is 
the Parent that is intrufved to do it -, and there- 
fore that the Parent muft confent to do it 5 and 
therefore that the Parent mul^ enter his child 
jn the Covenant of Chrift : 2. And that if 
the Parents apoftatiz^e or die ^ they will take 
the child themifelves as their Own ^ or elfe 
by what power can they educate him or difpofc 
of him > 

<. II. They that fay, God did not fave one for 
the faith or confent of another ^ muft remember, 
I. That we are all faved for the meritoriom 



Right eoufnefs of Chrlfi, by the way of a freeglft^ 
whofe condition is but [nit able acceptance : And 
why may not a Parent accept a domtion for 
his Child , who hath no will to accept n for 
himfelf? Shall he be certainly il ut out unto dam- 
nation? Or fhall he have that gift at^foltitelywhkh 
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 
iherefo?-e though life and pardon be by Chrift on- 
ly, yet it is congruous chat the raeer condition of 
acceptance may be performed by the Parents. 

<>. 11, Perhaps fome will lay all the right 
of Infants to the pardon of fin,, and falvation, 
upon fecret eledion only -, as if all that we 
knew of Infants Salvation were that God will fave 
fome whom he hath eleAed : but that there is na 
Promife of grace and falvation to any particular 
Infant in the world , as under any condition or 
qualification : And if this be fo, then, i. No In- 
fant hath 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 
^ith and regeneration ; Eledion gave Tanl ( nor 
any wicked man ) no right to pardon or falvati- 
on : Elfe eled Pagans and Infidels are juftified ^ 
if they have;^ ad impunitatem q^ .RegnHmC€e' 
lorHm, 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 
eleAed io many. f?. And yet we cannot be fure 
but that they may all or almoft all > be faved , 
while the number of the ekft is unrevealed, 

4. Nor 

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 thofc that love God and 
keep his Commandments, than of thofe that hate 
him. 5. And, in a word, we have then nopra- 
ffer hope, upon (/ovenant ri^ht, tiiat.God willfave 
any one individual Infant in the world : For we 
can hope ( in this proper fcnfe ) of nothing but 
what we do believe , and we can believe nothing 
but what is pro-mtfed or revealed. And fo Pa- 
rents muft be thus far hopelcfs. 

^.15% God who made man after his Image , 
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 pofleflion 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 thera 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 alTert , 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 Ihall open fuch a gap to the hopes of 
prefumptuous Heathens and Infidels this way, as 
will crofs our common doftrine : If God may 



fave whole Kingdoms and millions of Heathen^ 
Infants to whom he never gave Right to Salva^ 
tion by any gift or promife , mcerly becaufe he 
eleded ihem • fome will fay , why may he not 
do fo alfo by the Parents ; at leaft renewing them 
all in tranfnu } 

^. 15. If you fay that He giveth themfree-. 
ly his fan^ifying grace , and gtvieth them right 
to Salvation as fantiified , though he tell w not 
vpho are fanclifiedy I anfwer, i. Take heed left 
you teach the prefumptuous to fay the fame of 
Infidels, Heathens and almoft all , that God may 
in the paffages when they are dying fandifie and 
fave them all. 2. Still this giveth no pofiiivc 
hope of any particulars , nor more to Chriftians 
for their Children than they may have of the 
Children of Infidels-, nor any promife of the 
fphrit and fandification, as Believers have. 

5<, 16. I take it therefore for the foundeft Do- 
drine that Gods taking the Children of the Faith- 
ful into Covenant with him, and becoming their 
God and taking th^m for his own , doth figni-- 
fie no lefs than a ftate of Grace, and pardon 
and fight to hf^ eternal •, and that they are in 
this ftate upon their Parents Confent and Heart- 
devoting them to Cod in Chrifi^ before baptifm, 
but baptifm is the folemnizing and invcftiture, 
which openly coram Ecclefia delivereth them fof- 
feffion of their vifiblc Church-ftate with a fealed 
pardon and gift ot life : For it is not another , 
but the fame promife and Covenant which is 
made to the faithful and their feed : And all Gods 
promifes to the many Generations of them , in 



the fecond Commandment and many other Texts, 
cannot mean any fuch little blefiings as confift 
with a ftate of damnation and the poffeflion of the 
Devil. And ail the ancient Churches in bapti-» 
zing of Infants were of this mind ( whom I will 
not defpife. ) And jihrahams cafe perfwadeth me 
that the Children of Natural and Civil Parents 
( truly their Owners ) have this right ( before they 
are baptized. ) But the former f 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) though no Parent or Ovpner 
confent or dedicate them ( heartily , or openly ) 
to Cody or though they are hypocrites and truly 
confent not for themielves or theirs , let them 
prove it if they can ^ but I muft fay it is pad my 

^. 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- 
ftian DireAory that I will refer the confidering 
Reader thither, only adding, i , 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 knoyr ) did for 
many hundred years grant the conclufion and take 
it for no abfordity, but a certain truth •, yea much 
more, Auftin and his followers themfelves, 
thought more at age were truly juftified and fan- 
dified than were elected and did perfeverc : And 
fome hold that not all that have the fandifying 



fplrif^ but only certain confirmed Chriftians, hare 
a certainty to perfevere : And others hold, that 
as the (pirit of Chrift is promifed to Believers , 
though men believe not . without the fpirit, fo 
that meafure of Grace which caufeth men only 
to believe^ as antecedent to that promifed (pint 
( of Power y Love and a fonnd mind ) is but fuch 
as may be loft, as Adams was •, and that it is the 
jpirit following it (as the rooted habit ^ which 
cannot be loft : And oihers come yet lower, and 
fay that the Grace which giveth /<s2/>^ it /^//can- 
not be loft ( becaufe fuch have the promife of the 
fpirit ^ ) but yet the grace which only enableth 
men to Repent and Believe ( called fujjicient ) 
may be loft before it produce the Ad : Accord- 
ingly fome think of Infant-Grace : The laft fort 
think that they have real pardon of original (in 
and right to life, and have real Grace •, but being 
Infants,, that grace is but fuch as will enable t hem- 
to believe if they come to age , and not infaU 
libly canfe 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 ^^ 
Wardj 8cc, of the lof of an Infant-ftate of Grace y 
as by them opened is not fo hard, as I think the 
contrary way will infer : And it feems by Art, i. 
c. ij, that the Synod of Dort was of their 

0. 1 8. Qnt darknefs about iht future ftateoi 
Infants SohIs^ hath occafioncd fome diverfity of 
thoughts about their frefent ftate. Indeed they 
will neither in Heaven or Hell have any work for 
Confcience in the review of any formr diions 

good or evil: And it feemeth by NarJatiTLene 
before cited ( Orat, 40. ) that fome Antiencs 
thought as mod Papifts do , that unbaptizcd In- 
fants have neither the joys of Heaven , nor any 
punifhraent but the lofs Oi' thefe : But what ftate 
then to place them in they know not : To think 
that they (hall remain in a meer potentiality of 
underftanding, and fhall know no more than they 
did here, is to equal therti with bruits, and to en- 
courage the Socinrans who fay the like of thefe- 
parated fouls of the adult : And if they can allow 
underftanding to thofe that dted haftiz^ed^ why 
not to the reft? And if they ptnderftand^ they 
muft have grief or pleafure : But who can know 
more than God revealeth ? 

5^. ig. In fum ; i. That God would have Pa- 
rents devote their Children to him , and enter 
them according to their capacity in his Cavenanc 
(as I have elfewhere proved) is a great truth , 
not to be forfaken. 2. And alfo that he accept- 
cth into his Covenant all 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 without. 5. And I 
think the Covenant maketh their Salvation cer- 
tain if they fo die. 6. And it feemeth tomethac 
the inveftiture and folemniz^ation of their Co- 
venant with Chrift, fl^.ould be made in Infan- 
cie, from d^anh,zS» ip;2o. and the expofiti- 

P on 

( 2IO) 

on of theuniverfal Church. 7. But if any fhould 
think with Tertnllian and Naz.ianz,ene that the 
tin[ie of invcfttture and folemni^^ation is partly 
left to prudence, and may be delayed in cafe of 
health , yea or fliould thnik that Infants are not 
to be folemnly invefted by baptifm, but only the 
adult, fo they confefs hi f ants relation to God^ 
his Covenant and Church -, I would differ from 
fuch naen with love and peace , and mutual tole- 
ration and communion. 



The Occajion of this Writing* 

^. i« A ^ ^ ^'^^ ^y %^^^^ ^"*^ '^"§ imponu- 
Jl\. nity unwillingly engaged at firft to 
meddle publickly in the ControverTie of Infant 
Bipcifm wiih Mr. Tomba , fo I then refolved to 
meddle no more with ir, iinlefs I found ti^at ne- 
cefiity made it an apparent duty. 

0. 2. Accordingly when Mr, Tombes had print- 
ed the laft private papers wiiich paft between him 
and me, without my confent , I never anfwered 
his reply to this day -, not driving to have the laft 
word , and fuppofing that the ftudious impartial 
Reader, would find no need of a rcjoynder : For" 
to me his Reply feemed fo empty and next no- 
thingjthat I thought it umiecefTary to fay any nlore, 

<$, 3. But it is now grown the cuftom among 
Papifts and Sedaries and almod: all the wranglers 
that trouble the world, to fcribble fomewhat k\\{t 
or nonlenfe againft that truth which they have not 
wit, or will, or humilicy enough to learn, and then 
fay to thofe that would make them wifer, yoit are 
anfwered-^ and itgoeth for a vidory to any foolery, 
if they can but fay, fnch a one that hath written 
again fl yon is linanfxvcred : As if we dealt on 
luch terms with the world in writing, as that he 
that fpeaketh laft, (that is, that liveth longeft ^ 
muft be fuppofed to be in the right. ' Or as if 
we knqw not when wc write againft the grofieft 

V z here(ig 

f2I2 J 

herefie or error, that as many words may be 
faid or written for it as againft ic 1 

5^. 4. And O what pity is it that with the vul- 
gar fort of well-meaning people , number goeth 
for vret^hr y and he feemech to be in the right 
to them, who is nearefi them and hath befl of- 
fonnrnty 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 manifeft them- 
selves , which I hope thefe honeft fouls would 
not be drawn from by an Angel from Heaven : 
But verity no true Charity can be fo blind as to 
deny it, ihat 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 thaa. a man of fo- 
ber folid reafon, may deceive them ( having firft 
been himfclf deceived ) if he can but fpeak niea- 
loHJly^ and reproach others imfHciefjtly^ by the fpi- 
r\t defer ibed2in^ ex or ci fed \n Jant, i, at large. 

<^. 5 . And I crave thy pity , Reader , to my 
fclf and fuch as I , that our Tiryie and Employ^ 
ment is fo much at the wiil and mercy of fuch 
a fort of wrlnglin^ men. Thar rf 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 weli-meaning Chriftians^ to put a neceflity 
on me to do fome poor inconfiderable works, and 
leave undone the greater and more excellent, 

5^. 6. For circumftances may make it a mans 
duty to do that as frefently mcejfary^ which with- 


in a few years will be of no fignification, but die 
with the incerefts and quarrels of the age. 

5^. 7. It hath pleafed the Lord , who did let 
loofe the S^penc upon Adam in Paradifc, to ex- 
ercife his ffnurch in almoft all ages with tempta- 
tions from two r>rts chat feem much contrary, but 
are nearer in difpoficion and principles than they 
well underftand themfelves , I mean Church-Ty^ 
rarjts and Qjurch-Dtviders •, And though I ( and 
moft 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 ^ on in better work 
while I meddle not with them. I could not ob- 
tain that leave from y[r, Tombs -^ And now Mr, 
I>. hath been pleafed to open the mouths ot 
fo many of his partakers againft me , as maketh 
wife men tell me that 10 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 

^. 8. But my purpofe is to meddle with them 
but this once : And if after this thefe crying Chil- 
dren will bawl and wrangle and foul the houfe, 
and 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 th^ 
tnafters of my time. 

P 3 <f, 9. By 

f 214) 

^^ 9. By three or four arguments ( of his ma* 
king ) it hath pleafed one Major Dunvsrs a 
Souldier to call me to this task. i. By heaping 
up a Catalogue of Accufations againft my Do- 
drine in my Chriftian Diredory. 2. By re- 
proaching me for not anfwering Mr. Tomhcs. 
3. By proclaiming me to the world a flanderer 
who owe the Anabapiifts fatisfadion, for faying 
that many of them were Baptiz^ed nak^ci, 4, By 
perverfe citations of my later Writings as if they 
had been ferviceable to his caufe, 5. By his in- 
jury to poor fouls and the Churches peace , by 
his ignorant thougli confident oppolition to the 
truth, and writing a Volume of he knoweth not 

5J. 10. And to add to my invitation, it is be- 
come of late a common faying among the Ana- 
baptills, that I am turned to their opinion or ve- 
ry near it, but have not humility to retrad my 
formeF error, and openly acknowledge what I 

p. II. The occafion of this is, i. Becaufe I 
have fo many years forborn to anfwer Mr. Ton.hcs 
his lad. 2. Becaufe I feek peace with them, and 
fpeak for it upon all occafions, and feek to abate 
other mens over-great oppolition to them, 3. Be- 
caufe upon all occafions I prefs the confideration 
and improvement of our Baptifm , taking it for 
the fumm aad Charader of our Chriftianicy, and 
the true defcription ol Converfion, and the efTen- 
tial mark of Grace, and the qualification of Ca- 
tholick Church-mc:mbers, and the bond of all our 
ChriHian duty : As if none but Anabaptifts could 
think thuo? 5^. 12. When 

^, 12. When I firft read Major Denver s BoQk» 
I thought fuch a Fardk could not be fo regarded 
as to need an Anfwer^ But when his Bookfeller 
came to know of me what I had againft it , as 
from him ; and when I heard how many thou- 
fands of them were Printed , I rather chofe to 
imitate him that had coma[fion on a headltfs mid" 
tittidey than him that iaia, y? fofidm vult decivi, 
devipiatur. And they that will not let me reft , 
mull bear fome of the fruits of ray difquiet* 

P 4 CHAP, 



tJ^ore of my Judgement of the Anahaftifls and 
their Caitfe^ with a motton to them for peace, 

^. I. T Confefs that in my Book againft Mr, 
X Tomhes I wrote fcveral pages enigmati- 
cally of the otfenfive fcandals of the Anabapiifts : 
And they that now read ihem when the cccafion 
is forgotten or unknown , will eiiher not under- 
ftand them, or think them tco fharp. But in all 
military Controverfies, no man is fo meet a Judge 
as he that is on the ground. 

5f. 2. I am almoft ready to condemn my felf 
for that and many other things pail when I forget 
the opcafion of them and the ftate that we were 
in : But I will not deny that at that time my heart 
felt more than I expreft , i. When I heard Ana- 
baptiftry obtruded on the religious people , as a 
great and needtul part of their integrity : 2. An4 
when they that abhorred to hear of old fcandals 
were bufily making more and greater ; 3, When 
i faw what was done againft the Parliament, by 
them that profeiTed to be their fervants, and ihac 
the Anabaptifts and their AflTociates were the for- 
wardeft in the work : 4. And what was done 
againft the King, when they had thruft out the 
Farlidment ^ j. And what was done in the wars 
againft Scotland-^ 6. And what orders pa#|lqj:fe» 
queftring all fuch as my felf that were tiottfeii 
their Engagement or Keeping their days ofpifi^i? 
■ - ' . ^mg 


trig and thanksgiving in caufes of blood : 

7. And when I faw thefe executed on many ex- 
cellent men that were Matters of CoUedges in the 
Univerfities, and ufeful Minifters 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^ 
gland (hould be put out at once ? and carried 
againft them but by a few .* And that the Ana- 
baptifts were of the forwardeft in all this work : 
5. And after when I faw how many of them 
turned Ranters, and read my felf fome of their 
Letters , full of horrid Caches and Blafphemies • 
All thefe things made me think that they 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 
tliem in peace and quietnefs, but I could not ob- 
tain it : Mr. Tomhes thought that I ftood in the 
way of his fuccefles, even when I medled not with 
them. And therefore I muft be ercher 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 Fariihes where there 
were the ableft faithful laborious Minifters , ) 
they laboured to gather feparated Churches, up- 
on the account of their opinion ^ And when thev 
had gathered them, they were militant Churches; 
Prcfently that Town was in a \yar • and the meet- 
ings employed for the extolling of their opinions, 
-^^ ' ~ and 

and vilifying the Miniftcrs and Churches that 
were againft thenti , 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 affumed 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 fuccefles : 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 y and the Mef- 
fenger telling them at Bewdley that he had a Let- 
ter from me, lome of them made themfelves Soul- 
diers, and inarms way-laid the mefTenger, afTauIt- 
ed him , and took his Letters , and though they 
found not what I fuppofe they expedcd, yet find- 
ing in it but a great mans name, who tlien much 
ruled publick affairs, they fent it up to the Coun- 
cil to him, who fummoned Major Beak^io Lon- 
don to anfwer it, who had never fcen it and knew 
nothing of it : And though he fo fcaped , I was 
loudly threatned ^ but General Mvnkj approach 
out of ScfftUnd flayed the execution of their dif- 


pleafure. Thus did my familiar Friends unprovo- 
ked (hmt of them yet alive J, 

^. 6. Indeed my judgement was and is, that 
the point of Infant Baptifm hath its confiderable 
difficuhies, which may occafion wife and good 
men to doubt, or to be mift-ken in ir. And ma- 
ny of the Roman party have taken it to be 
proveable only by the tradition and judgement 
of the Church : And Mr. Tomhes hath pubHckly 
intimated as if one of oi]r moft Learned and En- 
tire puMick ProfeiTorsof Theologie in one of our 
llniverfities , had declared himfelf of the famt 
mind, viz^. that it is not to be proved by Scripture, 
(Mr. Danijers hath alfomade advantage of this 
teftrmony), ( Though of late Scripture certain 
-proof \s 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 not by evidence fo clear , as 
every good man can perceive. 

<f. 7. Therefore I never took the point of it to 
have fuch weight, as that all ihat differed from me 
in it, muft be denied either Loi/f, Liberty or Com- 
TKunion : 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 ^ and much better 
than one of my own judgement, who hath lefs 
piety and fobriery. And I make no doubt but 
there are among us very many fuch , even fober 
and religious men, as there be among other 

5^. 8. Nor do I think that there is {{) much ma- 


Ilgnity in the bare opinion which denieth Infant 
Baptifm, as that all the Anabaptifts mifcarriages 
fliould 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 fingularity kindleth a proud 
felfifh 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 
cuhers, and greater friends to the tru.h : And fo 
Frlde and Ignorance engage them in fingnlarity 
and fe'paration : And thus they would do, were ic 
any other opinion, which they thought as high- 
ly of as this : So that i: is not an Anabaptift as 
fuch, but the frond Church-divider , or Separa- 
tift that I am moil offended ar. 

5^. 9. I know that in the Ancient Churches 
men were lefc at liberty , both vohen they would 
be baptized themfelves, and when their Children 
(hould be baptized : And though Infant-baptifm 
was without any known original , fmce the Apo- 
ftles, yet it was not a forced thing. 

5J. 10. And were it in my power it (hould be 
fo ftill : I would not deny Chriilian Love , nor 
Church'Communionj nor publick encouragements, 
to any pious peaceable man for being an Anaba- 
ptift : If he would not feparate for ic from the 
Churches, if he would live peaceably with nie, 
I would live peaceably with him, and fhould be 


loth to be behind with him in love and peace,; 

^. II. It is not f I fay ) Anabaptiftry,Indepca- 
dency, nor any fuch opinion which I impure our 
calamities to'diredly : But it is (next to Church 
Tyranny^ th^ fykk o( feparatio?j -^ I mean, when- 
men cannot fo far differ in judgement from ochers, 
but a perverfe 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 
Vncharitablenef ( or JHulice, ) 

5^. 12. I have told thefe men that when they have 
fpoken never fo ilarply againft TerfecntorSy it is ap- 
parent that there is much of the fame fpirit in them- 
ielves ; One faith, of DifTcnters, Avpay vfiith/nch 
unworthy perfons out of the Mtnifiry or out of ihe 
Country: and the other hkh^jiway with fuch nnwor-' 
thy perfons from yoHrCommnnion: 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 leaft would confider 
of it, inftead of being angry with us when we tell 
them of it. 

^. 13. I am not therefore half fd zealous to 
turn men from the opinion of Anabapciftry , 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- 
ftanding fuch differertccs ; For which they may 
" fee 


fee more reafons given by one that once was of 
their mind and way ( Mr. William Allen in his 

Retrachation of Separation^ ^ 
^^ Satan will notcon- ^„^ j^j^ Perfwafive to t;/?.- 
lent thac yon fhoiild , . -^l^ i_ 

ffo^Dcrly read the Book5. 0') ^"an any ot them can 

found iy refel , though they 
may too eafily rejed: them. 

5^. 24. I am perfwaded that the formal Mini- 
fters , and people , who make little more ufe of 
Baptifm, than to give it to Infants, and to receive 
it in Infancy, have been the greateft occafion of 
Anabapciftry among us : when the people fee thac 
all being Baptized in Infancy , many afterwards 
live all their days, and never underhand what Ba- 
prifm is, and few evfer folemnly and diftindlly 
own and renew that Covenant when they come to 
age, (unlefs coming to Church and receiving the 
Lords Supper with as little iinderftanding , be a 
renewing it , ) this tempteth ferious people that 
underftand not the matter well thetftfelves , to 
think that Infant-baptifm doth but pollute the 
Churches , by letting k\ 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 flay till they are ready to devote 
ihemfelves underftandingly to God, But this is 
their miftake : For, i. If it were deferred till ripe- 
nefs of age, one part would negled it and conti- 
nue Infidels ; and another part would da all for- 
njally^ as wc fee they do now at the other Sacra- 
ment, where the fame Covenant is to berenewed* 
2, There is a better remedy, 

^, 15. For 


f, 15. For we hold that all tliat are Eapti- 
zed in Infancy fhould as underftandingly , anjl as 
ferioufly and ( if it may be conveniwtly ) 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 ac^ 
large, in a Treatife of Confirmation, written when 
we had hope of fetting up this Courfe, under the 
name of Confinnation, which fome of us pradL- 
fed in our AfTemblies not wiihout fuccefs. To» 
be ferioufly devoted to God by our Parents firft, 
and to be brought at age as fefioully 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. 

^. 16. I am as fully perfwaded that Infants 
Church-memberfliip and Baptifm is according to 
Gods will, as ever I was, when I was moft en- 
gaged in the Conw:overlie : And I am perfwaded 
that thcfe Papers of mine to Mr. Towbes^ are fo 
unfatisfadorily anfwered as is worfs than no An- 
fwer, and fheweth how little is to be faid. 

^. 17. Though the Ad of Baptizing be a du- 
ty, and fo neceflary n^cfffitate frdcefti^ yet Pro- 
teftants hold that it is not fo neceffury nsccffitatc 
mediiy but that in fome cafes thofe that are unba- 
ptized may be faved : As in cafe the Child 6xt 
before it can be done , or in cafe the abfence or 
delay of the Baptizer be the caufe .• Ir is true-cen* 
feming to his Covenant ( for our felves and thofe 
that we have power to confentand acceptit for) 


C 224; 

which Chrlft hath made necejfary to fahation^ 
and if hcftould A^mn TLtrueConfenter^ he fhould 
damn one that hath the Love of God , and one 
to whom he promifeth falvation, John 1^16^ 18. 

^, 18. 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 (hould 
lay fo great a ftrefs upon the very outward wafh- 
ing , as that he would damn trj : 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 fpirit and 
truth, and that Circumcifion or Uncircumcifion 
is . nothing, but t aich that worketh by Love : And 
if Penitent Loving Believers fhall not be faved," 
Gods promifes give us no affurance or feeurity* \ v 

5^ . 1 9. When the Apoftle, E^hef, 4. 4, 5. putteth > 
[^ one Baptifm 2 among the neceflaries of Church- 
Concord y by Baptifm is meant , our folemn de» 
voting our felves ( and ours under that truft ) to 
Chrijir in. the Bi^ftifmal Covenant ^ which can 
mean no more but that as there are three things 
f on our part) in Bapafm, i. Heart-confent ^ 
2. Profeffion of that confent ^ 3. The Reception 
of waHiingas the profelling fymbol: So, i.The 
heart'Confent is necefTary to our membership of 
the Church as invifible, that is, to our union with 
Chrift and our falvation •, 2. The Profeffion of 
Corjfent as there is opponunity is necefTary, both 
to prove the fincerity of <5!onfent it felf , and to 
other mens notice of it, and fo to our member- 
fhip of the Church as vi(;ble ; 3. And our Pro^ 

f effing 

fefftng it by being Baptiz^ed is neceilary to the 
regular and orderly manner of our Profeffton : 
And fo far to our concord. 

5^. 20. And he that kno\^^eth Baptifm to be 
hie et nunc his duty and yet will not receive 
it , (he wet h his unfoundnefs by his difobedi- 

5$. 21. As l^aptifm is made our gi-eat duty 
Under that name , fo Profe]Ji&n or Confejjion of 
Chrift, as fuch , is ofc ihcntioned as neceflary, 
even to falvation, Rom, 16.9,10. 1 7^^.4.2.3; 
15, Afar* 10. 32. Phil, 2. II 2 John J. 

And Bapttfm being our Open confefftng and 
Owning Chrift by a foleran Vow and Covenant, 
k is principally a^ fuch that it is necelTary tofal- 
vation , yea and to a perfed aaettiberfhip^of the 
vilible Church. 

c. 22. Therefore if any man that in a defart 
or dry ' Countrey could hc-'ve no water , or 
that Uvcd where there is no Minifter , fhould 
openly before all. the people devote himfelf to 
God the Father, Son and Holy Ghofl, according 
to the Baptifmal Covenant, and folemnly pro- 
fefs himfelf a Chriftian, that man were a true 
member of the vifiblc Church, though defedive 
as to the mode of entrance , and were to be num- 
bered with Chriftians : And Ccnftantine and 
many another were called Chriftians long before 
they were baptized. And it were injurious to 
the Rationality and fpiricuality of Chrifts Cove- 
nant , to feign him to be fo ceremonious, as to 
r^jed a found profefling believer for want of 


^. 23» Though jiagnfiine be called dnrui fa* 
ter Infantum^ and be i^uppofed for fome pafTa- 
ges by many Papifts and others to damn allun- 
baptized perfons fave Martyrs, yec thefc follow- 
ing words among others , in his later times in 
his deliberate difputes againft the Donatifts, ful- 
ly fhew his contrary judgement C which yet I 
believe the Intereft of his caufe againft the Do- 
natifts was a help to in this point) And remem- 
ber that be confirmeth it in his Recradations, by 
retracing only the inftance of the thief on the 
crofs 5 as uncertain whether he was baptized or 

<^. 24. Aug de baptif, conr. Donat. li. 4. c. 
29. [^ Qjdod etitun atqus etiam confiderans in- 
venio , nan tantum Pajftojjem fro nomine Chri- 
fti J id qitod ex Baft if mo deer at fojfe fufflere-^ 
fed ttiam Fidem convcrfionen^.que Cardiff fi for^ 
te ad celebrandum myfiermm baptifmi in an- 

giifliis temfomm fncctirri nan fotefi- — : Ef 

Cap, 24. Cnm Aftnifterinm baptifmi non con^ 
temptui religionis fed articulm necejfitatis exckt'- 
dit : c^ baptifmpis [quidem pot eft ineffs ubi con- 
verfo cordis defucrit : Converpo aittem cordis 
fotefl qnidera inejfe non fercefto baptifmo 5 fed 
contempto non fotefimequeenimnllo jpodo dicen^ 
da eft converfio cordis ad Deum^ cnm Deifycra" 
inentHm contemnithr, Coaverfion then will fay ^, 
without baptilm ,. wheri baptitu is nor contemn,^ 
ed : It is the contempt that dcftroyeib , ^^d 
that as it provcth men unconverted. And \k(\^ 
he profefTerh to be his judgement after long and, 
great confi deration, 

<c. 25.' 

^. 2$. Baptifr» is to Qoriflianity much like 
what Ordination is to ihc ficred Mimftryy and 
what folemn Matrimony is to Marriage, It 
is necefTary as a Duty^ and as a CMeam to cur 
vrdinary and regular admittance to the Coni- 
munion of the Church. But as in caie there were 
no Ordainer to be had, in a rar Countrey in 
ftyimertcay no doubt but a quahfied perfon might 
become a t aftoi* , rather than God ihould have 
no Church, nor be lokmnly woriliipped ^ And 
as in cafe there could be no regular joiemmz^ati- 
on of Marri ige ( as in fuch a vvildernefs ) a 
fiiblijhed corifettt may tie the knot j fo in cafe 
there could be no B^iptiz^ing^ a foicnm Frofeffion 
and Covenanting would ferve to Gods acceptance, 
and to a right to the Chriftian name, 

^, 26. I only leave it to Chriftian Charity 
and wifdom to confider how far fome mens Edu- 
cation^ natHral weaknefs of judgement, and other 
impediments of information , may make their 
error againfi: Infant Baf tifm , to participate of 
fuch a Neceffity : The cafe hath its difficulties : 
Papifts and Proteftants confefsi it , as to vScri- 
pture evidence : Weak men cannot know all things ; 
And even confiderable heads, that have heard 
and thought of much againft it, which they can- 
not anfwer, may grow very confidep.t that they 
are in the right, and after by that prejudice may 
become uncapable of what ffiould fatisfie them ; 
Abundance of the fons of the Church that talk 
flioft againft them , give fuch weak reafons for 
Infant Baptifm, and are fo unable to confute 
an Jlnahftifii as fheweth, that it k nor Mor^ 


knorvkd^e , but fomcwiiat elfe more incfi- 
ning' them to the truth therein, that keepeih 
them right. 

5^. 27. If the cafe were , whether the Lords 
Supper might be Adminiftred with Beer , or 
Milk, where there is no Wine } Or whether Ba- 
prifm might be Adminiftred by Mflk or Wine, 
where there is no water ? fuppofe the affirming 
party were certainly in the right • yet if the con- 
trary minded ''ould fay, I own Chrifls Sacra- 
ment , and folemnly profefs my confem to his 
Covenant ^ and I would participate as you do , 
but that I take it to be a fin , and with aH the 
means that I can ufe , in conference, reading, 
meditation , prayer, my judgement is not chan- 
ged ,J I fhould not break fuch communion with- 
(uch a man , as he were capable and willing to 
hold with the Church. And how near fome A- 
nahapifis cafe is to this, I leave to conlidera- 

<^. 28. But m.aking no queftion but many of 
them are far better men than I, and knowing 
my felf lyable to* error, and knowing how much 
ChriR: in his promifes layeih upon fwcerity of 
Fairh and Love more than upon ceremony • and 
having endeavoured to learn what this meaneth, 
/ vsfill have mercy and'/wt facrifice -^ As I am 
far more offended at their Schifm ^ ox fe far at ion 
from Communion wich our Churches, than at 
their opinion , fo I will here lay down thofe 
terms on which I am per fwaded. good andfo- 
ber men will be willing on both fides to agree 
and hold communion : Or on which I am furs 



1 would gladly live in brotherly love and com- 
munion with them my felf. 

5^. 29. Let the Anabaftifis confent to and 
profefs as foUoweih or to this fenfe. 

^* [^ Though we judge Infant Baptifm diiTo- 
" nant from Chrifts inrtituted order , yet find- 
^' ing .that God hath made many promifes to the 
^' feed of the faithful above others, and that Chrift 
" exprefTed his readinefs to receive little children 
*' when they were brought to him for his blef- 
'' ling, and knowing that all Chriftian Parents 
"fhould earneftly defire that their children may 
*^ be the children of God through Chrifl: , and 
'* 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 
** Chrifls promifes ^ we do here folemnly pro- 
*'fefs, that we thankfully defire all ihofe mer- 
*' cies for this child v;hich God hath proraifed 
*' to fuch in his word ^ and that we heartily 
" offer, devote and dedicate this child to God the 
*' Father, Son and Holy Ghofl , as far as he 
" hath given us power to do it, befeeching him ac- 
" cordingly to accept him: And we promife faiihful- 
*Myto endeavour to educate him in the nurture 
*' and admonition of the Lord , and as we are 
*' able to perfwade him when he is capable, to 
*' believe in Chrift, and folemnly devoie himfelf 
''to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghofl in 
'' Baptifm. 1 

Let this much be done in the Church or fo 
openly as may fatisfie the Church, thiit thev arc 
not defpifers of God: mercies, nor their cliildrea? 
fouls. ' 0^3 Muc.: 


Much more would it tend to our quietnefs an4 
£:oncord , if thofe that profefs that they cannot 
^atisiie their confciences in their Infant Baptifm, 
Would but do as the Lirurgie doth by thofe 
wbofc Bapcifm is uncertain , [ If than be not 
Bapttz,ed, I B>iptz.c thee~\i.x\(ii fo would fay, [^J?^- 
ing uncertmn v^hether my Infant Baptifm be va- 
lid , If it be net I novo receive that which is ] 
And when they have fatisfied their confciences^ 
woiild live quietly in the Love and confimuni- 
on of the Church / Who would n6c receive 
th^m, though we approve noc of their way ? 

i, 30. And were it in ray power as a Paftor 
of the Church , I would give fatisfadtion by 
fuch an anfwerable prcfeflion as this. 

*^ [ Though it be our judgement that Infant^ 
''have ever been members of Gods vifible Church,' 
^' fince he had a Church and there were Infants 
*Mn the world, and do believe ihat Chrift: hath 
'Signified in the Gofpcl that it is his gracious 
*'will that they fliould flill be fo • And that 
''he that commanded. Mat, 28. 19. \^Go ye and 
^' Difciple all Nations 'Baftiz.ing 'them ~] would 
'' have his MiniRers endeavour accordingly . to 
*^Mo ir, and barh hereby made Baptifm the re- 
*'gular orderly way of folemn entrance into a 
'' vifible Church ftate •, and therefore we devote 
^^ this child to God in the Baptifmal Covenant : 
'' Yet vve do alfo hold, that when he cometh 
^' to age , it will be his duty as ferioufly and 
^'devoutly to make this Covenant with God 
*' underflandingly himfelf , and to dedicae him- 
^'felf to God the Father, Son and HolyGhod, 


^'as thofe rauft do that never were Baptized in 
^' Infancie : And we promife to endeavour faith- 
*' fully as we have opportunity, to inftrud and 
*' periwade him fo to do , hoping that this 
*' his early Baptifmal dedication , and obligati- 
*'on to God, will rather much prepare him for 
*'it, than hinder it. 

<5. 31. Me thinks thefe Profeflions ihould put 
olT the chief matter of offence and exception againfl 
each other , .as to the ill confequents of our opi- 
nions ? And if fober good men would by fucha 
mutual approach, be the more difpofed to live to- 
gether in love and holy peace, how eafily (hould 
1 bear the fcorns of thofe Formalins that will 
reproich me for fo much as motioning [ a. Teace 
with the Anabaftifts , 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 of Chriftian Communion than fober, pious, 
and peaceable Anahnftifts. 

f, 3Z. 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 againll their way, I fhall 
account it no wonder nor matter of much provo- 
cation, finding in all Sed:s as well as theirs, that 
the injudicious fort are apt to be abufively cen- 
forious , and the more mens Pride^ Ignorance 
and uncharitahlenefs remain, the more they will 
fwelj into felf-conceit , and trouble the Church 
with a miftaking wrangling buitful fort of 

a.^ ^ 35. 

^i 33. Afld as I itouft needs believe as ill cf 
(ome fort of Zeal as St. fames hath fpoken 6^' 
it. Jam. 3. and experience hath too long told 
the world of it ; yet 1 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 againfl it •, and that their bit- 
ternefs againfl: the truth and me , is upon a fup- 
pofition that both are againfl: the truth and God ; 
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, ttiey would 
be zealous for it. 

5^. 34. I conclude with this notice to thccon- 
tr?ry minded,that the evidence for Infants Church- 
meraberfliip fecmeth to me fq dear , both in na- 
ture and in Scriprure , that 1 bid them de- 
fpair of ever perfwading me againfl it : But 
if they will have any hope of changing my judge- 
ment, it muft be by confe[jingi\{tvtfible Church- 
membership of Infants , and proving that 
ytt they are not to bebaftiz^ed^zxi^ that Baptifm 
was appointed for initiating none but adiik con- 
*VErts y and not to be the common eTitrance into 
the (hurch : which yet I think they can never do, 
while the plain Law of Chrift Mat.ig, 19. and 
the expofition of the univerfal Church, doth ftand 
on record to confute (uch an opinion / But here 
they have more room for adifpute. 

5f. 35. But ("though I exped to be cenfgred 
for it J I will fay once ( becaufe truth is truth J 
(hat tboiigh Rebaptiz^ing and Reor^aining are 
juftly both condemned by the ancient Chur(;hes , 


and pronounctd altk^ ridiculoHs by Gregory Mtig^ 
Lib, 2. £/>. Indi^. 1 1. x,$(6^ and many others • yet 
were men Rehaftiz^ed but for Certainty to them^ 
fclves or to the Church, and to quiet their con- 
fcicnces , and on fuch terms as in my Chrifltan 
DireAory I have (hewed that a feeming Reor- 
dination might in fome cafes be tolerated, and 
would not r^rong Infants , nor make it an occafi- 
on of divifion or alienation ; I know not by any 
Scripture or reafon that fuch Rcbaptizing 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 tAbaj- 




0/^ General V^iewofVit. Danvers book* 

f* lu A /T^* Danvers book is entitled a Trea^ 
jLVI tife of Bapifm, in which he giveth 
us the Hiftory of Infant and Adult Bapcifm out 
of Antiquity , as making it appear that Infant 
Baptifm was not pradifed for 300 years (in his 
fecond edit, it is [^ near 500. ) And in his j^p-. 
fend. ed. 2,\_ I cannot find that it was praUi* 
fed upon any till the fourth Century .'3 And he 
giveth us a Catalogue of witnefifes againft it. 
By which thofe that hold their Religion on the 
belief of fuch mens words , will conclude that all 
this is tme^ and that Infant Baptifm is z Novel- 
ty , and thofe that are againft it do go the old 

f. z. Having pernfed his teftimonies on both 
fides 5 I am humbled and afhamed for the dul- 
nefs of my heart, that doth not with floods of 
compaflionate tears lament the pittiful condition 
of the feduced , that muft be thus deceived in 
the dark ^ and of the Churches of Chrift that 
muft be thus aflaulted , and ihaken, 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 \nfaih and hiftory, as I pro- 
fefs it one of my greateft difficulties to know 
how to call them. Should I fay , th^c they are 
' fo 

fo notoriotK and fhamelcfs , as that ( I fay lo^ 
only a Papift, ) but any fober Turk or PagaTi 
fhould blufh to have been guilty but of fome 
page or lines of them , and much more a man 
of any tcndernefs of confcience , the Readers 
would think that the language were harfli, were 
k never fo true , and fome would fay , Let us 
have [oft words and hard arguments ]. And 
fhould I not tell the Reader the truth of the 
cafe, I might help to betray him into too much 
fearlefnefs of his bait and fnare, and I doubt I 
may be guilty of untruth by concealing the /^tia- 
lity of his untruths : And it is not matter of 
Argument^ but /^^ that lam fpeakingof. 

<• 3. But it pleafeth that God whofc coun. 
f*^ls 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 di- 
ftrad:ed between Church Tyranny^ and dividing 
feffirations , SeBs and parties^ as that in many 
ages it hath not been eafie to know which of thera 
was the more pernicious. 

^. 4. And it muft grieve every confcionablc 
and difcerning lover of Truth and Peace, toob- 
ferve how thefe two Church-difturbing parties, 
do by their extremities cf oppofition, increafc 
as well as exafperate each other : As th^ Ithaci- 
r:« Prelates did by the Tnfcillianjfts ^ and the 
Prrfiilliamfls by them. The Pride , covetouC- 
nefs, dead formality, and cruel violence ofCler- 
gie Tyrants maketh the poor 5cdari«s think that 
they muft go fo far from them , till they have 
loft themfelves and know not where they are^ 


and as Mr. Danvers muftcrs up a catalogue 
of my fayings in his mode and drefs , which 
feera ugly to the poor man that thinks he feeih 
Antichnftianity mfnch Gofpel znd 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 (he can converfe with 
them , though fhe be cetera fana ) •, (o thofe 
on the other extream think them fo fanatick, 
and almofl mad , that they are apt to fufped eve- 
ry word alraoft 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 aliqHo tertioy They are all alike. 

p. 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 perfecution ohhs Prifciliianifishdid 
fo animated the loofer fort againft ftrid Reli- 
gious people , that they had brought men un- 
der the fufpicion of Prifcillianifm^ , 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 Sedaries , and the bold-faced fallhood 
which fuch as y[.T.I>anvers obtrude on the world, 
and hear them furioufly revile what they under- 
hand not,it maketh them think that they are fitter 
for Bedlam than for humane focietie : And their 
confciences Juftiijc them for all the cruelties that 


they ufe againft citlier them , or more innocent 
perfons, whom in their ignorance and uncharita- 
blenefs they number with them. 

i. 7. And on the like account when they read 
and hear their erroneous Dodrines, and hear 
their incongruous words in prayer , they think' 
they can never be too ftrift in fhackling them and 
all others in prefcribed forms : And nothing. 
Guieteth their Confciences in all this fo much, a$ 
the undeniable errors , and follies and mifcarria- 
ges of thofe that thus provoke them. 

^, 8. But in this the Church in AngHfiines days 
did not think that way the wifeft cure : when he 
faith [^ Afferat^ m fieri fokt^ aUqnam free em in 
qua loqiiatur contra reguUm fidet ( mtilti qtiiffg 
irrHHnt in freces non folnm ah impritis laqnaci'^ 
httiy fed ettam ab h^reticis comfofitasy Q^ fer ig- 
tiorantitz fim^licitatem non eas valentes difcerne^ 
rcj muntur tisy arbitrante5 quod bona fint:) Nee 
tamen quod in eis ferverfum efi cvacuat ilU que 
ibi reUa funt • fed ab eis fotipps evacnatur ] 
Aug. de bapr. cont. Donat. f as I remember about 
lib. 5. c. II,) O truly charitable and peaceable 
Dodrine ! And he that will feparate from other 
for every difference ( or real error ) in DoArinc 
or Prayers, fhall have enow to feparate from 

^. 9, I know nothing that fo much multiplicth 
Sedaries as the notorious mifcarriages of Church- 
Tyrants that oppofe them ; And T know no- 
thing^ next carnal intereft it felf, that fo much 
, multiplicth and confirmerh Papiils and Church- 
Tyranrs , as the madnefi of the SeAaries : The 



wildenefs, but efpccialJy the diverficy of thejif 
opinions, hath done naore to increafe the number 
of Papifts among us than any thing that ever the 
Papifts themfelves could otherwife fay for theif 
caufe : For people fee fo many giddy with turn- 
ing round, and fee fo many Seds among us , that 
they are confounded, and know not which to N 
of i but they rnuft lay hold of fomewhat that is 
more ftable, or be wheel-fick. 

^. 10. O what a confirmation is it to a Papift* 
to find fuch a one as Mr. Danvers calling Gods 
Truths and Ordinances Antichriftian 1 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 fach men > 
Wq he to him by whom offence comet h. The chief 
Quakers are charged by Mr. FaUo and others 
( even fome of their own name J of denying the 
perfonand office of Chrift hinafelf: It is worth 
^he enquiring whether they rejed him not as An- 
tichrift, and call not Chrjftignity by the name of 
Amiehrif^ianity ? . 



C H A P. I V. 

Of Mr. Danvers'i kis Witnejfes agawfi Infant^ 

^' I. "T XT'Hen he hath told you, that Inhi^ 
W ''fmailfearch f fhamefully fmall) 
■ ^ he cannot find there is any authentick teftimony 
'' that it was pradifed on any till the fourth Cen- 
^' tury •, he in the next words faith that it is grant- 
^^ cd th?it Tertulhan fpake againft it in ty^fricay 
"which is clear evidence that fonie had been 
" fpeaking for it in that corner of the world : ] 
This is no contradidtion with him : And did they 
only Jpeak^for it and not pratitfezt <* Speak once 
like a man : And was not that till the fgttrth 
CentHry f 

^. 2. His Catalogue containeth three Columns : 
The firft of the Baptifm of the Adult : And what 
Chriftian ever denied this ? And what meaneththe 
man in labouring to prove it ? The fecond is of 
the Inflituting and averting of Infant-Baptifm ; 
of which more anon. The third is of his Witnefles 
againft Infant-Baptifm. And the firft of thcfe 
mentioned in the Catalogue is TertnlUan in the 
third Century. By which he feemeth to confefs 
that till the third Century he hath no witnefs 
againft it. But I have laid fo much elfewherc 
and others more, to prove, i. That Tertnlii^ 
ans words prove that Infant-Baptifm de faBo 
was then in ufc j 2. That he only telleth his opi- 

hlon of the point of convenience , but conclud^th 
riot againft Infant-Baptifm as unlawful ; 3. That 
it is moft probable he fpcaketh of the Infants of 
Heathens ; 4. That he fpeaketh from that flriB 
y?-^^/</^n>^ which ihade him plead alfo for th^ 
^JHontanifls Fanatictfnt^ and againft fecond mar- 
riages^ and for his inordinate faftings^ &c. as a 
man differing from the Ghuirches 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 Infaht-Baptifm 
I have not proved by many other words in Ter- 
tullian that he was not againft all Intant-Baptifm, 
but for it among Chriftians. 

$^.3. His next and great Witnefs is the 1)<?»^-; 
tifis together* This is fomething, were it true : 
but it is futh a kind of falfhood as t muft not 
name in its due epithets, left you think me over- 

*' ^. 4. His words are [] Bonatns a learned man 
*^ in Africa taught that they fliould baptize no 
-*^ Children but only th^t believed and defired 


jinfxv* Utterly falfe : And how doth he prove 
it ? By Sebafi, Frank* whom I will not fearch to 
fee whether he fay fo or rot. Reader, if the 
qiieftion be, what was done, faid or held by thou- 
fands of ncien 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 pafsby 
all proof from thefe, and tell you what a fellov/ 
of his own opinion faith eleven hundred years af- 
ter ? 

ter ? He brings us with great oftentation the Diach 
:A/jabaptifis Martyrologie and fuch like Hiilort^' 
of a t'ew years old , oi" fellows that knew Httlc 
more than as he doth, what their Party or Com- 
panions told thetti, or what they ignorantly ga- 
thered from fuch Books as are yet to be feen by 
us as well as by them.If Ifhould difpute what ^^/n^/^- 
ftin-e held , would Mr. D, fetch his proofs trom 
the writings of J^wtf/iV^/Vor, or George Fox^ or 
Ifaac Penningto}?^ yea or Mr. Tomhes to prove his 
aflertions, while ^agujfi;ics works are at hand to 
be fe-n ? 

" <5, 5. So next he faith [that the followers of 
" Dmarm were all one wiih the Anabaptifts^ de- 
"nying Baprifm to Children, admitting the Be- 
*Mievers only thereto wh,p defired the fame J 
And he citeth one called Twiski 

jififw* Utterly falfe 5 They held no fuch thing. 

<J. 6. His next proof is indeed from an unquc- 
ilionable witnefs ^ he faith '' \_ AHguftines third 
" and fourth Books againft the Donacifts 6iO de- 
*' monftratc that they denied Infaiu-Bapiifm, 
^^ wherein he managcth the argument for Infant- 
*'Baptifm againft them, with great zeal, enfor- 
" cing it by feveral arguments, but efpecially frrm 
*^ Apcflolica! Tradition , and curfing with great* 
*' bitternefs thf.y that fhould not embrace it. 

i. 7. Anfxv* Mr. Bagjhaxv is now quite over- 
done in the quality of untruths : Reader., either 
this man had feen and read the Books of Au-^ 
ghfiine mentioned by him , or he had not. If 
not , doth he ufe Gods Church and the 
fouls of poor ignorant people with any. tender- 

R neU 

hefs of Confclence, 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 ir, 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 march him again among all the falfifiers 

that I know in the world •, 1 dare not be fo uncha- 

iritable to him as to think that ever he read them. 

^. 8. The Books are feven that Aiiguftine 

wrore of Baptifm againft the Donatifts : And in 

them all I cannot find onefyllable of intimation 

. that ever the Donatifts denied Infant- Baptifm, buc 

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 it^tn books nor in all the reft oi Ah^ 

flins books againft the Donatifts, one word that I 

can find , of any fnch controverfie with them at 

all ; And for a man to fay that in two books he 

thanageth the argitTnents for Infant ^Bafttfrn 

againft them with great z^eal^ dec, when there is 

not one word that luppofeth them to deny it , blufh 

Reader in compailion for fuch a man. 

^. 9. Re.;der, 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 

'ferfond faccejfiQn of their Biiliops^ In a 


( 24 j ; 

time of perfection they faid ( truly or faKiy was 
a great controverfic J that one ofilieBifhops de- 
livered up the Church-books to ihc PerfccuLors ^ 
to be burnt, rather than die himfelf, when they 
demanded them ^ And that the Catholick Bifhops 
received fuccedlvely their ordination from that 
fnan , and called them Tradttores •, whereas the 
Bifhop that all their Bijlwfs had fucceflively beea 
ordained by, was one that had refufed to deliver 
tip the Church-books ; And confcquently he was 
the right Bifhop, and they that had their fuccef- 
fion from him were true Bifhops and Churches , 
and aU the reft were no true Bidiops or Churches ^ 
and therefore that all their Baptifm and Sacra- 
ments were nullities , and their Communion un- 
lawful, and that all people were bound m Confci- 
ence as ever they would be faved to feparate from 
the reft f called Cathohcks J and to cometothemi 
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) rebapiize not (though they 
fay fome Monks have done it, r.selfewhere I have 
cited.) The Donatifts were Efifcof^l cerewoniom 
Separattfisy that did it on the account of a purer 
Epifcopal fiiccefjion^ Till their days the holy Do- 
Aors of the Church had almoft aU been againft 
drawing the fword againft Hereticks, even yyugu- 
fiin himfelf. But the grearnef-i of their party 
and the proud conceit of their greater Ztal and 
ftridnefs than the Catholicks had, made them (o 
furious that the Catholick Paftors could not live 
■ quietly by them, Infomuch that fome of tbent 

R 2, v;oun^ed 

Wounded the Minifters in the ftrects, and fome o£ 
them made a lak fliarp water and fpouted into 
Minifters eyes as they paft the ftreet, to put out 
their eyes ; till many fuch infolencics provoked 
Angufibi to change his judgement of toleration, 
( and efpecially the multitudes feduced by them, ) 
and the Bifhops to crave the Emperors aid : The 
Emperor made Edids for mulds and baniflimenc 
to thofe that perfevered : This ( being a new way ) 
fo exafperared the Donatifls, that in very paflion 
many of tbem ( yea Bifhops ) murdered themfelves 
to bring odium on the Catholicks , to make the 
people bfclicve that the cruelty of the Catholicks 
compelled them to it : And this was the ftate of 
thefe two parties •, but not a word of difference 
about hifant-Bapcifm between ihera th^t ever I 
read in either parr. 

p. 10. The Controverfie between Anfli?! and 
them he thus flateth ; Lib. i. c. i, z. Si haheri 
forps potej}^ ctiam dari cur non foteft f Bafttfrh 
received out of' the Catholic\ or true Church 
arKong Schifwatickj is trite haptifm : and there- 
fore baptifm given without by Schifmatickj is tnic 
baptifn7, ' 

" Impie faccre qui rchaftiz,are conantur orbps 
^^ unit atemy c^ nos rcBc facere qui Dei Sacra^ 
^^ menta imprcbare ^ r:ec in.ipfo fchifmate aude' 
'' mp*j : They do impioufly that endeavor to re-* 
^' ba^ti ze all the united Chrifiian world , and we 
^* do i^ghily who dare not deny Gods Sacraments, 
"no not in a'Schifi-n. J Tor Jitgufiin peaceably | 
be!d th; Donatifls haptifm to be true and z'alid 
though irregular and unlawfully given and taken, 


but the Donatifls held all the Cathohcks Mini- 
ftry andbaptifm null. 

^.11. Therefore he thus fummeth up their dif- 
ferences, cap. "i,. Duo fnnt qua, dicimm , GT* ^S^ 
in Catholics Ba^ttfmum^ Ct- ilUc tantuji retie ac^ 
dpi : Item alia duo dicimns , ejfe apttd Donatio 
flas baptifmitm -^ non aatem re^e accipi : Hurum 
fententiarum tres nojlrdi tantum fn^^t^ ivaam vcro 
Htrique dtcimr.s.'2 That is, ^'fTwo things wc 
''fay, that there is Baptifm in the Catholick 
'^ Church, and that there only it is rightly rccei- 
*^ ved : Alfo two things more we fay, that there 
*' is Baptifm with the Donatifts ^ but that with 
^' thetn it is not rightly received.: of ihefe fen- 
^'tences, three are only ours, and one is cora- 
" mon to us both : 3 ^i^fim held it a lin , ro 
be baptized among Schifmaticks, (tojoynwith 
their Sed ) but not a nullity. 

5^. 12. Hereupon he addreflethhimfelfto evince 
the finfuinefs of their Schifm and unchriflianing 
all the Churches : And indeed he feems to think 
that thoDgh Baptifm w^ among them^ yet hardly 
SulvAtion: And his argument (though I think we 
muft abate for mens paffions and te^i'.pt.itiotjs) i^ , 
worth the Separatifls confideraiion : that baptifm 
that dcftroyeth ( remitteth he calls it ) not fn , is 
?7vt fiving: that which is withortt h-ve renittcth 
not fm : But Schifmdtlcl\i ^ fauh he, have. pot 
love: For, Nnlli Schif/iata facer crit fi frd- 
tcrnoodio ?70?i excdicoj-e-rnnr : Annon cf: i?i Sthif- 
77i^.te odium fraternum^ Q^is hoc dixerit i Cum. 
C-r origo dr pertinacia Schifni^tis nidit ft alia 
nif odi^^m fr*itcrnmr.'\ That is , '* A"^<?r7^ ^i-ould 

( H^ ) 

f ^ make fchifms if they were not blinded by the 
* ' hatred of their brethren : Is there not the ha* 
^^ tred of brethren in Schifm ? What man will fay 
^^ fo ? Whenas both the Rife and the Pertinacie 
^' of Schifm is no other than the hatred of bre- 
thren, 3 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 thi^k^ them fo bad as not to be commn^ 
nicated with, and feparate from them on that ac- 

^.13. The main (ubjed of all the reft of thefe 
,feven Books of A^ifiin is to anfwer the Donatifts 
claim of Cyprian and his Carthage Council as on 
their fide: and to anfwer all the layings of himi 
and the feverat Bifhops of that Council. The 
plain truth is this : In the firft age the Churches 
were fo fober and charitable as not to account 
every erring brother and party Hereticks, but 
fuch as fubverted the EffentiJs of PkdigionrAntl 
feme of thefe corrupted the very form of Baptiim : 
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 , ftretchcd this too 
far and rcbaptized them that fuch Hereiicks bapti- 
zed as did not change the form of Ba^iifm , 
but incorporated men into their corrupt focieties : 
The ponatifl:s took advantage by this example 
and all the Reafons of the Council, to go fo much 
further as to take the CathoUckj for Heretick^s 
cr nnUwfHl Churches ^ and rshaptiz.e thofe that 


they baptized : j4ttfiin anfvvereih all the Councils 
reafons , but praifeth Cyprian as a holy Martyr, 
and no Heretick though miftaken. 

5^. 14. And it is nor enough for me to fay that 
all thele Books of Aufl^n have not a word of what 
he fpeaketh, as controverting Infant -B apt tfm with 
the Donatifisj but moreover, he bringeth the Do- 
natifls agreement with the Catholicks in the point 
of Infant-Baptifm , as a meditim in his arguing 
againft them, Lib.^.c, 23. fhewing bow much 
baptifm availeth, in that Chrijl him/elf xvouldbe 
bapiiz^ed by a fervant , and Infants that cannot 
them fe Ives believe are baptiz,ed " [^ Quod tradi- 
^^tunp tenet univerfitas EccUfidt cum parvuli In- 
^^ f antes baptiz^antur qui nondum pojjnnt corde ere- 
*' dere ad jnftitiam or ore confiteri ad falntem , 
*' qnoA latro pot nit : Qninetiam fie n do cr vagien- 
*'\ do cum ineis my ft er turn celebratnr^ ipfis my flic is 
^^ vocibp!^ objirepunt •, Cr tanr.en Nulliis Chriftia- 
** mts dixerit eos inaniter baptiz^ari. J That is, 
[■ Which all the * ^tjurch holdtth 
when little Infants are bapti- =*■ Including the Do- 
z.ed, who certainly cannot yet natifrs. 
with the heart believe to righ- 
tcoiifnef and with the mouth confef to Salvation : 
And yet no Qoriftian will fay that they are ba- 
ptiz^ed in vain, J 

Thus he arguetH againft the Donatifts , If the 
whole Church hold hifant-Baptifm, and noChri- 
ftiau will fay that it is in vain, though iheythem- 
fv.^lvcs believe not and confefs not, then you flioc'd 
not fay all baptifm is vain becaufe we Catholicks 
;iJn:imifter it, or becaufe it is received in our 

R 4. Churches. 


thurdics. The whole tenor of j4nftirjs charitar 
ble language to the Donatifts , and the fcope of 
this place Iheweth, that he here pleaded Hniver-r 
fat confent , and by [^ all the Church ^ and [] no 
Chriftian~\ includeth the Donatifts. And fo he 
oft argueth againft the Pelagians, who though 
they denied original fin, durft not differ from 
the whole Chriftian world by denying Infantr 
baf'tifm^ but pretended that it was for the convey- 
mce of Graccy though not for remitting fin * 

5^. 15. And A^tJHn next addeth \^Etp qnif- 
cjuam i?i hac re . anthor.itatem divinam qnarai 
( Quanqu^m quod umverfa tenet Ecckfta ^nec 
Conctltts irjftitutumj fed femfer rctcntumefl^ 7ion 
mfi authontate Apofteltca tr adit urn rcQiffme cre^ 
dittir ) tamcn veraciter conjicere foffummy &c. ] 
That hy ^"^ [ And if any one in this cafe ( of In'" 
^^fant'bafttfm) ask^for Divine authority (Though 
^^ that which the nniverfal (or whole) Church 
*' doth hold , and )X>as fiat injiitnted by Councils 
^^ hut was ever held^ is mo ft rightly believed to 
^^be delivered by the Affiles authority) yet 'we 
may truly conjecture ^ dec, (^and fo he paueth to 
che Scripcure argument from Circumci/ion. ) 

5f. 16. Here note, 1. That this v/as no contro- 
ver/te with the Donatiftsy 2. Nor with any other 
Seci^ but held by all the Churchy 3. That he only 
faith as in a Parendielis that [that which all the 
whole Church heldcthy and did ever hold, not in^ 
ftituted by any Comic ily is juflly taken for an 
Apoftclical tradition , ] which I think few Pro- 
teftants or fober Chriftians will deny. Who can 
fmagins that Ttmothy , Titus , Sil^is and alf the 

'^ V/hol? 

whole Church in the Apoilles daies ;ind ever fine?, 
ihpuld hold and agree in any thing as a part of 
(hrifitiin DoBrine or Worfhip, which they had 
not trom the Apoftles ? Had the Apoflles fo lit- 
tle charity as not to endeavour to redifie any of 
iheir errors ? 4. Note here that the Donatifts ne- 
ver denied this ( that 'Infant -haptifm vaas ever 
[jeld by the whole Church to that day ^ and not 
inftitute^dhy any Council: ) And were not ^//y?f>, 
the Donatifls and ^ the whula Church liker to 
know \\\tuniverfality 2sA AntlqHlty cf the thing, 
xhan the Holland or EngUfi Anabaptifts about 
fourteen hundred, years af:er them ? 5. Note that 

jj. 17. Indeed I find feme that before thofe 
tinnes had been ahove Ordinances and againfl ajl 
baftifm^ but none againfi Infatn-haftifm zs un- 
la\vjiiL\\\tidQ\:t jiugiiftine faith eliewhere^thatit 
is eaficr to find Heretickj that deny all baftifm^ 
than any that change iht form of baptizing -^Ao 
fuxe hath the Tradition of univerfal practice de- 
livered down tl)e form and words of baptifm to ' 
us. ' • 

<C. 18. Afterward pag, 230* Ed. 2. Mr. Ban^ 
vers cometl'i to cyiuftm again , and faith that 
Vincent 114^ ViUor did oppofe Audln in the point 
of Infant^baptifm y citing Augufl. li. 3. c. 14. dc 

u4nfw. Not a word of truth : no fuch matter 
in that Chapter or the whole book. 

^. 19. Next he faith '' [" Crefconius did alfa 
'-' ovfbfe Auftiii in the poi^n of Infants baptifm^ and 
5' did maintain that there was no true ba- 

*^ ftifm 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 Augufiirje having written againft 
Tetilian ( their beft ^eaker, having of a Lawyer 
been made a Bifhop ) Crefconim a Donatift Gram- 
marian interpofed for Tetilian , and perfwaded 
jiuftiH to gentleif thoughts of them 5 but fpeaks 
not a word againft Infant-bapcifm. 

^.20. Nay, lib,^* cap.^i, ^////;;2 tells us that 
ihey held it as well as the Catholicks -. faith he, 
\^Circumcifionem certe fr^futii in figtira futiiri 
ha^tifmi (^iorijii ah antiqitis obfervatHm ejfe , wf- 
gare^ Ht arhitror^ non audetis : That is, ^^ Ifup- 
'^ P^fi yo^ dare not deny that CircHmcifion yeas 
^^ ohferved by the ancients in figure of the Chri^ 
^-^ ft tan bapttfm,'} It was a granted thing. 

p. 2 1 . And it was Crefcomm words to Aufiin 
^Vna Reli^ioy eadem Sacr amenta-, nihil in Chri- 
ftiana obfervatione diver fnm : ^ adhitc adverfm 
invicem Uboramm ? Saich Auftin^ Quare ergo re- 
baptiz^od Chrifttannm f "Ego non rel:?aptiz,o ; that 
is, " [] We have all one KeligioUy the fame Sacra- 
^' mentSy there is nothing in onr Chriflian obfer- 
^^ vat ion divers (faith Crefconim ) And yet do 
'* Vpe ftrive againfl each other ? Why then dofi 
*' thou rebapttz^e a Chriftian ( that diifereth not 
^'from them? ) / rebaptiz^e no Chriftian^ (faith 
*' Aitflin, ) So that here was no dtfagreement in 
Sacraments or any Chriftian obfervance. Only 
as Auftin faiih lib* 7. de hapt, r. 2. the quarrel 


Was that the Catholicks were charged to beTV^- 
ditores quia ex traditorihHs, the fuccejfors of fn^ 
tiers: Thus being rvife and right eotu overmncb 
did tear and almoft ruine the Churches. 

^.22. *' He addeth, fag, 223. Ed. 2, the fay- 
'*ing oiOftander^ Fuller ^ BHlltnger^ that the Do-' 
*' nacifts and the Anabaptifts held the fame ojini' 

Anfw. I. In what ? In all things or fome ? 
that is, in the point of Rebaptiz^ing perfons before 
hapttz^ed ( do you own that indeed ? ) But not as 
being againft Infant -baptifm. 2. So, many Pre- 
latifts have called the Puritans Doriatifts - and 
abundance of Proteftants fay that the Paptfis fuc- 
ceed the Dojiatifts in appropriating the Church to 
their party. Do not write next that they fay the 
Papifts are againft Infant -baptifm^ left you make 
your felves Antichrijlian alfo, 

5J. 23. Reader, the Donatifts were fo^rf^^ a 
fjnrty of men and had fo great a number of Bt- 
pops ^ and fo many wrote againft them whofe 
Txorkj are yet extant^ and their caiife had fo ma- 
ny piiblick^ exavnnations , that I leave it to thee 
if thou have the brains of a man, to judge whe- 
ther it they had been againft Infant-baptifm in 
Iei time when Aujlin ftid no Chnftian dented it^ 
neither Opt at w^ nor Anfttn , nor any oiher ot 
their moft copious oppofers would ever have 
charged them with fuch an opinion, nor any ex-* 
aminers , Councils or Hiftorians of their ages ^ 
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 were? And now if JohnBecold will fay 
thiey were of his fide, we muft believe him, 

5^. 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 ofpofed hfant- 
iaftifm^ and pumbreth them alfo with his party. 
When it is a falfliood as much aggravated as thefe 
particulars import, i. They were an honeftand 
numerous people , and fcattered almoft all over 
the Empire •, tolerated till Innocents time in Romey 
and long tolerated and much favoured by niany 
Emperors and Fatriarchs in Confiantinofle , be- 
caufe fas Socrates faith j they agreed in Do- 
drine with the Catholicks : And could they have 
denied Infant- baptifm , and not be acculed of it ? 
2. They had many bitter enemies that would foon 
have catl: 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 timQ , 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 
found) accufe them of any fuch thing: No not 
Epiphanies himfelf, who is moft copious, and not 
very backward to accufe. And fliall either J'ohn 
of Leyden or any of his party now in the end of 
9 the world perfwade us , by flandering fo many 
thoufands of innocent men, that they were guil- 
ty ? And can Mr. Danvers now tell m that they 
held that which for a thouCand years hath \^a 
unknown? ^ ' ^^ ,-. 

^. 25 . He citeth Socrates ^ /. 7. c, 9. that i"^* 
iffffrf;7f banifhed them out of Rome, 

jinfvp. Elfevfhere indeed Socrates and many 
more fay fo : But doth that prove they were againft 
Jnfant'bafttfm ? 

^. 26. Somewhat he would fain fay at the (e- 
tond hand cut o^^lhajpi/jawy Obferv. 20. I hope 
he never read the book : JilbafpinaHs there pur* 
pofely decidcth the Controverfie, what the Nova- 
tian Herefie iv<^ , in feveral Chapters , and ne- 
ver raentioneth any fuch opinion or fHJpicion of 
ihem. The fame doth that great Antiquary Jc- 
fuit Petavtm ♦, ( and what thefe two men knew not 
of the Fathers and Church-hiftory, few in the 
world knew, unlefs I may except Blonde I and 
Vjljer:) In his notes on Epiphanitu of the No- 
vatians , he cntreth on the fame Controverlie as 
jilbajpin^m did, and never mentioneth any fuch 

^. 27. Next he tells us that " Ecbertus and Eme- 
** ricus do ajfert that the Waldenfes , the new ^a* 
** thariy conform to the Dotlrine and manners of the 
*' old^ the Novatians* 

Anf\\\ But did they fay that the Novatiatts 
Vitxtagaijjfl Infant -B^^pttfm} Why did you cite 
neither words, page nor Book? And if they had, 
fhould two railing flanderous Papifts near a thou- 
fand years after Novatian be taken for witneiTes 
that he was againft hifant-baptifm^ againft all the 
Hiftory of the Church that concu-neth them to the 
contrary ? 5^cr^ff^ himfelf (an honell Hiftorian ) 
and Soz.omen alfo are ordinarily by the Papifts ac- 
cufed as Novatians^ becaufe they fpeak iairiy and 


impartially of them as honeft tften : ( and whether 
ihey were or not I know not, but by their own 
words conjcd^ure the contrary ) And they lived 
when and where the Novatians were beft known .; 
And yet tell us not a fy liable of any fuch fuipi- 
cion of them. 

^. 28. Next he faith, Ferln faith that the Wal^^ 
denfes were the off-fpring of the NovMi^nSy dri^ 
ven out of Rome^^o//^ Anno 400. 
. Anfw. Iris very probable : Therefore the PF^/- 
denfei were not againft Infam-baftifm. For it 
is certain the Novatians w^xt not: And the fame 
Ferin faith the Waldenfes were not. But if they 
had, would that prove that the Novatians were , 
fcven hundred or eight hundred years before ? 

5^. 29. Next 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 (honld 
he received into the Catholick Church withoi^t 
rehaftiz^ation though haftiz^ed in Infancy^ ] and 
faith 5 " [^ /f is hut afuppojition at beft that they 
^-^ might he baptizjed in Infancy or they might noty 
*^and can fignifie nothing againft all the former 
*' 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 Chriflian^ and too good for the 
communion of fuch as we , fliould 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 wha; abundance more may eafily be 


produced , if it were of any need ? And how 
(hamefully are thefe plain words of a Conncil 
put off, as if all the Bifhops that lived in the 
fame time and Countrey with them knew not 
what the Donatifis hold, fo well as he and fucU 
as he? 

. ^. 30. His next witnefles are [^ the ancient 
Britains that having received the Chrtfiian do- 
Brine and worjliip from the jipfiles times did 

inttrely keep thereto vchom Auftin the Monk^ 

would have engaged [ efpecially in Chriftening 
children and kfeptng Eafler^ but in afmnch as 
they utterly refufed to be feduced by him there- 
in dec, 

Anfw. This is a witnefs ( being fuch a body 

of mtneffes ) of great importance ('as that of 

the Donatifis and Novatians was ) \i it were 

true : But it's all falfe ftill : And muft our own 

Countrey , yea all our Chriftian Anceftors be 

thus flandered ? Whether Britain received the 

Chriftian dodrine and worfhip from the j^pc* 

files time (^ if he mean in that time ) is very 

doubtful and nothing to our bufinefs : we have 

no fufficient proof of any fuch thing ; The Reafon 

itf the cafe maketh me conjefturc that Chriftia- 

nity was firft brought hither by Soldiers, of the 

Roman Legions ; efpecially fince I read in 'Beda 

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 , Cwhe- 

ther Soldiers that had been in the u4/w» Legions, 

or who elfe, is not known ) and it is certain 


- (25^; 

tba^ they were not agaipfi: the obfemtion of 
Eafter : For both they and the Scots that con- 
curred with them again ft the Romans , did ftri- 
dtly keep it : But all the queftion was of the dne 

^.31. Nor is there the leaft proof or. pro« 
bability that they were againfl Infant jBaptifm, 
I . Becaufe jingnftine 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 againji them^ and a Roman 
x^ealoty and the ancientefl writer after (^afiins 
time, and lived in the fame Country with themy 
and k!iew them , and defer ibeth all the contefis 
with them, yet never layeth any fuch thing to 
their charge ; when yet he mentioneth the Re^ 
baptiz^ing of One by Bijhop John , beeaiife it 
was an ignorant infufficient man -for the Prieft- 
hood, that Baptized him •, and this a rare inftance. 

3. The Scots that about Eafter and other con- 
trarieties to the Romansy 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 Anflins time, and great ftir 
and meetings and difputes were about it, ^s Beda 
tells us at large, before the 5^0/ i were changed : 
And in all that time , there would have been 
opportunity for their forward adverfaries ( efpe-. 
cially Wilfrid^ afterward St. Boniface o(Mentz.y 
who was the Chief ^ to have found out this 
matter of accufation. 5. None of the hiftorians 
near following thofe times do charge any fucji 



thing on them. And yet were the old Brltaih 
againft Infant -Baptifm i 

P* 32. But to puc all out of doubt take the 
words of Aiiftin to thena in his three deaiand^ 
thus by Beda recorded , Eccl. Hifl. li. 2. c. 2. 
[^ Vt Pafchafiio tempore celebretis •, ut (zJ^fini- 
fterinm ha^tiz^andi ^no Deo renafcimiir juxta 
rnortm RontdL fanB^JEcclefi^t^ et jipoftoltc<t Ecclt- 
fi£ compleatis •, nt genti Anglorum una nobifcHm 
pritdicetis verhnm domim'\. Thai: is, ''[^ \,That 
*'^ you celebrate Eafier at the due time -^ 2. That 
*-^ye complc^it the Mini fir y of Baptifm by which 
*' we are born again toGod ^according to theftjljion 
^^(or manner) of the holy Church c/Rome,^?/^ 
^^ the zy^poj%lical Qjitrch* 3. 1\m you Preach 
^^ with US the word of God to the Englijl) Na- 

And what is here 0^ Infant ~B apt if 7i ? How 
proveth he that that was meant by the Roman 
manner or faflfion o^ Baptizing ? Is the fnbe[i 
ofBaptifm, the Manner? when about the Man- 
ner indeed there were then fo many and different 
ceremonies ? Nay when above an hundred years 
before this Anflim dayes , a wifer Anfin had 
.told the Donattfls^ that the whole Church was 
agreed for Infanr-Baotifm , and no one Chrtftian. 
held it to be in vain ? fure this was not fo iono 
after, a Manner peculiar to Rome } But rliu'^ 
the honour of our Anceflors , and the hiftoryof 
the Church , and the fouls of poor ignorant 
Chriftians among u?, muft allbc heinoufiv wronp- 
C(i by the falihoods of rafh prcfuming iguoranc 
men • 

S ^'. 33, 

^. 3 3. And if this had been as true as it is * 
falfe f that the old Britains were againft Infant- 
. Baptifrn ) it wbuld inform thefe men that it is 
not delaying Baptifrn till riper age , that will 
keep it from formality , nor the Church from 
falling into all impiety : For if our eldeft hifto- 
rian C?/^^ may be believed (and who may if 
not he?) his Countrymen me Britains^ were 
TrinceSy Pricfts and Teofle fallen to fuch abho- 
minable wickednefs , murder, drunkennefs, filthy 
lulls, deceit, thefc , cruelty &c. that he takes 
the Princes for wolves and monfters , and the 
Pricfts for no Priefts but traytors , ( excepting 
fome good men among them ) &c. It is neither 
Infant nor Addt Bnpifm that will fecure againft 
the corrupting of Churches, but Grace with either 
hath faved fouls. 

(• 34. He cites himfelf here £<?>', quoting Me- 
day Polychron.znd others. And what fay they ? 
[] Baftiz.ing after the manner of Rome 3 And 
what's that to his queftion ? But he tells you that 
Fabian faith |^ that yoit give Chrifiendom to 
children r\ 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 falfificacion of a fabler about 
nine hundred years after , difprove the yet-vifi- 
hie words of the eldefl records , which undertake 
to give you not only ih^ fenfe but the very 
terms } 

5fo 35. He proceedeth to prove by argHment 


that the Britain s were ag^iafi- Infant Ba- 

I. Bccanfe they received the Scriptures ^ the 
Chrifttan Faith^ Doctrine and Difcipline fro:n 
the u4poftles and AiiaEick Churches^ who had 
no fuch thing m the BapttT^ing of Infants among 
them / 

Anfw. No fuch thing in the AfiaticVs Chur- 
ches ? He might as welj fay, There is now no 
fuch thing in England, But perhaps hee'l fay 
that he meaneth in the Apoflles time or foon 
after : Of which you have tryed pare of his 
ftrength. But when he hath fludied well Bifliop 
Vfljers Vrimordia who faith all that is to be faid 
for our Antiquity, he will find no proof that we 
had our Religion from the Apollles or any in 
their time. 

^. 36. But ask the man whether Afia it felf 
long before the dayes oi Gregory had not Infant- 
Baptifm ? And whether they received not the 
cScriptures and Religion as certainly from the 
Afiatick^ Churches, and fo from the Apoftles , 
as the Britaifls 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 \ Becanfe they 
fo fnlly priz^ed and faithfully adhered to the Scri- 
ptnre^ &C.] 

Afifw, What will not partiality fay ? i.You 

mull: believe him that Scripture is againjv ///- 

fint'Baptifm : And then the coicrovirrfie h a: 

an end. 2. You niufi: helnve him ho.v ciofc^ly' 

S 2 thev 

( ^6o ) 

ftiey adhered to Scripture, if you can, when you 
have read Cydda^s ( who is tranllated into £n- 
glifh^ their neighbour^ one Dfthem^ the only cer-r 
tain hiftorian that knew them, who defcribeih 
them as I have laid, as moft flagitious heinous 
wicked men. Though I hope they amended after 
Gilda^ dayes ,yet that {hewed you how they held 
to Apoftolick difcipline or Scripture. The 
book is fo very fmall •, it is but equal to intrcac 
him to read it before he ufe 

^ Itfeenisby fome this argument again *. 3. You 
orations out of it af- ^^^ ^,/-,.^, ^,^, ^hat kll that 
ter that he hath read •• , ji c * 

it, and yet fpeaks P^^^^Le and adhere to Sen- 
thus! ■ pture are againft Infant-Ba^ 

ptffn;. Read and try whe- 
ther there be not greater evidence that Cypriariy 
jithafioftii^^ NA;Lianz.€ne^ (^hryfofiomey AngnftinCy 
the iEgyptian Monks, and other fuch ftn<ft per- 
fons in thofe ages, at leafl the Novaitians , and 
I>^;;^r(/?^ (in his own judgement) prized the 
Scripture than the Britains i And doth it fol- 
low (in defpitc of their own profeflions and pra- 
difes ) that all thcfe and the reft fucli.were againfi 
hifant'^Bapifm <' 

^.38. Were not this as good an argument ? 
Luther^ CalviriyZmngliHiy Bradford^Hoo^er -^ all 
the Martyrs in Queen Maria dayes, &c. prized 
the Scriptures : Ergo they were all againft In- 
fant. Baptifm. Yea even IrJe fen dent i and Fref- 
hytevidns and all that prize and cleave to them 
now in England ? 

<o 39. 3. He addech ["^^'i5fr.'?//p they did fa 
^"uehernemly rejt^ him^rie Tr adit ions in the wor-' 

■ ■ -- "/"p 


^^flilp of God • efpec tally all Romijlj Rites and 
'* Ceremonies j this as before undeniably appear- 
** ing to come from Roraes ordination and ImpO" 

Anfw> I. £Undeniably]\s ^ word ihzt jliameth 
you to every inteiligcnc Reader that underftand- 
eth Church hiftory. Will you not confefs your 
felf that Cyprian and that Carthage Council, 
Naz^ianz^ency Bafil,] AHgnfiine &: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 z-ehemently 
rejeCied humane 'Traditions in the vporflnp of God ? 
Did they not ufe the Aftatick Ceremonies f Did 
they not precifely obferve Eafier , and place Re- 
ligion in keeping it on their own dayes ? Had 
they not Btjlwps^ 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 ? 

3. And were not the Scots then of their mind, 
and as much agiinft Traditions as they ? and 
more againft vi e and formality in afid after 
Colmans and Coliimbanti^ dayes ? And are not 
the Indepetidents more againft Traditions now 
than the Britains were ? And are they therefore 
Anahaptifls f 

^. 40. He addeth [] 4. " Bccaitfe Conftantine 
^' the Great (the fon ^/Conftancc and the famotts 
* ' Helena , both eminent Chrifiians ) in the yci r 
'' 305. iv^ not Baptiz^ed till he vqm aged as be^ 
^^fore^ AcleAr proof that theChriJltMS /;; Bri- 

S 3 *'tain 

''tain*> thofe daycs did not 'Baptlz.e theii' chiU 

u4^f\v. Some will laugh at thefe things, but 
I had*ra:her mourn for the poor peoples fnares. 
T. It's talfe that Constance was a Chriflian , at 
leafl: when Confiamine was youiig. No rcgarda- 
ble hiflory miketh him any better than a mode- 
rate fa'vourer of the Cbriftians. 2. It is not 
-proveable that Helena was one in Confiantines 
Infancy. 3 . There is no probability that he was 
-born in EngUndy as many Learned men have: 
proved. 4. It is certain he was educated and 
lived in oiher Lands. 5. He was no Chrifti- 
an in his youth himfelf, nor profeiTed it till after 
he wa> Empercr : The fign of a Crofs appear- 
ing in the skies and his victory thereupon is 
faid to be the means. 6. He lived long at 
Ri>me^ and Conftantinofle, and elfewhere before 
he was Baptized. And was that a certain froof 
that none of thofe Gountreys were for hifant* 
Baptifm, no nor for Bapcidn at Convcrfion nei- 
ther, because Canftamine 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 Cm being pardoned at Baptifm', 
they mud live much ilridlier af:er they were 
Baptized, and were in much morfe dinger by 
their fin , and thertfore would not be Baptized 
tiJl old , as Co:^flai'itinc when he was like rodie^ 
And now where is this mans ckar proof that the 
BritM72s were A-^^haftijls ? 

^. 41. $,Sx\ihht[^' Becafife of the Correfport^ 
^' dency and unity that were between the French 
" p}rtfiians after called the Waldenfes, and them 
" • viz. Germanus and Lupus. ^ 

Anfxv, What abundance of untruths will one 
mans head hold •' i. Fe would make the igno- 
rant believe that the French Churches that fent 
over Germa?jus and Lnpm were fuch as after 
were called Waldenfes: When yet before he ci- 
teth P^n>z laying tliat the Waldenfes w^rc the off- 
fpring oftheiVoz'^/^/?jbani'hedfrom^<?;;?f. Beda 
Hifl. EccL Itb, I. c, 17, 18, 19, 20,21. tells 
us brieriy that the Br it aim being infeded with 
Pelagian ifm by A^ricoU the fon of Severian^ 
a Velagian Bifhop , fent to France for help, as 
being unable themfelves to difpute the cafe. The 
Bifliops of France in a great Synod agreed to 
fend German in Bilhop of Qy^ltijfwdore , and Ln- 
piij Bilhop of Trecajfe ( brother to Vincentim 
Lerinenfs, ) Projper in his Chronicle tells us 
that Gerwaniis was fent by Pope Cclefline by the 
inftigation of Valladim a Deacon : Vfjcr reciteth 
and rejedeth not Baroniits his conciliation, that 
it was done by the Pope and FrerKh Bifhops, 
Germanus and Litpm come over, and work mi^ 
racles by the way, and here Germanus carried 
a box with him of the Reliques of all the Apo- 
ftles and many Martyrs ( Bedac.i^,) This he 
layeth to the eyes of a blind maid and curefl 
her fuddediy, which confounded the Pelagians: 
Thefe Reliques he buryed in St. j4lbanes Sepul- 
chre •, And inftead of them took with him fome 
of the dud where Sr. Albanes bloo^ had been fhed , 
S 4 which 

which remained red till then. And after other mi- 
racles and a vidory he returned with a pro- 
fperous navigation, faith Beda c, 20. by his own 
Merits and Su Aihanesm^xct?i\ox\, Afterwards 
he returned again in a fecond neeeflity with 5tf- 
njerm^zn^ delivered the Britains irom Pelagi- 
anifn[i, who yet lived in fuch wickcdnefs as Be* 
da after 6*^7^^ defcribeth. 

Here let the Reader note againft Mr. JD^;/- 
vers dream, i. That this was done in 429^ 
And if Mr. D. could prove indeed that all the 
Eilhops of France tli^n were WaldenfcSy or of 
the judgement fo called fo long after, he would 
do us Knights fervice againft the Papifts 
in the queftion of the -perpetual visibility of the 
Church. But if I cite yiv.Danvers for it, I doubt 
they will laugh at me , and make no more of 
his authority than I do of the Dntch Jinabaftljts 
Marty rology. 

, 2. Note that Frcfper faith it was the Pop€ 
that fent Germ arms. 

3. Note that he was fent by the Bi (hops of 
France , who ihen did little differ from RomCy 
but fubmitted to his Primacy, (and Patriarchate ) 
in the Empire , thqugh referving their liberties • 
Read the Epiftles of Leo i. againft Hillary 
ylrcUt. and ail that ftory, and you will fee how 
much the Pope ufurped there betimes. 

^.. Pope Celcfiine was the great maintainer 
of <>y(fH^HftrAe againft PelagitiSy and fo the apter 
todothi--'. / 

5. . The Pope had before this fent PalU- 
dins lO the Britai'/js who received him : And 


therefore they were then on fomc fair terms with 

6. Germmus and Ln^Hi were Bifhops, and 
they that fent hina •, and fo Antichriftian to fomc 

7. Germaniu fure was not ofMr.DV. Church, 
that ufed ReHques fo ftrangely for working mi- 
racles ? Was this an Anahaftift ? 

8* This was all done after Atignfline had 
written, that no Chrifiian thought Infant-B^' 
pifm vain : ( or about that time. ) And yet 
were all the Britaim then of another mind ? 

9. The Bifhops of France ("with Pope C^- 
lejiine) took part with AHgnflrne againft Tela- 
gitiiy and fent Lftpfi^ with Germantu to do that 
work : And yet were all thcfe Bifhops againft 
Augtifline^ about Infant-Baptifm, which he faith 
ali the Chnrch Vniverfal agreed in ? 

10. Laftly , the Britains were infefted with Pe- 

lagianifm -, Felagim (" called tJMorgan^ being a 

Britain ( and Vfl}er faith, fome fay born the fame 

day with Anguflhie ) and (^elefiius a Scot or 

Jri^i man •, And the Pelagians themfelves 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 ^rir^/;?^ who were 

fome oiPelagim's mind, and fome o^ AuguflineSf 

were yet againft both in point of Infant-Ba- 

ptifm ? Yea and not a word faid of this by any 

writer , when their Pclagianifm made fo great a 

ftir / Yet this m;in gathereth that the Churches 



0^ France were Anaha:ptifts ( contrary: to all 
hiftory j becaufe the WMertfes 600 years after 
were Anabaftifls (which is alio faife:)And the Bri- ' 
tains were Anaba^tifts , becaufe the Churches of 
France Tent two Learned men to diipute againft 
Pelagianifoi in England , fwhen tne unlearned 
Britains could not do it). Reader, will not 
this kind of arguing make thee an Anahaftifl ? 
or elfe make tbee pitty the Muced 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 falfhoods to cheat mankind , and the 
ignorant know not but it may all be true, ittem- 
pceth men to think that there mull be fome 
AHthoriz^ed men whom the Ignorant mu^ believe 
before fnch feditcerSy or elfe confufion and falf- 
lu5od will take place of truth, and the people 
will .be as children tojfed up and down^ and car- 
ry ed to and fro with every wind of do^rine. 
And indeed a concordant Miniftry is fo to be 
preferred , though it infer not 3 Roraan iefaili- 

. ^, 42. 6. His laft proof that the Britains 
were " againfl Infant Baptifm, is becaufe Augu- 
f^ftine the <\y^onkwas hirr^felf fo raw and igno- 
*' rant in the rite ^ as to ask^ , How long the 
^^ Baptiz,ing of a child might be deferred^ there 
*' being no danger of deaths ~} 

Anfw, I grow afhamed that I have medle^ 
with fuch a Colledor : A baculo ad angulum^ 
Doth it not rartier imply ttat there was no contro- 


(267 ) 
verfie between him and the Britain about In* 
fant-Baptifm, feeing he never mentioned any fuch 

^. -43. His next witnefks againft Infant-Bu- 
ftifm are in the fourth Century , called by him 
*' DadQes , S^ha^ , j^dnlphpn , and Simonps vcho 
*'(faiLh he in his catalogue ) opfofe it. And 
*' p. 229. he faith to prove it, but that f/?^^ were 
^^ charged to have an ill opinion of the Sacrament 
*''^of the Altar and of Infants Baptifw. And he 
*' cireth Htftor. Tripartita h\ 7. c. 1 1. f and fome 
''fellow an hundred years ago.) 

Anfn\ And have we here any honefter dea- 
ling than before ? Read and judge. That which 
the Tripartite Hiftory cited by him faith is this, 
that [^ There was then a Sed called Meffalians 
or Eiichetcs (^ known in the Catalogues of Here- 
ticks ) and called The Praying Hereticks ) who 
expedted the operation of Tome Devil think- 
ing him to be the Spirit of God , refufing to 
work and giving themfelves to lie and ileep to 
exped Revelations ^ Indeed their opinion was that 
Prayer vcas all, and Baptifm and the Lords Sitp^ 
per were nothing , dicentes Divinum cibum nihil 
nee prodeffe nee Udcre ^ that the Sacred or Sacra^ 
mental food^ did neither profit ncr hnrt : Thefe 
ttKn were led by one Dadoes^ Sabbos^ Adelphi- 
fiiy Herman and Simeon : And Adelphtu when 
old ( for they hid their opinion ) bewrayed his 
error in a fpeech to Flavian of ^ntioch-^ that 
Baptifm ' doth the Baptiz.ed perfon no good, but 
prayer enly cxpelUth the Davil. And i» Thefe 
men were no more againft Infant -Baptifm than 


again ft the adults Bap if w. For they wefe ^fe-^/ip 
all Ordinances f^cve Fra/ere 2. They wer'(t1|| 
againft neither as Hnlawfnl , 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, and all Infidels and 
Pagans were againft all Baptifra as well as they : 
And doth any of this prove that any one Chri- 
Itian was againft Infant Baptifm moi;e thart 
adult? V ' 

d. 44, ^^ Next he tells you that Fauflus J^e^ 
^^ gienfis faith that Perjonal and aliual deprevpos 
** re qui fit e in every one that wa^ to be Baptiz^ed 
( Fincertt and Crefconim 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 
Dutch Anabaptifi, 

Anfw. Pveader, thou feeft ftill how thou art 
ufed. Fan ft as Rhegienfis is a' known Author ; 
his works are common ^ He is commonly taken 
for a Semipelagian^ and he hath a book to' prove 
thaty^«/j are ^o^/>j, which Clandiantu JMammertm 
hath anfwered. But I never read one fyllable in 
him^ nor in any other that ever wrote of him or 
againft him, that fhould make one doubt whether 
he was for Infant -b apt tfm. Could he be in fuck 
a ftation as he was, and have fo many writings, 
and fo many adverfaries , and yet hold fuch aa 
©pinion and never be fufpeded? Do the Anaba- 
piifts no better own their canfiu ? But the words 
he alledgeth are but fuch as he citeth of my own ; 
If truly cited, no doubt fpoken only of the adnlt^ 


and of what the Infants do by them. But who 
can anfvver 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 race > 

^. 45. The next is ^' [ Albanus a zealous god- 
*' iy Minifter in the lixth Century was put to ' 
** death for baptizing Believers , though baptized 
[^ in Infancy or by Heretick?.] 

^Afjfw. Still all alike, i. Baronim is cited ^^^ 
413. n. 6, when in my Book there is not a fylla- 
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 Separadft^ now 
fliould tell all Eng^Lmd , [ Ton are all out of 
the tyue Church which is only with m^ and if 
yoti come uot to pu and he not baptiz,ed in our 
Churches^ you have no true bapnfrn nor can be fa^ 
ved. 1 And for fuch rebaptizing many were 
troubled. And is this a wimefs againft Infant- 
baptifm? Shall we not have o;/f rrw^ ivor^ i' 

5f. 46. His tale of Swermers he refers us for 
to ^JHerning and Rulicius , or Lulicim and 
Glmavu , men that I know nor fo well as hira- 
felf, and I had rather he had referred me to him- 
felf or Mr. Tombes. 

^\ 4^. He addeth p. 25 1 . '^ [] Nicephorus 1, 17. 
^^f. 9. f^ith that [[ In the year 550. one Peter ^z- 
^^ fliop of Apamen and Zoroarus a Monk^ in Syria 
*' did maintain and defend the point of dipping^ 
*' rebaptiz^ation or weder-dipping* 

jinfw. Did Nicephorns write in Dutch ? i. Is 
dipping any thing to the cafe of Infants ? 2. Are 
you really for Rebaptiz.ing •, and are you juftify- 



ing it ? If not, why ciie you inftances of Rebaptu 
Zers ? Too many befides the Donatifts rebaptiied 
others to engage them to their Sed as the only 
Church. 3 . Do you know the Hiftory of the 

Council of Cakedon and Dlofcoms^ and the Ne- 
ftorians ? Reader, beUeve not this man any fur- 
ther than fenfe or great evidence conftraineth 
thee : That which Ntcefhorus there faith is this, 
[[Severus of Antioch, and Peter c/Apamea, and 
Zooras a .Monkey were found to curfe the Conn^ 
cil of Cakedon, and to hold but one nature in 
Chrifi ^ fraterea anahaftifmos aliaque nefanda, 
obfc ocHit at is -^lena facinor averager Cy that is, [] and 
alfo to have fraUi fed Rebaftiz^tngs^ and other viU 
lanies full of fitch ohfcenity that is not to be na- 
med, J If he rejoyce in thefe Witnefies, is here a 
word of Infant ^baft if m f When (hall I come to 
a fentence that is true ? 

^.48. The next is [^ Adrian Bifiop of Co^ 
rinth in the feventh (fentHry did pibiickly of^ 
■pofe Infant -B apt if m , infomuch as he vpould nei- 
ther Baptiz,e them hiwfelf ^ nor fuffcr them to- 
be Bapttz^ed by others , bnt wholly denyed Ba^ 
ptifm to them : Wherefore he was accufcd by Gre- 
gory Mag. 3ifwp of Rome , to John Bffl^op of 
LarifTa, oi appears by Gregories LetteMto the 
faid John, in which arnon^ otl^rs he complains 
again fi the faid Adrian that he tumid away 
children from B^^ptifm and let them die with- 
out it J for which they proceeded again fi him 
as a great tranfgrcjfor and bUfphefner,'^ 

A'-if-x, Not one true Senrtnce in all this t 
I. It's lalfe that Adrian pkblickly cpnofed In- 



jAnt-Baptifm. 2. It's falfe that he was accnfed 
for it by Gregory , or that Gregory laid any fuch 
thing to his ch^irge : 3. Or that they fo pro- 
ceeded ^ if my books be true. Reader, the cafe 
in Grcgories Epiftles here cited is this. Adri- 
an was accufed malevolently of many things 
( not by Gregory ) but to Gregory : Among 
others , that through hfm [owe Infants hr,d dy- 
ed without Baptifm, Gregory writeth to John 
Bi/l)op of Lartjfa on his behalf ^ and faith that 
[^ no one of the witncffes could fay that he knew 
any fuch thing by him, but that they were tf^ld 
fo by the mothers of fojKe children^ wh&fe f/- r- 
bands had fr their faults been removed ( iv-.n^ 
the Church) fed nee in baptiz^atos eos morti': 
icmpus prof ejfi flint occttpajfe y Jkut accufitortrr.i 
continebat invidiofa p^gg^flio^ cum in Dcme- 
triade Givitate baptiz^atos eos ejfe co?:fiiterit j that 
is, \^Nor did (the Wttnejfes ) fay^ that they di- 
ed Hnbaptiz.ed y a.s the envious faggeflion of the 
accufers contained ^ for it is manifefi that they 
were bapttz^ed in the City Deraetrias. ] 

I . Is here a word that he was again fl Infant- 
baptifm ? 2, CouldaBifhop of fo great a City 
and Diocefs have been againft Infant-baptifm and 
none to be able to prove ir, even in envioi^ ac- 
cufations ? Would not every week deled: it ? 
_?. Would Great Gregory h2iVt thus jufiified him, 
if he hsd but fufpeded fuch a thing, above a hun- 
dred years after Auflin faid no one Chriftian 
thought Infa-nt'baptifm vain ? Was this great 
Pope an Anabaptift ? 4. Is it not plain by all this, 
dut it WJ^but iht particular children of fomer.v- 

c urn- 


communicate mens wives, who malicioufly accufe 
fiim ( not for being againft Infftnt-bapifm ^ no 
nor againft their Infants haftifm ; but ) for delay^ 
ing it ? It is like, to difference them fronri the 
children of Church-members : And yet that they 
were afterward baptized. See here what a wit- 
ncfs he hath brought ? 

^, 49. '' The next in Ris Catalogue is, [[ z/^gy- 
^^ ftian Divines "] but after in his book before it 
^* he tells you of one Berinius an eminent learned 
^^man that frofeffed inftmUion to he nee e (far y be^ 
^^ fore haptifm, and that without it baftifm ought 
*' not to be adminiftred to high or low 2 ^^^ ci- 
*neh 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 HildiUy 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 
fyllablc in this ftory that Infant-baptifm is concern- 
ed in ? No nor a word of one Berinm an eminent 
learned man that frofejfed as he faith , though 
it be nothing to the purpofe: Nor was thebufinefs 
done as he faith in Lower Saxony but in the Ifle 
of Wight • fo little is there that hath the leaft kin 
to truth in this lamentable Reporter. 

5I. 50. His Teftimony of Egyptian Divines 
he citeth two lare Papifts for ( inftead of juft 
proof ^ who neither of them ever dreamed that 
thofe ^Egyptians were againft Infan#Baptifm. 


That the adult (hould be Cateehifed and intru- 
ded before Baptifnfi, all the Chriftian world 
agreed : That there were fome Monafteries of the 
-Egyptian Monks that would not hold communi- 
on with the Church of Rome , is known -, and 
what a turn was made among many of the Cler- 
gy after the Council of Chaicedon on Diofcorpu 
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 Fhlgentim was di/Twaded from go- 
ing to the ftrid: Hereraites and Monafticks near 
^gyft 5 becaufe they were feparaied from the 
Roman Communion, as you may fee in Fnlgen^ 
tint's life. But what is all this to Infant-bapdfm? 

^.51. Next he tells us that in the ninth Cen- 
tury HincmarHS LaHdnnenf, was againft Infant- 
baptifm, and recitech many words of Hificmarm 
jRhenenps to him. 

Ar?fw. The book is Bih. Pat, SnffL To, 2. 
containing 55. Chapters: And if I mull read eve- 
ry word of fuch long books to try his Citations, I 
mud fpend many momhs to be able to tell you 
that a man told you fo many untruths: All that 
I can find by a curfory perufal is but this, aboi:c 
a Village in the other Pari ii , whom it fhould 
pay Tythes to , [^ hahth^u imhrcviatos ^not Infan- 
tes fine b apt If mate ^ ^ qmt homines fine Cemm^ 
nione inde obierunt^ cjHiC mihi in pptbiicnm objicere 
nolleSy ne pofic4 tibi improper arem ^ at ft alia ma- 
U de me fcires , ilia etiam de me dtceres, ~\ 
Reader , is here a fyllable againft Infant-ba- 
ptiftn ? Who was the accufer here ? What is in 

T the 

ih^ 2LCCuhnon hut 2iS in Adrians to Gre^. Vfhith 
plainly proveth the contrary, that he was for In- 
fanr-baptirm and ordinarily ufed it, when the in- 
timation was but that he had let fome Infants die 
without baptifm and fome men without Communi- 
cn ? 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 ? 

^.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 loath fom a bu- 
iinefs that is fet before us ; firter to be wept over 
than anfwered at large. I fliall yet take notice. 
of what he faith of the WalJenfes , and to that 
further fay, i.That I have eifewhere vindicated 
thciii ai:;eady from this flander. 2. That fo do many 
of their bitter adverfaries, in laying no fuch thing-. 
to their charge. Among whom to what is faid 
eifewhere, I add but the Teftirnony o'i Naucle*^ 
rus a PopiQi bitter enemy to them, who FoL 2. ' 
■part 2, pag, 265. reciteth their Dodrine as being.i 
agreeable with the body of Dodrioe held in the ■ 
Reformed Churches , never mentioning any de- 
nial of Infant-bapcifm, but only that they affirm- 
ed. Water to be fufficient without Oyl. 



AN ,D now as to our Te ft monies for the Com- 
mon pradice of Infant-baptifm from the • 
daies of the Apoftles, I will not abufe the Rea- 
der by reciting again the teftiraonUs long ago re- 
cited. Let him but confider what I have there 
faid out cf Jffftin , IrenaHs^ Origen^ Tertulliariy 
Cyfrian^ Naz.ianz.e?te^ tiyinguflin and others, and 
I leave the matter to his Judgement. 

5^. 5 3 , And further where they feign Naxjan- 
zen to be indifferent I will add but thefe words 
out of his Orat, 40. 'vol. i. p. 648. £^. Morel, 

''[Hafl thou an Infant? Let not naughtinefs fur- 

*' prize him firft, \^ Let him be fanAified from his 

"Infancy; Let him be confccrated to the fpirit 

^' from his Infancie ; But doft thou fear the fcal 

*' becaufe of the weaknefs of his nature ? How 

" weak a minded mother art thou , and of how 

" little faith ? But Hamjah ^ &:c. Thou huft no 

*' need of Amulets and Inchant- 

" mcnts * with which the wick- , "" '^^']^''} '^'^^ J^^?; 
ic t I • 1 thcns uicd to Cnil- 

ed one creepeth mto the ^j.^„^ 

" minds of vain men , fteal- 

"ing to himfelf the veneration doe to God: 

^' Give him the Trinity, that great and excellent 

" [^ Amulet. ] 

That all this is fpoken of Baptifm is paft all 

doubt : Yet Naz.ianz.en in fome cafes admitteth 

of delay till three years old: But tpok baptifm 

to be fo necefTary for Infants , that he ihouohc 

that if any though by furprize and not the Pa- 

T 2 ^ rents 

rents contempt fhould die unbaptized, they fhould 
not goe to Heaven ( or hz Rewarded ) though 
he thought they fhould not go to Hell or be pu- 
nifhed :, lb. Orat. 40. His opinion therefore tor 
delay three years in cafe of fafety confided with 
too much apprehenfion of its necefli[y even to In- 

<^ . 54, When I read his language of holy 
Cyprian^ I confefs the apparition of fo frightful a 
fpirir, doth affright me from his dodrine. Firfiy 
The man (, with greater audacioufnefs than the 
Papids ufe the Fathers, ) doth tirft attempt againfl: 
all confcnt of antiquity, and without any proof , 
to queflion the truth of the fentence of Cyprian 
and the Carth.^ge Council to Fidm, 

Secondly^ AwA what could he fay more to be- 
tray the Pfotvftanr Caufe to the Papifts, than as 
after \^ Either Cyprian Z;^.^ been vilely Raffned ^ 
or that he hirrifdf was a notable Fathr for Anti^ 
chrifl , and that in him the ryjy fiery of iniquity 
did very firongly ^vcrk* 3 

The man it feems had never read Jeremy Ste'^ 
phens hisj^ Edition of Cyprian de unit, EvcL and 
how ihofe few words of Peter and the Chare hoi 
Rome were added by Corrupters (though he is 
wiiling to believe in the general that his writings 
were corrupred ) But wc have certain Copies at. 
lea ft of fo much of them , as confute his Caufe. 
I remember our great Antiquary Bifhop Vfier 
told me that it was Tertnllian and Cyprianih^th^ 
took for the Chief Records of Church Antiquities, 
next a few' fm a 11 things which give little informa- 
tion of matters of fad. And fome of the things 


tbat this man fo ftarteth at, Cyprian held , and^s 
Epifhnniiis faith , ^11 the Chrtflian Chnrches : 
And mud he then be a F^cior for Antichnft ? 
Who then is this ^/.£« a Fador for ? Mark, Rea- 
der, whether it be any wonder if I be Momina" 
hie and Antichrtftian to him, when Cypriii?i and 
the fixty fix Bifhops with him muft come under 
f hypoiheticaily J that fui'picion. i. That Q//:?-/- 
oii who was To holy and wife a man ^ 2. That 
lived before Antichrifl: was born • 3. That died a 
Martyr for Chriil: •, 4. Who is fo great a part 
of the pure antiquity ^ that if youcaft himawav, 
v/hat will the reft be for a great time? 5. That 
Cyprian who is called by fome the firft Anaba- 
ptift, becaufe he\vas for rebaptizing thofe bapti- 
zed by Hereticks ; 6. That C)'/?r//j^/ who fo (lifly 
oppofed the Bifhop oi Rojre (though himfelf was 
in the error ^ ) 7. That Cyprian whom the Do- 
natift$ boafted of as their p^edecefTor in rebapti- 
zing, and Aitfirn was put to anfwer ( though with 
his honour •, ) S.That Cyprian who lived before anv 
Chriftian 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- 
tirhriftians fay they, as holy ^3?W*?« and ih.^ pri- 
mitive Churches were, we wili prefer it beiorc 
the Anabaptifts Chrifcianity ?• 

5>. 55. And \{C\uriim\V2.^. Antichri/lian, where- 
then was the Church of Chrift ? ic will be hard 
to anfwer Papift or Seeker about its vilibility, or 
lofidtl about its reality : And what a King do 
' , T 5 they 


they make Chrifttbat make him to have no King- 
dom , that they can prove to have been exi- 
gent — « 

^. 56. We will cafily gnnt him that Cyprian 
de iimt, .EccI, is abufed by the Papifts, and the 
very words cbrull in are proved lo to be by ma- 
ny Copies that have :hera noi : Yea, Jeremy Ste^ 
fii'/is Taih that there are eight Copies in Eng- 
land which omit twenty three of the Epiftles 
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 Fidi46 about 

^. 57. And whereas he faith that Cyprian ur- 
ged not Tradition^ I anfwer, there was no caufe : 
For the qutRion- wzs not vpheiker Infants jJw^ld he 
baptiz,ed-^ much lefs whether they were to he dedica" 
ted in Covetiant to God, and to be (^lourch-menchers ^ 
but only whether they jlioM he haptiz,ed hefor^ 
the eighth day: For Fidm 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 ti^me of their puriHcation ; 
which Cyprian and the fixty iix Bilhops confu- 
ted, and (hewed that Gods mercy accepterfi ihem 
from the beginning without refped to legal days. 
And what ufe was here for a plea from Traditi^ 
on for Infant'haptifioi^ v/hich was not denied ? 

5^.58. And it feemsto me to be a great evi- 
dence that the Tradition of the Church was then 
for' it, in that this Council of Bifliops ("before 
true Popery was born ) To unanimoully deter- 
mine of the day or tims^ and not one of them , 
■> ' '~ ' * '■ m 

no nor Pidw himfelf that raifcd the doubt , did 
fo much as raife any fcruple or queftion about 
Infant-baptifm it felf at aU : which i'ure they 
would have done on fuch an occafion if any or 
many Chriftians, or any Churches bad denied it. 
No wonder therefore if Angnfttn lo lon^ after 
fay that no Chnftian t^iks^f^ t^ ^o he in vain ? 

t5. 59. Yet again I will confefs, that the words 
of Terttillian and Naz.ianz.en , fhew that it was 
long before all were agreed of the very timey or 
of the necelfny of baptizing Infants before any 
ufe cf Reafon , in cafe they were like to live to 
maturity : For I am perfwaded that the Apcflles 
and firft Minifters were fo taken up with the 
Converting of Infidels ( Jews and Gentiles) thar 
the cafe of Infant-baptifm was (0 poftponed und 
taken but as an Appendix to the baptifm of the 
adult, as that it was thought lefs needful to give it a 
particular exprefs mention in the Records and Hi- 
ftoryofthe Church. The Churches made no que- 
ftion of Infants Chinch-n^embcrfjip, as being nn- 
doiibtedly in the promife^ and devoted to God hy all 
faithful parents : And they took not baptifm at 
firH:, for their fir f: Covenanting o^c Confcnt^ but 
for the folemniz^ation of it ; and fo not for In^ 
fants firft real fate of relation to Qjrifi and righr 
to life ( which was before itj as it was to be/ic' 
vers before baptifm-^ ) but for the folemn invefti' 
titre in thofe rights : And fo Greg, Nazjan, 
Or,4o. giveth this brief definition of hapcifm , 
that ic is nothing clfc but a Covenant madercith 
God for a new and purer kind of life : And here- 
upon many who thought Infants Ojurch-members 

T4 (\'iz.) 


Yvifiblej and fafi upon their Parents Covenant^ 
confent , thought that the time of folemniz^atton 
was fo far left to prudence as that ( as the Ifra- 
elites did Circumcilion in the wildernefsj it might 
be delayed a few years by fuch Parents asdefired 
it, till children could fomewhat anfwer for them- 

5^. 60. Yet after my review of this controverfie 
upon their urgencie , I find no proof brought by 
any of thefe inen , chat ever one Church m the 
world was without Infant-members^ (that had In- 
fants, ) nor one prfon in the Church againft In- 
fant Church-memlferfiip and haftifmy from Chrifts 
days till the \Valdenfes f about eleven hundred 
or a thoufand years ) except that TertMan^ who 
took them for Innocent and therefore Church- 
members J did in fome cafe advife the delay ; I fay, 
I find not one Chriftian or Heretick againft it : 
(unlefs you will impute it to them that were 
(^gainji allbaftifm^ which Infidels alio are. ) And 
though I verily believe that the Waldenfes were 
not againft Irifant-baptifm, nor is there full proof 
that any in their time were, yet becaufe I am loth 
to judge the Papifts utrerly ijnpudent lyars , I 
think it mofl: probable that in the WaLdenfes days 
and Country y there was a fort of odious Hereticks, 
that denied Infant-baptifm, and the Refurredion, 
and held community of Wives and other abomi- 
nations reported all together by their oppofers in 
thofe times. 

,C H A P. 

f 28^ ) 

• CHAP. V. 

Mr. DanversV great Calumnie of my [elf refuted. 

^. I. TV yfR* ^' P3g« I34« E^- I. faith thus 
iVi [ Tet ts not tJlir, Baxter ^fhawed to 
fix fftch an MominMe jlander upon i-)e Baptjfis 
of thts our age of baptiz^ing naked: ( rJ:tcb it 
fcems Vi'os fo Long the real praSitce of the padoba- 
ptifls ) and about rvhich he jpends three whole pa- 
ges to aggravate the heynoufnef of their ciijiom 
(which he ts pleafcd to father on them, ) And 
though I am perf waded he cannot but be cenvtn^ 
ccd that the thing is mofi not or ion fy falfe , a,:d 
brought forth by him rather out of prejndice 
( not to fay malice) rather than any proof or good 
tefiimony he cuer received thereof - yet have I 
never heard that he hath done himfelf , his injii^ 
red neighbours and the abufed world that right as 
to own his great weakjiefi and fnfid jhortfiefi 
therein^ in any of the many Editions of thatptece^ 
which J humbly conceive as well defcrved a re- 
cantation as fame other things he has judged wor^ 
thy thereof. ] 

^* 2. j4rfw. To live and die impcnicently in fo 
unprofitable a fin f and unpleafing to any but dia- 
bolical natures) as is the belying of others , is a 
very dreadful kind of folly, I would heartily wifh 
that },]r.Danvers and I might meet and help to 
bring each other to repentance, by a willing im- 
partial examination ofeachof our guiltinefles here- 

5f. 3, I never look to fpeakto therai thus mor^ 
nor lung to any man on earth , and in this ftati- 
on and with thefe thoughts I muft profefs (not 
thinking it lawful to belie rayfelf ) that in the year 
1647. ^^ 1648. or both when Anabaptiftry be^ 
gan fuddenly to be obtruded with more fuccefT- 
ful fervency than before, I lived near Mr* Tomhes^ 
in a Country where fome were, and within the 
hearing of their pradice in other parts of the land :. 
And that in that beginning the common frame of 
Minifters and people was, that in divers places 
fime haftiz^ed naksd and fome did not : And that 
I never to my beft remembrance heard man or 
woman contradid that report till this man did it 
in this writing : And that no Ansbaptift contra- 
dided it to me that I then or fince converfed with : 
And that thereupon in 1659. 1 wrote againft both 
fertfy thofe that baptiz^ed nal^d y and thofe that 
did not : And after all this when Mr. Towbes an- 
fwered my book and thofe very pafTages, he ne- 
ver denied the truth of the thing ( though he did 
not fo baptize himfelf funlefs he have any where 
elfe fince faid any thing of it which I never faw 
or heard of. ) And I appeal to impartial rea^fvin, 
whether he would not then at the time hnvede. 
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 common con- 
fent at the prefenc time? And wheLher it be Uw- 
fnl for me to take all forts then livi?jg for lyars, 
rather than this one man that hath written us fiich 
a book ? and who in a negative 25 years after 



cannot poffibly be a competent witnefs, nonorif 
he had written at that tinne : For who can L\y 
that there was or is no fuch thing done beyond 
his knowledge ? 

. 4. But if Mr. D. would perfwade the world 
cither that I wrote that of ^// the Anab:'ptifts, or 
of mofij or of any in any other age, or that I have 
fince faid that a^iy continue the fame pradice^ he 
would but deceive men : for it is nothing fo. 

<^. 5. I muftconfefs I did not /^^ the-perfonsba^ 
ftiz^cd 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 th em f elves cither 
Mmifters or fcofle at the time^ I think it is to 
be taken fo much notice of, as the confuting of 
the evil doth require. 

j, 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 Preach to call fuch to repentance, left 
I be a Slanderer in faying that there are any fuch, 
I think it would be foolifli uncharitable Charity, 
and unrighteous juftice. 

55.7. Moft Scds do in their height and heat at: 
firft do that which afterward they furceafe with 
Ihame : The Donatift Circumcellians continued. 
not felf- murder ; the Anabaptifls held not on to 
do as they did at Alnnficr, or in the time of D.t- 
vid Ceorge : Our Ranters continued not open 
fvpcaring and whoredom long; The fame of Eyi- 
gland which I never heard gainfaycd is that the 
Quakers at firfl did ^hnke and vomtt and infed: 
others ftrangely : And is he a lyar that faith it, 



becaufe they do not fo now ? I was at Worcefler 
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 muhitude of Spedators, if after 
twenty years and more I were called to prove it. 
I know by uncontrolled fame that Miftrefs Snfm 
Tier [on folemnly undertook to raife the dead ( ta^ 
king up a dead Quaker at Claines and command- 
ing him ( in vain ) to live. ) But if now after more 
than twenty years my witnefiTes were called for, I 
muft travel to the place before I could produce 

^ . 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, Ifhall 
be glad, and will joyn in vindicating them; And 
fo I fay of the prefeRt cafe • And will heartily 
joyn with any in reforming backbiting , and rafh 
ungrounded defamations of- others. 

r 1:^^?. 

C H A p. V L 

Of Mi\ Danvers'^ frequent Citations ^f my Words* 

f. J, TXT" Hen I read Mr. Tombes his twenty 
VV Citations of mc as againft myfelf, 
which Mr. D, provokeih me to anfwer, and 
when I find Mr. D. fo often iniitating them, and 
ailed ging my words , as jaftifying his caufe , I 
have no convidion on my mind that it is lawful 
for me to waft my time and the Readers, abouc 
a particular vindication of my words, fo triflingly 
and vainly ufed by them. 

^, 2 . Either it is the authority of the Writer 
which they fuppofe will ferve them, or \\\t force 
of the arguments • or clfe it is only to make the 
Reader believe that the Writer is fo foolifij as not 
to know when he comraditicth himfelf. Th.e/r/? 
I may well prefume it is not : If it were^ the fame 
p^rfons authority would be as much more againft 
them as his judgement is. It it be the fecond^ 
v;hy do they ulc 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 uiiy then do they not infift on- 
ly on the Argument and ncgled the Author? 
But feeing I muft believe that the laft is their bu- 
(inefs, I can have leifure to fay little more thaa 
this to them, that it is not my bufinefs to prove 
my felf no fool but to prove Infants Cburch- 
memki? •, nor will it make me fraart if all of 


(2^6) ' 

their mind in England fo judge of me • But yet 
I am not fo foolilh but that I know my own mind 
better than they do, and can reconcile my words 
when ihey cannot* If this facisfie not them , ic 
fatisfieth me. 

5^. 3 . In fumm, the words of mine which they 
alledge againfl my felf need but thefe two things 
to be faid for them againft fuch filly cavils : 
I. That moll of them fpeak to the Queftion 
|[ What is the kjnd of Covenant confent reqnired in 
oaftifm f Whether a meer dogmatical faijh- pro^ 
'fejfed f Or ths frofeffion of a faving faith 'f as ' 
to the matter beUeved and the fincerity of the he^ 
lief and confent ? ] And I prove that it is no other 
fort of faith, but a true favmg faith as to objeB 
and a^ which is required and accepted of God 
the fearcher of hearts, as the (Condition of his 
Covenant: And that it is not tht Prof ejfion of ^ny 
lower fort of faith ( as to ohjeB or all ) but of 
this faving faith^ which the Church muft accept 
to the admifiion of members t A lower profefli- 
on will ferve for none. 2. But I flill maintain 
( and I think fully proved ) that God fo far taketh 
the child as if he were apart of the Parent C 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 h'^this fort of faith and con- 
fent the Parent is to enter his Child into Cove- 
nant with 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 Gody as a child Covenant eth and confent eth 
repmatively amor.g men > who by his Parents is 



made a Party in a ContraB , as in a leafe for his 
life , or the like. Not that in fenfn fhyfico th# 
perfon of the Child being the fame with the Pa- 
rents doth confent in hts confent •, but that the 
Parent having the treble intereft in the Child, of 
an Ovpnevy a Governonr and a Lover ^ God by 
Nature and Grace conjundly alloweth and requi- 
reth the Parent to dedicate the Child to God, and 
to confent that he (hall 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 Chriflian when he cometh to age : 
And this fl^all be as acceptable to the Childs Co- 
venant-relation and rights , as if he had done it 
himfelf ^ andiia this fenfe may be faid reputatively to 
have confented or Covenanted by his Parents , 
which in proper fpeech, is, They did it for him 
fit Gods CcmrTiMid. 

^ . 4, He that is not fatisfied with this Gene- 
ral Anfwer, let him either perufe the words 
themfelves in my Writings, with thofe before and 
after that explain them , or elfe 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 Confequcnt?, 
and know that I have fomewhat elfe to do with 
my few remaining hours, than to write books on 
fuch infufficient invitations and expedations. 



Of Mr. Danvers'i many other accitfations of 

^. I. TT was one of the old Charaders of the 
X Hereticks in the Apoftles dayes, To 
Ipeak^ evil of the things that they underflood 

And that may well be thetr Character in 
which they contradid the three great confticutive 
parts of Ghriftianity, and all Religion, and true 
honefty, vitl. T R U T H, H U M J L I T Y and 
LOVE, by Falfljoody Trtde and Malignity ^ 
( called comnionly Vnchantablnefs, ) 

^.2. The Root of this is, when Reigning, aF4 
unfanEiified heart in which thefe vices remain 
unmortified , covered from the owners knowledge, 
by a form of Godlinefs , and cfpecially a zeal 
for the wayes of fome Party, more honoured in 
the perfons eyes forwifdom, or piety than others : 
In others there is a great meafure of the lame 
"ukes mixed with trne Grace , where an evil and 
a good caufe are conjoyned as to fome etfeds : 
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 ft tidies were not fuch, as exa^nefi and large-- 
mfs 01 knowledge do require , but yet lovers of 
knov/ledge , truth , and Scripture , they have 


more knowledge than prophane fots , but IhtUy 
alas , little, in comparifon of that which is ne- 
cefTary to a methodical, accurate underftanding of 
the matters which frequently fill under contro- 
verfie •, And fo knowing but little they know 
not what they are ignorant of, nor wha: others 
know beyond them ; And it being the common 
vice of mans underftanding, to be hafty m judges 
tng before they hear or know one half that is 
neccHary to a true and faiihful judgement, and 
fo to be con^dcnt before they underftand, thefe 
men hereby are led to conscience in many 
an error : And an erring judgement firil 
telleth them that Truth is fallliood, and falfhood 
truth, that Good is evil, and evil good, that Du- 
ty is fin , and fin is duty ; awd then a good 
caufe and a bad, the Love of Truth and a per- 
verfe and partial zeal concur , ro put them on 
in the way of error. Ignorance and error fee 
them on a -wrong canfe^ and a mixt affetlion or z^ealy 
partly good and partly evU fpurreth them on. 
And in thefe the JError and Herefte and confe- 
qucnt fins, arc no more predominant than the 
canfe •, and God will have mercy on thofe ihac 
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 fetled way of getting know- 
ledge ; And therefore required all hisdifciples to 
come to his Church, as little children to School, 
with teachable humble minds, to Learn, and not 
U with 


with proud wrangling minds to difputc : If alloiff 
children lliould fpend iheir tinae at School in difpu- 
ting with the Teacher and fetcing their wits againft 
his as in a cohflid, what would they thus Learn ? 

5^, 4. Therefore Panl faith, that the fervant 
of the Ljrd mufl not ftrive^ and oft calleth men 
from ferverfe Mfpnttngs^^ndflriving about words 
vphich fahvert the hearers^ and from fuch con-^ 
tendinis as edijie not but tend to more ungodli- 
nefs , ^though the faith may be contended for^ 
and truth defended , when oppolition maketh it 
truly necefTary). 

c. 5. When a man feeketh after knowledge 
as a Learner^ he meeteth it with a willing wind -^ 
he cometh towards it with an appetite^ and fo 
is a capable receiver : But when a man cometh 
as a dtfpHtanty he is ingaged already to one /ide, 
and if that be falfe he cometh out to fight ^- 
gainfl the truth ^ with ^ fpirit of oppofitton^ ha- 
ttng truth as error , and good as evil-, and thinks 
It his amy and intereft to deftroy and fhame it 
if he can, and therefore is unapt to think what 
may hQ faidfor it , bui: ftudycth all that he caa 
againfi ir. And is this loathing , and oppofi- 
tion and fig!»i:ing againft truth the way to know it ? 
<S. 6. Thciefore that which hath undone the 
Churches peace* is, that too many Teachers, be^ 
ing themfelves too forward to comroverfies , have 
too haftily drawn in their people into their quar- 
rels, and caft fuch bones before them in books 
and pulpirs-.inftcad of food, which break their 
teeth and fet ibenj together by the ears inftead 
of nourifhing than. And fo one mans hearers 


are taught to difpute for this fort of Govern^ 
mentj and anothers for that fort ; one mans for 
free-will and anothers ^^^/w/? it • when perhaps 
neither they nor the maftcr of the quarrel can 
telJ you what tt is ? and fo of an hundred more 
fuch hke. The honcft hearers when they (hould 
be digeiling the ancient Chriftian dodrine, and 
learning to increafe in Love to God and man, 
and to pradife a holy and a heavenly life, and 
prepare for a comfortable death, and happy eter- 
nity by a Living faith and hope, are taught that 
if they be not zealots for this ofi?non or that , 
for Anabaftiftry , for fefaratiorij &c, if they 
pray by a book, or if they joyn wirh thofe that 
hold fuch things as they hear called by odious 
frightful names , they are not thtnright jLcaloui 
ChrtfiiartSy but corrupt or comflyers or lukewarm ; 
And thus each Church is made a miferable 
Church-militant, and trained up to waragainft each 

5^. 7. And this ^inifters have done, partly 
to ftrengthen themfelves by the confent and num- 
ber of their adherents, as the Captain muft con- 
quer by his Souldiers : When they can fetagreac 
number on hating their adverfaries , and backbi- 
ting them, and telling the hearers wherever they 
€ome, to make them fecm odious , how errone- 
ous and bad fuch and fuch men are , they think 
they have done much of their work ? And while 
they think it is for Chrtft , they know not how 
notably they pleafe and ferve the Devil. But I 
nuift remember that I have fpoken of this eilc* 
where, and fodifmifsir. 

' U 2 t<. 8- 

( 2P2 ) 


<. 8. That Mr. Danvers and his imitatefS 
fpe^k^evil (confidently and vehemently ) of the^ 
things they k^ow mt ( yea very many fuch J I 
am fure. 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 huw Mr. Tho. Tierce once dealt with 
me : When my Religious neighbour could hard- 
ly be perfwaded to communicate with thofe among 
them that were of his judgement , faying, they 
were men that would fwear and lie , and lived 
fcandaloufly , 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 raeafure of fincere piety, and Church-com- 
munion. And what doth he but hence take ad- 
vantage to tell the world how loofe my dodrine 
was J and what finful perfons I thought had 
grace ? 5o now if I ihould fay, that notwithftand- 
ing thefe hard-faced faldiodfis^heaped together, 
^nd confidently obtruded on the ignorant, even 
about publick and vifible matter of fad , yet I 
hope the Auihor feareth God truly in other re- 
fpeds, and erreih through Ignorance , paffion, 
and temerity ; 1 fliould be told publickly ere 
long by one or other, that I think the moll bra- 
zcn-facid Lyars may be Saints : And if I deny 
fuch mens Goodncfs, I look to be told that I am 
cenforious and a reviler of godly men that dffFer 
irom me. Therefore I am" thankful to Chrift 
that he not only e.rct'tfeth us from fo hard a work 
as die Judging of the (incerity of others, butcaiis 


( 2p3 ; * 

us ojf^ and faith, v^ho art thou that judge jj: ano^ 
ther mans fervant ? to his own mafler hefi^inds 
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. 

<S. 9. That He and I do differ \njndgerrje71t 
and Practice, is not to be denyed : I thought 
our difference had been but in fo fniall and tole- 
rable things ( till I fa:v worfe in his writings ) 
as (hoijld neither abate Love or forbid Commu- 
nion : And thinking fo, I was thelikelier to pra- 
d:ife as I thought , and not to hate him and iuch 
as he : But I perceive he takes the ditferenccs 
to be far greater , and my errors and llns 
to be more heinous and intolerable , and there- 
fore if he hate me (though I know not thatevei: 
he favv me or I him ) it is 710 wonder^ it being 
more agreeable to hvs 'judgement •, And alfo 
if he would not tolerate me were it m his pow- 

c. 10. If he fo greatly differ from me, and 
be in the right , certainly it is becaufe he is c?- 
ther a great deal wifcr and ?nore knowing in 
thefe matters, or becaufe he is 7nore confcicnahk 
to avoid perverting temptations, and more Godly 
and fit for divine lighr. I deny not either : biU 
from the bottom of my heart tell him, that I 
am fo desfly co-nfcious of the dark^nefs aiid /;;«f2i- 
nefs of my underfiandlng,znd my little goodnets 
and very ill defcrts from God, that did he bring 
me any confiderable evidence for his caufe, my 
great fufpicion of ray felf would prepare nie to 
U 5 hcai- 


hear him : But it muft not be fuch fluff as htt 
here obtrudeth on us. And I muft tpll him, 
though I acknowledge God to be a free Bene- 
fador, and may give the Create ft Knowledge 
fo them that have leaft laboured for it -, yet while 
diligent fearching is his commanded means , I 
fliall doubt whether his eafier and fhorter fearch 
hath attained to fomuch more than my harder m^ 
longer^ til) the fruit thai! prove ir. 

^, II. He tells us Ed, 2. p. 170* that l^can- 
'' net do my felfmore] right and my ojfended brer 
^^ threnj than to clear my felf in thefe particulars 
'^^ which are indeed fa heinoiu , not only to every 
'' one of his Nonconforming brethren^ hut to mo ft 
F' V rot eft ants that hear them* ~\ 

fiAnfvQ, I. Still fuch untruths ? Do you know 
what moft Proteflants think that hear them ? and 
every one of my Nonconforming brethren /* Why 
fome of the wifcft of them that I know did 
read them over , and approved them before 
they were printed } Others ( many an^l 
many ) of the moilt judicious alfo of my acquain- 
tance have fince profefTcd their confent : Nay 
piore . I remember not one Minifter that hath 
made me know by word or writing to me that 
he diffenteth from any one of all thefe heinous 
things. I remember that once fome objeded 
what they heard others fay fnot as confenting 
to the oppofers ) and acquiefced in my anfwers, 
©r rather in the words of the book perufed. So 
that if every one cf my Nonconforming brethren 
he offended^ and Ikjiownnot of one, nor anyone 
pf them would ever vouchfafe ^ %yord or line to 


convince me, you cenfure them for woful dif- 
femblers or uncharitable. But I believe them 
ef themfelves rather than you, 

^. 12. He addeth, j4nd J dare be boldtofuy^ 
hath given more ^ general offence , ^nd lofi 
Afr» Baxter /nore amongfi bus 
Friends *, than any thing he "^ Not fp much as 
did tn all hts Ufe.-Ji ^'' '^T^l'!'Tf^ 

y4nfrv. I. The oitence which .^rinng for Parifh 
Chrift dreadfully condemneth, c^nimuniou. 
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- 
ten that which ofFendeth you. • Bur the offence 
which is but D iff leafing dtjf enters , yea mi ft a- 
king men J I little regard on my own accoiinr. 
And your talk of my lofs ( or being loft ) doth 
favour fo rankly of a humane hypocritical teyyi- 
ptation , as maketh me remember what Chrifl: 
laid to Peter Math, 16.23. that would have had 
him fave hirafelf from fuffering , though I will 
not fpeak out fuch unpleafing words to you : 
But your tvords favour too much oi 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 I And themfelves are haftin^ 
to the day when all their thoughts perifli. O cea.fe 
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 arpro- 


approbation of man ? O miferable reward ! 
Were not that book odious to you , I would 
refer you for my Reafons to the two Chapters 
of Man-^leafing and Vride : If Gods approbati- 
on feem not enough for us, why call we him 
our God ? 

But if I have lofi [o much as you 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 coil roe nothing. 
But you fiiall not tempt me to over-value it fa 
much ^ I find no lofsatallby it. What have! 
loft Sir ? Not one farthing or farthings-worthy 
that I am aware of 1 As I lived not on any man 
before , fo I am never the poorer for that duty 
now. Is it mens ^raife or good thoughts of me ? 
Not one friend to my remembrance in the City, 
or Land hath once told me his dijfenty 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 
fatisfled as far as I could perceive , and I wifht 
hira bur to read over all in my bookfabout that you 
jobjed concerning the Crucifix) and I heard of him 
no more.) And if I am fo much loflmth my friends^ 
and no one of them in Erjgland tell me that he 
diffenteth , and veherein^ fpch friends are not fo 
valuable as to be any of my felicity ! And do 
you call a man [^ lo(i 3 that Idfeth the thoughts or 
(the breath of man > As it is their own duty or 
fin^ I regard all mens thoughts or words, and fo 
would f leafs all men fur their good to edificati- 
fn .* But ^s to my ov?n comfort I can . fpanp 


youri and theirs]^ and if you and a thoufand fucli 
fhould write a Cart-load of Calumnies as you 
have done, I think they would break but little 
of nfiy fleep. Set thefc arguments next before 
hypocrites that Uve on man : I live not oa 

But your words do mind me , how men that 
are embody ed in little parties, (Tar lefs than the 
Donanfts or Kovatians ) are inclined to take 
their Cabin for all the Kingdom, and their Sed: 
for the Church, and areaffeded with their praife 
or difpraife almofl: as if they were all the world. 
You hear your folks it feems talk againft me 
( with whom backbiting is a duty ) and youfeem 
to dream that it is all my frten'df. If God in 
Chrifl will be my friend, I can fpare others. 

And tell me Sir, for what friz.e or gain do you 
think I am lofi vptth all my friends P No man 
in his wits will voluntarily be lofi 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 the Diocefan, 
party ? What have I got by them but fitencmg 
and the lofs of, all Minifterial maintenance , 
thefe twelve years ? And ask them whofe 
writings have more offended them yours or 

\i \ am lofi, it hath tcfl me more years hard 
fiiidy to be lofi , and to be erroneotu or a fool^ 
than it hath done you to be fame body and to be 
mfe •, And I tell you I never yet repented of 
Cofi or lof for that Truth and duty, which you 
bment as W\vvy\i% error and fin. But naked (rut b^ 


isind the faithful endeavours of pleafing God, in 
promoting that Love among Chrifts difciples, and 
-peace x;a his Churches which ChmchTyrants and 
Se5is have fo many ages laboured ( too fuccef- 
fully ) to deftroy, are fleeter than to be forfa- 
ken either through the ferfecution of one fort 
or the Revilings of the other , or the lofs of all 
mens friendfhip upon earth. 

And yet I will add , that though being long ago 
glutted with mens applaufe, 'as finding it a lufciom 
hut unwholefome thing, Sindlunng voluntarily caji 
up much of it my felfy I yet perceive no wane of 
friends, but take your words of them for meer 

5^. 13. Saith Mr. D. (Pref.ed. i. ; \J' He hath 
'^ fo much abounded ( in contradtElions ) ( none 
*' more that J^knovp of • ) being as you I find^ fame- 
** time a great oppofer , then a great defender of 
^[Epifcopacy*'] • 

Anfw* I. Yet I know not that ever this man 
ikw me C as I faid) or I him/ 2. Thisfalfliood 
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 Poiv- 
name and feme others ; But in 1640. the oath cal- 
led Et cetera calling us to fvoear never to confent 
to the alteration of the prefent Government by A» 
JBl[hops, 'JBiJljopSy DeanSy Archdeacons^ dec, forced 
me to ftudy the wholexaufe to the bottom, (ince 
which time my judgement of Epifcopacy never 
altered ( which is 34 years ago ) having fetled 
in the ReceptihiHty of cne fort of Epifcopacy, 


and the deftrahlenefs of another, and the diflike 
of another fore : All which I have fully pub- 
lished in my Difpute of Church- Government 
1658. when the BiOiops here were at the iow- 
tft. Either this man knew me and my writings 
herein, or not. If not, what a man is this that 
dare talk thus confidently and faldy of what he 
knew not ? If he did,then how much more flagitious 
is his pradice, thus to tell the world an untruth 
fo notorious to himfelf ? He faith (a^ yon may find) 
but never tells you where. Let him tell you w/^fr^ 
and vchen I ever defended that Epifcopacy which 
I hadoppofed ? 

^.14. [_ Mr. D, [^^^ Sometime for Noncon^ 
^^formity ( in whofe tents he hath feemedto fljeU 
*' ter himfelf in the flornJ^ and with their IndnU 
''^ gence to come forth of his hole) and yet at 
*' length fo highly to di [grace the fame, 

j4nfw. I , Let him (hew you if he can, where 
or when I have changed my judgement about 
Conformity , or exprefl a change fince 1640? 
Not that I take it for a difgrace to be mutable 
by growing wifer : But neceffity forced me fo 
Jong ago to ftudy thofe controverfies fo hard, as 
fixed me, and I never heard any thing fiiice which 
confiderably altered me therein ; Which alfo be- 
ing vifible in the forefaid Dtfpnte of Liturgie^ 
Ceremonies , &c. written 1658. leave no cloak 
for this mans calumnies. See there whether I 
faid not more for fo 'much of Epifcopacy^ Litur- 
gte and Ceremonies which I took to be Uxv^ 
fiil , than ever I have done fince Bifliops return- 
ed ? 
* 2. But 

2. But what doth he mean by [^Jhelterlng my 
felf in a florm in their tents 3-^1 cannot ima«- 
gine what , unlcfs fenfe and truth at once for^ 
iook him ! When a ftorm fell on the Nonconfor-- 
wifts^ were their tents a hkely place for fhelter ? 
Had not the Conformifls] tents been likelier f 
Did the Nonconformijts (belter me f Frofti what, 
and how? 

3 . And what hole was it that I came out of, 
with their Indulgence ? Are fuch men as this 
the Vindicates of Gods Truth againft the Chri- 
llian world , that 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 
Confcicnce and defire co have prevented that 
which I forefaw ) in the tasks of writing and 
fieaking which would moft exafperatc and offend 
the Bilhops •, till I was I think;the firft among 
them that was forbidden to Preach. I continued 
after that in London a 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, being near the Church door , 
and the people numerous, Clergie-envy caufed 
me to be fent to the common Gaol, among malefa- 
dors •, As foon as I was our, another warrant 


was put into the Officers hands to apprehend 
me again, and fend me to Newgate for dx 
months • Upon which I removed my dwelling 
CO the next Village out of the County : Irc- 
fufed none there that defired to hear me, of my 
Neighbours. The writings which he revileth, 
(hew that I lived not idle ; And I think he could 
wifli I had done lefs and fpoken to fewer; 
I came not out of that hole of many months af- 
ter the Indulgence was granted : I flayed on 
reafons of Sel&denyal, becaufel would fore-ftall 
no London Minifters , nor hinder their Audito- 
ries, and therefore refolved to ftaytill they were 
i^tled : I came on terms of far greater Self-^ 
denyal^ to the great abatement of my health, 
( to fay nothing of my greater coft, ) which now; 
hath again 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- 

As for his talk of \_ Difgracing the Noncon^ 
formiftfJi it's true in two fenfes. i. As he ancf 
I difgrace Chriftianity by being fo ignorant and 
had : 2. Or if he mean not My ox^n Nonconfor- 
mity but his, ( even his Nonconfbrmity to a great 
deal of truth and Qoriflian duty and common 
honefty C by concatenated falflioods ) , I have 
done my part ( when conftrained ) to difgrace 

^. 15. \_Sometime a friend to Q^Wm^ and then 
A greater to Ai'minius J faith he. 

Anfvc, I. Did he tell the Reader where by 
9ne (in any words ) I contradid: the other ? 

2. Buc 


2. But fee the mifery of a Se^flarian fpirit J 
that taketh it for a contradidion to be a friend to 
Cdvin and Arminim both ? He would as this 
inferrcth , take it ill to be thought a friend to 
Ancba^tt^s and Piedobaptifts both, to Indefen^ 
dents and Frefuyterians 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 Anahaptifis , I will be a friend to 
no other as fuch : Men of fo little a Church, 
mufi have anfwerably little Love : Cenforioufnefs 
is a friend but unto few. 3. But by this your 
friendfhip feenneth narrower than I thought it s 
I thought it had extended to all the Anabaptifts^ 
But they are divided into [^Free^vptlUrs} and 
(^ Free-gracers ~] as they call them , that is, into 
Calvimfts and Arminians : and are you 2l friend 
but unto one part of them ? 4. But indeed Sir, 
the Controverfies intended by you under thefe 
names, are not fuch as a man of my poor mca- 
fure can Rk his judgement in very young, and 
promife that it fhall never change, northatlcaa 
take it for a fhame 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 publifhed) to make 
it appear that fuch as you that fpeak evil of what, 
you underftand not, are the grievous enemies of 
the Churches of Chrift, as to Tmthy Holinefsy 
and Feace^ by your militant noife about Calvi^ 
nijmy and aArminianifm^ ftirring up contentions, 
and deftroying Love, by making differences feem 
greater than they are •, and laying the Churches 


Concord and Communion and mens falvation up- 
on fuch queflions, as Whether the houfe jijouldbe 
built of Wood or Timber, f And is not thiswor- 
ihy of your zeal } 

* i^. i6. He adds \_^^ Sometimes a great Defen^ 
^^ der of the Parliament andtheirCanfe^ and then 
^^ none more to renounce them and betraytor them 
^^for their fains, ] 

Anfw, I. Was there never but One Parlia- 
went and One Catife /* Perhaps you mean that 
the Parliament Called 1640 and the ^«w?p(^ as cal- 
led ) and the Armies Little Parliament, and OH- 
very and the Army Council and all the reft of 
the Soveraigns were all One Parliament f Or 
that to fwear to the firft Parliament, or fight 
for them , and to fhut out and imprifon them, 
and to difTolve them , as Ufurpers , and to fee 
up one chofen by — who knows whom — and 
to fct up Oliver and his Son , and to pull him 
down again, and to fet up the ^/uwp again, and 
to pull them down and fet up a Council of State, 
ore. were all one Caufe •, And that one day it was 
-Treafon not to be for oneSoveraign,and another day 
rot to be againftthat, and for anoihcr. Your Ar- 
my did not betraytor them, when they forced cue 
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 
nwre hand in thefe matters ? Whether you know 
your felf I know not , but I am fure you know 
not me, nor what you talk of. 

p. 17. It 


<$. I /• It followeth [Sometimes a great Oppafer 
of Tradition , and anon a great defender there^ 

Anfva. I . If you take Tradition equivocally > 
you calumniate but by equivocation ^ but \'i\jhere' 
p/J mean [_ the fame Tradition~\ your falfhood 
hath not. the cioak of an equivocation. Prove 
what you fay by any words of mine > It is be- 
tween twenty arid thirty years I think (ince I 
largely opened my judgement of Tradition, in the 
Preface to the fecond edition of ray book cal- 
led the Saints Refi, which I never changed fmce. 
If you will" deny that your Father delivered you 
the Bible ( or any otherjor that the Church bath 
ufed both Bible and "Baftifm from the Apollles 
dayes till now. Let the reproach of fuch Tradi- 
tion be your glory , if you will 5 It (hall be none 
of mine. But do you write a book to prove the 
Tradition of Adult Bapcifm from Chrills 
time to ours, and when you have done renounce 
and fcorn it ? See Reader, how he valueth his 
own work ? 

<>, 18. \lt2ii^ti\\ ]^^^ Sometimes a 'violent im- 
^' pHgner of Popery ^ and yet at laft who hath fpoken 
*^ more in favour of it ?~\ 

jinfw. Here again if by [ Topery J and [^ it J 
you mean the fame thing, 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 
years time , by which you may fee in comparing 
ihem whether I changed my judgement. If you 
' cannot/refufe not to blufh. Buc 

•' But i was and am a defender , of that \th\di 
is Fopery . and Antichrifltanity v/ich you , 
the Church-raembcrfhip., Covenant-incereft and 
Baptifm of Infants, and it's like many more par- 
cels of the Treafures of Chrifl , which you zea- 
loufly rob him off, and give to Antichrift ; As 
too many Sedaries do, the greateft partf I doubt 
more than nine parrs of ten' ) of hi$ Kingdom or 
Church univerfil ; And as Divines ufc to prove 
that carnal minds arc enemies and haters of God, 
hecaufe they confefs , honour and worfaip him 
both in Nams^ and in refpeft of many of his At- 
tribures and relations and works , yet in refpcd 
of others they are averfe to him - fo I would be 
a monitor to you, and fuch like 5e(fl:aries, to tak€ 
heed of going much lunher, left before you know 
what you do , while you honour Chrifls ndir.e , 
and cry up fome of his Grace, and dodrines, you 
fhould realty haje^ oppugn and Uafpheme him, and 
take Chri^ himfelf iox Antichrift^ and his Chur- 
ches and fervanrs for Aritichriftian. If you will take 
him for Antichrift that takech Infants into the 
vifible Church, I think it wil) prove to be C^r^/^ 

^. 19. Reader, How tig a volume wouldfl 
thou have me write in anfwering fuch fluff as 
this ? Tears are fitter than Ink, for fuch fearl.rfs,- 
radi, continued, vifible fallTiocds , to be delibe- 
rately publifhed to the world as tpjihs, by one 
that calleth himfelf a man, and a Chriitian, and 
feemeth zealous to nev^ Chriflen moll of the 
Chriftian world. Unlefs I fliouid tire ray felf 
and thee, I muft ftop, and cc2^k this noyfome 
X: ' ' ■ work-. 


work ; Only one charge more which runs through 
much of his 'book, I will anfwer , becaufe it 
concerneLh the caufe it felf. 

p. 20. He oft tells you that when I have cal- 
led my book\^Plain ScrtptHre proof jlya there and 
after contradid my felf , by (aying that the cow- 
troverfie is difficult ] and by faying that in the 
fiincient Churches men were left at liberty to Ba- 
ptiz.e their children when they vponld, 
\ And I. His v^ry words prove that this is no 
contradidion : For thefe very words I will make 
fUin to a boy of ten years old, and yet the world 
niuft know in print that he is not able to under- 
fland them , and that this is worthy the conlide- 
ration of his profelyces. 2. My meaning I ope- 
ned long ago, which he concealeth : The Proofs 
of Infants Church-meraberfhip are VUin : the 
proof therefore of their right to Biptifm is plain 
though not in the fame degree ? but there are 0^- 
jdlions Q^ difficulty which may be brought againft 
ic, which every weak Ghriftian (nor Minifter 
neither ) cannot anfwcr. And the hardefl is thar 
which is lictle taken notice of by themfelves, but 
i C impartially J opened in vay Chrifiian Dire^io" 
ry, ' And is it a conLradidion to fay that a do- 
drinc that haih Plain Proof y may be afTauIced 
by difficult cb;cclions ? And yet fuch as 
a fobtr Chriilian Ihould not be changed by, 
unlcfs on the fame reafons he will forfake all 
Chriftianity , ^i^ii his everlailing hopes : 
For I take the dodriii*^ of the Souls Immortali- 
ty to be fuch as may be Plainly f roved : But 
truly I take it to be five degrees above t^ie abi- 

( 3^7 ) 
iityof this Writer, to anfwer folidly ali that can 
be faid againft it. I take it to be PUmly pro^ 
liable that the Scfiptute is certainly true : And 
yet I take it to be quite above this confident 
mans ability well to folve all the diiBculties o'b- 
jeded ? were it but thofe poor ones of 'Bene-^ 
dtdm Sfinofa in his late peftilent Tra^atm The- 
olo^tco'PoltticM. I think I have plain prootthat 
God is not the Author of fin, and man is not 
moved in it and all his aAs as an engine by un- 
avoidable neceiVitation ; But I defpair that ten 
years Trudy n[iore (hould inable this Writer, clear^ 
ly to folve the objedions of Hohbes or Camcro 
about it. In a word, though wchstve Plain proof 
that Chrifi is the Son of Godj I fhould be loth 
that the faith of this Nation (liould li^ upon the 
fuccefs of a difpute about it, between a crafty 
Infidel and this felt-conceited man. 

<. 21. And why (hould my impartiality ia 
acknowledging the Churches liberty as to the time 
of Baptifm, at fird, be fo unkindly received ? I 
meant not, nor faid, that Chrtfl hadkk it Indif- 
ferent and to their Liberty , but that they left 
one another at liberty herein : Becaufe i. The 
firfl and great work was in feeling the Chur- 
ches by converting Jews and Gentiles to the 
faith : And the Adult who were the adivc mem- 
bers, were tney that the ApoAles had moft to 
do with, f and therefore whofe cafe is exprefiy 
fpoken of.) 

2. Becaufe it was a known thing that the In- 
fants of Church members had ever been Church- 
members and were in pofleffion of that Rclaii- 
X 2 on 


on when Chrlft and his Apoftles fet up B>- 

3. And it was a granted cafe , that all Sand:i- 
fied perfons devoted themfelves and all that they 
h^d to God ; and every thing according to its 
capacity : And therefore their Infants according 
to their capacity, which God himfelf had before 

4. And it was never tlie meaning of Chrift 
to lay fo much on the outward wad^iing, as ma- 
ny Papifts and j^mbaptifts do : But as the un- 
cifcunicifed 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 necefTary , 
many Parents baftned their childrens Baptifm, 
at two or three dayes old. Others (laid till the 
eighth day: others longer.; and multitudes had 
children that were in feveral degrees enrred en 
the ule of reafon , when the Parents were con- 
verted , and it remained doubtful whether they 
wtre fas to [he Covenant ) ajtheir Parents choice 
01* their own : And to this day there want not 
thofe that think that Baptifm was n|^t 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 conrfey but Trofelytts 
from without only were to be Baptiz,ect, Though 
this" be an error, it is probable that thtre were 



fome then, as well as now of that opinion. Bu* 
nothing more occafioned ( as far as I can find ) 
the delay of Baptifm, than the fear of the danger 
of finning after it , efpecially of apoftafie. All 
held that all Cm paft was pardoned in Baptifm. 
And Heh»6. and lo. and other texts, and the com- 
mon dodrine of the Church made them think it 
a very perillous thing to fin wilfully after 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, Ullchildifh folly and youth- 
ful lufts, and worldly temptations, ihould 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 wei"e Ba-, 
ptized at age upon their own converfion from 
Heathenifm , were not fuddenly fo l^wvcin^-, as 
to be acquainted with all the cafes about their 
childrens righcs, but muRhave a confiderabk time 
to learn. For ir was ( be ic fpoken without 
offence to ftrider men J a General and Nar« 
row fort of Knowledge which the Apoftles and 
the Primitive Churches required in the adult 
as nccefTary to Baptifm , yea when they had at 
laft kept them long under Catechizing. For 
even in Jl/ii^afiines time, though all u fed the 
fa^e words oi Baptifm, fo few had a clear underftand- 
ing of the very Baptif.nal form or words , thnc 
( \Mn\\ng( nbifitfrn)de haft.contr , Donat , ) hefai-h 
that as to the Meaning of ihofc words not only 
the Hereticks , jed ipfi carrmles parvnU Ecclcjt£^ 
fi pojfent pTigult diligent cr inter ro^ari , tot di- 
X 3 '-^^' 


tfiirjit^tes opimomm fortajfu , quot homines mime^ 
Tarentiir : Animalis enimhomo non fercifit^^cc, 
^nmn tamcn ideo non integrum facr amentum ac- 
fi'pihnt f 

^, 22. There remaineth a Catalogue of my heyr 
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 have taught many 
Jionefl weak people m London^ both Anahafttfts 
and Independents to talk frightfully and odiouf- 
iy of from one another behind my back. What 
fhould I fay to him and them ? Shall I anfwer 
them that never fpeak or write to me ? Shall I 
take this mans accufarion for a conlutation or con^ 
yidion ? Is fo deadly an enemy of Antichrift 
conceited of a felf-infallibility , or that I muft 
take my faith or truftfromMr.D^;7i;frj,though not 
from the Church, Pope, or General Council > 
If nor, what did the man think that a recitation 
fhould do with me ? Did not I know whal I 
had written till he told me ? • 

^. 23. Bnt it is others th^t he tells it to [ 
Thof? others will read 7vy own vpords or, they 
jv/7/ not ? If they will, I will not be fo cenfo- 
rious of them as to think that they need any 
more tp his fruftration : If they will not, muft I 
write another b(X)k to tell them what I have 
written in the former ? Kow (hall I know shac 
they will any more read the laft than the firft > 
If Satan hgve fo much power over them, that he 
can make them err, and lie andllander and back- 
bite as ofc ai a manprofefting zeal for the truth, 
will l^e his inftrun|?nt and meifcnger, ft is not 


my writing more books that can fave them* 
The end muft tell them, whether lonheytell 
be the grcaier ioiers by it, 

^. 24. I have therefore but thefe two wayes now 
to take : I. Whereas this man fai.h, that my 
do^ru}': fceweth heynons to every one of my Non^ 
conforming brethren^ and mofi FrotejUntSy and 
that I have lofl my felf among my friends^ I do 
demand as their duty and. my right , the Means 
of my convidion and reducfl on from ihcfe bre- 
thren ( 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 
ray dodrine, and thankfully to retrad whate- 
ver they ihall manifefl 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- 
ber anfwcr to their reafons^ or refufcd to learn 
of any that would teach me, or to i udy as hard 
to know as they ?, or that ever partiilicy, fadi- 
on or worldly inicreft, bribed me to deal falOy 
with my confcience, and betray the truth. And 
if after this claim , they will be filent, I will 
rake them for confentcrs , or if by backbiting on- 
ly any will ftill notifie their difTent, I will take 
them forfuch as I take this writer, and infoii e 
rcfpcd worfe though not in all. 

<S. 25. 1 1. My fecond remedy is, I will go wil- 
lingly to School to Mr. X>. and having laid fo 
much for the Learnings againft ihe D/fparmg way, 
1 will become his hearer and reader, if he hav e 
any thing co teach me, that favourcih ^'i Truth 
X 4 and 

and Mode fly morje than this noy^oxnc fardel 
dotl\ which he hath publiflied. And to that en4 
I will here give him a Catalogue of the contra- 
ry opinions to mine, which I defire him folidly to 
prove. lihthoXdviOl iht contrary doUrines^ why 
doth he exclaim zgSLinG: wine, as heynomf If he 
do hold the contrary to what I have mth due and 
clear diftindion and explication opened, (and bis 
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 
Eeligion, which I delire them to make good, and 
reacijthem ra? by fufficient propf. 




'j4 Catalogue of fame Dotirtnes of MrJ}mv€ts and 
the refi that with him accnfe my Chriftian Di— 
redory , if indeed thty hold the contrary to 
mine which they acciife ( as prnft be fuppofed 
by their accnjation) which as a LearnAr I tntrcat 
any of themfolidly to frovc* 

OF the Queftion 49. p. S26» as cited by him 
(The lalihood of his inferring [] in aPoptfi? 
Countrey in their way of Baptizing J in that cited 
place which fpake only of thz Lutherans^ 1 pals 
by as weary of anfwering (uch : Bur 

I, That it is a fin for any man ( [ufpoftng In-* 
fant Baptijr/i a duty) to offer his child to he Ba' 
j>tiz,ed where it will be done with the fign of the 
Crofsy or fuch ceremonies as the Lutherans nfe^ 
though he profefs his own diffent and diffallow^ 
ance of thofe ceremonies , and though he camwt 
lawfully have it done better ^ but mafi have that 
$r no Baptifm at all f 

IT. That in the ancient Churches of the fe- 
condy thirdy and fourth ages^ it had been better 
to be U7ihaptiz^cd than to life a white Garment tn 
Baptifm as they did , or to be anoi7itcd as then, 
cr to tafie Milk and Honey ^ though the Perfoft 
offering his child to fuch Baptifry had frofeffed 
his diffent as afonfaid f 

III. That 

III. That ad the Churches of Qsrifl in thofe 
fecond, thirdy and foHrth^ and follomng dgesy 
vpha were Baptiz,ed thm ( Infant or adult ^ ) had 
710 Baptifm but what was worfe than none : 
( Though Church hiflory certifie U6 that this ufe 
woi fo univerfal , that it*s Joard to find any one 
Chrifiian in aH thofe or many after ages that 
ever was. againfi the lawfulnefs of ity or refufed 
it. ) 
( By the way, it w.as but one of ^ your tricks 

which you know not how to for- 
» p. 572. ed 2y bear, ^ to foift in [_ Peril of 

Law 3 when I had not fuch a 
word or fenfe as Fertl : As if you knew 0? no Obli- 
gation there but from PeriU } 

IV» Tour fag. 375. ed. 2. \^ That anointings 
fifing the white Carment , Milk, and Honey ^ 
were Blajphemow rites^ and Popifh before Popery 
was^ exifient ? or if otherwife , that All Chrtfis 
Church was Pofifh then ? 

V. Your Pref.tdi. i. [ That Chrifis Mlniflers 
rightly ordained and dedicated to God in that fa^ 
cred office^ are not fo much as Relatively holy 
asfefarated to God therein ? 

V I. That Temples , and Church VtenftU de^ 
voted and lawfully feparated by mm to holyufeSy 
either are not jujily Related to God asfafepa- 
ratedy or though fo feparated and Related are r» 
fio degree to be called Holy i 

V I T. Your 

VII. Tour Tref, i6. ^That no Reverence u 
flue to zJ^tnifiers and Church menjlls ?^ 

VIII. Ibid, ^ To be uncovered in the (^hurch^ 
and ufereverejjt carriage and ge ft ures there ^ doth 
not at all tend to freferve due reverence to Cod 
and his worjliip ? 

I X. Ibid, [] That the unjufl alienation of Tem-^ 
flesy Vtenftify lands , dayeSy vphich were fejara- 
ted by Cjod himfelf^ is no facri ledge : no not to 
have turned the Temple of old, and the facred 
things to a common ufe u^ijuftly : nor the Lords 
d^y now. fBut thou that abhorred Idols, doft 
thou more than commit Sacriledge ? Even teach 
men fo to do, and fay It is no Sacriledge ? no 
not when God himfelf is the fe par at er and man 
the unjufi aliemter f And yet is Infant-feuptifni 

. X. Ibid, [That its no facri ledge unjuftly to 
alienate things juflly con fe crated and feparated 
to God by man (as (iJ^imfterSy Lands , Vtenftls^ 
SkC, ) ( Remember Ananias ^»(s/ Saphira* ) 

X I. Ibid. [ That it is a fin to call a t^inifter 
a Priefl^ though it be done in no ill defign^ nor 
with any fcandal or temptation to error ^ and 
though he that uftth the word profefs that he 
cloth it but as a trar? flat ion of the Greeks word 
[ Fresbyter ^ ^^^ ^^ God himjelf doth Rev. 
}• 6. and 5. 10. and 20. 6, and i Pet. 2. 


5' 9* ( QH^ft'^on* Whether it is finfully ufcd in 

X 11. Ih, \^ Accordingly it is fin to ufe the 
word [ Altar J for [] Table J or the word [ Sa- 
crifice 3 for [ worfhip ] (as thanksgiving &c ) 
though with all the fore [aid camiom^ and thoftgh 
God fo ufe them intheScriftnre^ i Pet. 2.5. Hcb* 
13. 15,16. Phil. 4. 18. Eph. 5. 2, Rom. 12. i, 
Heb. 13. 10. Rev. 6. p.and 8. 3> 5. and 16. 7. 
And that all tioe ancient writers and Chnrches 
finned that fo ^ake ? j 

XI IT. That no fiber Chrifiians flmtld allow 
each other the Liberty of fttch phrafes without 
cenforioptfnefs or breach of Charity and peace^ 

X I V. Ibid. [^ It if a fin to fit a Rail about 
the Communion Table though it be not done ta any 
jU defign nor with fcandal , but only to keep dogs 
from pijfing or dunging at it ^ and boy es from abu-^ 
fing tt. 

XV. That in fuch cafe, yea though fcandal be 
removed by the puhlick, profeffion of the Churchy 
it is a fin to cor/ie to fuch a railed table to com- 
municate ; e'^en when nofinful difiancc between the 
Clergie and Laity is im ended, 

XVI. Ibid, \_ Chrifiians ought to cenfure and 
condemn each other , if one come to fuch a Table ^ 
or Receive hieeUngff uppo fing tt a lawful thin g.'^ 



;-• X Y\ t Ilfiii* t '^'^^ ^^ ^ aftttd kee'j) a thanl^ 
ful remembrance of Gods mercy to his Churchy 
by an anniverfary day of folemnity , in giving 
them any j4pofile, Martyr -^ or extraordinary in^ 
ftrtifnem of his blcffrng^a^ fome k^ep their birthdays^ 
or wedding-dayeSjor dayes of fome great deliverance, 
and England the fifth of November ^ Though it 
be not terminated in the honour of a Saint, bat. 
of Cjody nor made equal to the Lords day, nor 
kept otherwife than Iptritually andfiouflyf 

XVIII. Ibid. [_Thatforaman thatis againfi 
commanding the jSfiinence of Lent, and againjl 
obeying [uch commands as an Imitation ofChrifi's 
forty dayes fafling y and in all cafes of injury 
to our fouls y bodies^ or others • 

yet to fay that he is not a- Read Rom. 14. and 
ble to prove it a Jin to obey judge. 
by meer abftinence, vchenthe 
Magiftrate peremptorily commandeth it , meerly 
in Commemoration, and not Imitation of Chrifi'i 
fafi: y is a fm in him that faith it^, though it be 
true : zy^nd confequently though it x^ould do no 
harm to my felf or others , / ought rather ta 
die than to forbear fiejh in lint, if the King com- 
mand it ^ 

XIX. Ibid. IThat Church Mufick^(and con- 
fcqitently fnging which is the prime Mufck,) 
^ no help to any man in the fervice of 


X X. Ih* {That though he find it a hilfy it is 
fin for any man to nfe it ^ 

XXI. That either Chrifl did not joyn vcith the 
Jews in rvorjhif which had Mnfick^ ( in the Tem- 
ple ) or elf e he finned info doing f 

XXIL That the experience of prejudiced fe If- 
conceited men, ' that klfow not what melody is^ 
mnfl be fet againfi the experience of others fo 
far as to deprive them of all fuch helps and mer>* 
cieSy as the other find no benefit by , (^As finging 
is novpcafi out of many Churches*) 

XXIII. That it is no wrong to Ignorant 
Chrifiians to put fnch whimfies and fcruples into 
their heads f 

XXIV. lb. {It is a fin toFow Chaflity for 
any man in the world^ though' it be with this ex- 
ceptioH or condition^ { Unlcfs any thing (ball 
fall out which fiiall make ic a (in to me not to 
marry]. And though under the mofi; extraor- 
dinary necefftties of avoiding marriage , he find 
fuch confirmation of his Refolutions need- 
ful t 

X X V. IbJ[That it is in no Cafe lawful toks^f ^ 
Vow of Chaflity^ at leafi among the Papifis ? And 
confequently whereas Chrift faith ^ He that can' 
keep this faying^ Let him. It is every mans du- 
ty t9 breaks Chaftity that hath once vowed it , 


though it were no duty , hut a fin before, fur 
dohbtUfs ^yUarrtage is a fin accident ally to fitmt^ 
thoHgh not in its ovpn nature , and far from be^ 
ing a duty to all ? But according to thin doctrine ^ 
if a man vp ere eighty years oldy and utterly iwpo^ 
tenty and unable to breaks his <vow of Chaftity 
if he would, he is bound to do it , rvhtch he can- 
not do^ and to breaks his vow when he cann§t 
breaks it ? or if an old mans marriage that hath 
no neceffuy, would undo him f If and his (former) 
children ^ he is. bound to marry ^ if he have but 
once vowed that he wtll not ^ or at leaft he 
way do tt? (For which of the contraries you 
chufe [] May or Muft^-^ *^^ uncertain* ) 

XXVI. lb* [That either it was a fin to fut 
TiUures in the Geneva Biblesy and^ fin to have 
cur Dutch Chimney bricks which contain aU the 
hiftory of the Gofpely or any other Image of Chrifi 
crucified wherever ^ or once tofeefuch a Figure ; 
or elfe it is a fin to have any holy ajfeEtienftirrd 
ftp in our hearts by feeing it : fo that though a& 
things are fan6lified and pure to the pure^ and I 
may excite holy ajfe^ions when J fee hut a worm 
or flower^ or any creature , or a houfe^ or any 
work, of many yea when I fee the fins of thewick^^ 
4d , 1 may fxir up thankfulncfs for grace ^ 
yet if I fie in a (^nimney piece ^ or a Geneva Bi- 
ble, or elfe -where y the Imnge of Chrifi crucified^ 
it is a fin to excite holy affections thereupon ^ Th^ftgh 
the tv.enty one Cafts which I haze named oi un^ 
Uvrfnl to ufe an Image in^ be every one obferved 
( 04 the Cafes of danger-^ fcavdaland aUtiy refl.) 



XXVII. The image of Chriji Crucified ifj ihi 
Imagination or mind of a Believer is a pni 
Therefore it is a fin to thinly of a CrucifiedChrifty 
or to know Chrtfi crucified^ or to love Chrifl cru- 
cified as fuch :■ for it is impojfible to think, on 
birrif kj^ow him or love' him as cr^cified^ witho/ft 
the Image, of him on the mind : Therefore Paul 
determined to do nothingbnt fn, when he deter- 
mined to know nothing but Chrift and him crucified : 
(and inflead of anathematiz^ing 'them that love 
him not , he jhoitld have anathematiz.ed or repro- 
ved all thut love him as crucified. 

Do you and your Companions know that yoii 
are renouncing your Bapcifm, and Chriflianity, 
and the Crofs of Chrift, while you would reba- 
prize us all ? I charge it not on you as your 
meaning -. But \^ it be not the downright. ton fe- 
quence of tlie words of all my Religious backbi- 
ters, who fay that the Image of Chrift crucified 
heiitteth, 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. IThatthe 
Ordination and tJ^iniflerial Office received by 
Any that live in Communion with the £hurch of 
Rome, and confequeiitly ail their baptiz^ings and 
other miniflrations arc not only lins ^i^f nullities : 
(Though they were fuch as Bernard, Malachie, 
Patrick, Gerfon , Ferus , Kempis , Gerard Zut- 
phanienfis, ^r. ) And fo none of the Engbflj Na- 
tion had true buftifm from their firfi Converfl- 


m by Auguftlne till the Reformation , but all di-^ 
td unbapttz^ed and jljonld have been baptized 
again : And fo Jlwnld all baptized by them m any 
Kingdoms of Europe or the World: and fo Luther, 
Zuinglius, Martyr, Mufculus, and the refl of onr 
frfl Reformers^ were never Chrtfinedy but all dyed 
unbaptiz,ed perfons , and flwnld have been bapti"^ 
z,ed after their converfion, 

XXIX. lb. That it were better have all Eu- 
rope unbaptiz^ed ( Infants and adult) than fnch 
Ai Bernard, Ferus , CafTander , ^c* JIjohU ba^ 
j>tiz,e theWy thoUgh thsy had leave to protefl again j^ 
all that is (infid in it^ and were put Ptpon no fiH' 
fnl promifesj profeffions^ or aUs t hem fe Ives. 

X X X# lb. That it is a fin for thofe in any 
£oHntry that can have no other ^ to confent that a 
Paptfi Priefi do teach a Child to Speak^ or to Ready 
or to Writej or teach him Adufick^^ Arithmetich^^ 
Geometry, Latine, (jreel^ or Hebrew j Logich^^ or 
Grammar , or any Arty though but fuch as LaboH- 
rers get their daily bread by. 

XXXI. lb. That it is a fm for thofe j« Italy, 
or any Kingdom that can have no other ^ to let a 
Popijh Priefi teach their Children the Creed, 
Lords prayer and Ten-Commandments which all 
Chrifiians are agreed in: but it's better that they 
never learned a word of the Bible , or Ch, ■f.an" 
faithy than learn it of fuch a Priefi : fo finfuUy 
did Bifljop Ufher make the motion to the Prtefis 
in Ireland, that Protefiants and thy might joyn 

Y in 


in teaching the barbarous people the Creed and 
common principles of Religion, 

XXXI I. lb. That it is a fin to hear a Po^ 
fijh Frtefi read Gods word or any good book 9 
though it were a Protefiants, or one of the Anci- 
ent fathers : or to hear him Jpeak^ the trnefi Do- 
Urine ^ though in a Country where it can no other 
vcay be heard or learned* 

XXXIII. lb. That in fuch a Country nhere ; 
there is no other ^ it is a fin to joyn with one of 
them in any Vrayer how good [oever ^ though cra^ 
ving a bleffwg on our meat^ or in a Family j or 
elfe where - even in the Lords Vrayer • 

XXXIV. lb. That it is necejfary to Salva- 
tion to believe that the Pope is Antichrifl^ and fo 
no man , woman^ or child can be faved that belie- 
Veth it not. And fo fince Antichrifl arofe , we 
have a new Article iti our Creed: Even for thofe 
that know not what the Pope isy whether male or 
female J flefh or fijlu 

XXXV. lb. That it if a fin to read any good 
hook, in the Church befides the Scripture^any Chapter 
in the Apocrypha^ any Homily or Sermon j though 
Written by an Anabaptijl^ and though we declare 
what it is y and mention it for no other end but 
'H^hat it is written for^ as We cite Authors as wit- 
fieffes : ( And yet ir is lawful for Mr. X>, to pubf- 
lifn many ( falily ) in Print. ) 


XX XVI. lb. That it isafmtoreadaTrayer 
in the Church , thongh it were the Fraycr of Chriji 
John 17. or of Mofes or others in the Pfalmes^ or 
any others. 

X X X V I L lb. That if one fray zJ^r, Dan- 
vers to fray for him, it Is Idolatry ^ or if the fco- 
fie or ftck^ fray the Mtnijler to fray for them , 
or Children their Parents •, or if one floould do fa 
hy an Angel that jhonld appear to him • or to a 
Saint or Angel itnfeen, imagining that he were 
frefent ^ this is not only Suferfiitton andfo ftnfnl^ 
but alfo Idolatry ; which ps giving Gods frofer 
tvorjhif to a creature : And confccjuently it is the 
frofer ivorfhtp of God only , to fray him to fray 
for Hi to htwfclf, 

XXXVIII. lb. That it is a fm to how the 
kjiee at the naming of JefHS-, though we renounce 
all in it that is fuperfiitiom and Jcandala/is^ and 
how equally at the name of God, Jehovah, 
ChriR, &€. 

X X X I X» lb. That it is a fmto fiand when 
the Gofpel vs read^ though we be never fo weary of 
fittings and fl and equally at the reading of all the 
refi of the Serif ture^ or at Sermon without difiin^ 
iiion •, fo heynonjly did the Vniverfal Church fin 
for mayiy hundred years in their long fiandt?rgs ; 
and fo finful a thing it is to hear in a Churih 
or Afeeting'flace that hath no feat s^ nnlej^ we ft 
9n the ground, 

Y 2 XL. 

X L. tb. That it is a fin to kneel rphile the 
Ten-Qommandments are ready though it he by wo- 
men irhofe ciifiom that fofinre is ( Hpon a bof ) 
throHoh the reft of the dales exercife ; and though 
it be never fo epenly declared that we take thent 
not for a prayer y nor do it to any ill fignificati-^ 
on or intent. 

X L I. lib. That he finneth who doth not con- 
demn the Univerfal Church of Chrift for many 
hundred years ( of the greatefl antiquity that we 
have any records of fince the Apoftles ) for their 
worshipping with their faces towards the E^ift ; 
Thgugh he jljould himfelf dtfltke that praBice and 
never ufe tt^ nor co-nfent to have it ufed. 

X LI I. lb. That tt is a fin to fay , that any 
children of any wicked men in the world^ have any 
gti It of any of their nearer Parents finsj b-ut on- 
ty of Adams : ( And confequently it muji beheld 
that God unjujhly threatned andpunijJjed any fuch 
children for their Parents fin , from the dates of 
Cain, Cham, Pharaoh , Ifhmael y Efau, Achan, 
Gche^i, till the dales of that Generation threat- 
ned Mattb. 23. And alfo that no man receiveth 
<t''iy pravity from Adam neither , bccaufe it mufl 
pafs ta him through his next Parents and bt 
theirs^ and he receiveth none that is theirs : And 
fo all Nations are juftified againfi all guilt of any 
Parents fa but Adam, and warranted to deny to 
vonfefs any fuch guilt , or to be beholden to 
Chnfi or mercy for the pardon of it.y ib)ugh 


f 3m; 

David , Daniel and Nehcmiah did otherv^ife^) 
I fay again, cither Mr. X). and his like do re- 
aliy hold the contraries of the a/Tertions ot mine 
which he thus notifieth as heynous errors, or not -. 
If not , he raileth againft his Confcience in hy- 
pqcrifie ; If yea, then chefe propoficions 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 procf 
of aU thefe ftrangc Commandments, and teli mc 
where they are written ( if I have overlookc 
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 ccme, thac 
thefe were their Dodrines, for the love of which 
they whifpered or clamoured againft me. 

But here he ftops and pittiech the Reader, and 
referreth them to my Book it felf ; And I wilJ 
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 , anil 
will not read the Book it felf, and all in it to- 
gether that concerneth the qusflioned iubjed^ be- 
fore he judge ^ I take not my felf bound to write 
more books to tell him what I wrote in the for- 
mer, nor do I think that I am otherwife obliged 
to redifie his Error , than by Prayer or Coun- 
fel, endeavouring to bring him to fomecenderncfs 
of Confcience , fear of God anj fobrieiy of 
luind. Y 3 Bl.c 

But his ftrength lieth in frightful exclamations, 
\^ O vpas ever the like yet heardy &:c. to palliate 
(abominations^ and reconcile m to IdoUtrom Poftfj 
names^ as Altar^ Frieflsy Sacrifices^ &c. and their 
ha^tifm,~\ And yet he might have known that 
all rhefe words are oft ufed by the ancicntcr lore 
of the holy Paftors of the Churches after the 
Apoftles , and I remember not that ever one 
Chriftian was againft it , or fcrcpled the ufe of 
them : And^ I before fhewed that they are ufed 
by the Holy-Ghoft in Scripture, whom I dare not 
accufe of IdoUtrom names , or reconciling us to 
them. Whether all the Papifts baptifm admini- 
ilred and received be nullities, and all Papifts to be 
4:ebaptized,and all Proteftanrs that were baptized by 
Papifts? are queftions which I will not be fo vain 
as todifpute with one that talketh at this mans rate. 

But yet we have not done with the high char- 
ges of his Preface : He faith '' [^ Oh ! were not 
*' thofe twenty Qaeries^ fo much again fi the [elf- 
''^ evidencing authority of the Scriptures j in his 
^' Admon. p. 142. in favour of Tradition a heyr 
*' ncHS provocation.) to fay no TKore of them f ~\ 

zAnfvc, It feems they were fo to you. But re- 
ally , did you read that book and the other to 
Mi^« BagjJmWy and yet not fear to follow him and 
out-do him in notorious untruths, after fo full a 
convidion and warning as was given him ? Think 
on it, and again cry out ( But alas! whereto will 
not men run left to themfelves -^l there profef- 
(-'d and proved to yoiir friend Mr. Bagjhaw that 
I was for , and wrote for the fclf-evidencing au- 
thority of the Scripture^, and it is untrue that thofe 



twenty Queries or any one of them is againft k* 
But feeing you think oihcrwife , if indeed you 
held the contrary to the afTertions implied in thofe 
twenty. Queries, I am not at the end ot the Ca- 
talogue of your ftrange Dodrines : If you and 
my revilers own them, fo wilJ not fober men : e. g. 

X L I I I. [ Every Chnfltan wufi fee the Co- 
fits of the Scripture written hy the Prophets and 
jipoflles own hands : Or at leafl mnji nnderflund 
theTranfcriptsmthe Original tongues, \ 

X L I V. \_ God hath promifcd unerring infal^ 
lihility to alt Scribes m the world that write out 
the Bible ^ and all Printers that print it : Or at leafh 
to fome of them^ And we may be certain who thofe 
are, 2 

X L V. [^ Though the feveral Copies have a 
multitude of differences^ it is certain none of thcifi 
are erroneous^ or miftaken,^ 

X L V !• [^ Thfffe men and women that under* 
fiand not Hebrew or Greek may be certain only 
hy feeing a Hebrew and Greeks Bible^ without a- 
Tranflatort^elp , that every word in it is the 
Vpord of God. 2 

X L V 1 1. {_ Either he that will be fure which 
Copy is without mi f- writings mu(i- firfi fee all the 
Copies tn the world theit differ ♦, or elje if 
he never fee hut one ( or few ) he may he cer- 
tain that it IS right tn the words in which :t 
Y 4 diffentb 

djffereth from all the reft vphtch he never faw» 2 

X L V 1 1 1. \_ No corrupt or mif-wrltten (/}py 
ef the Serif tnre c^.n come to a true Believer^ 
hands : Or if it do^ he can infallibly tell us the £r- 
rata,'^ i • 

X L I X. A true Believer that ne<ver faw the 
Originals can hy feeing a tranfiatipn judge of all 
the diverfe readings in the Originals* 

L. The Tranflators are either all infallible in 
iranfiattng -, or elfe a true "Believer is certain 
Vphich of them is , and which not , and vphich 
tranflation among many faulty ones is fault lefs. 

L I. He that never favQ all Tranflations , but 
perhaps but one , can by that one tell that it is 
truer than all the differing ones, which he never 


LI I. cx^// this of Copies and Tranflations is 
known to Believers either by Prophetical Revela^' 
tton from Heaven , or by the fe If -evidencing de-^ 
fiionftration of the Copy and Tranflation which he 
feetk * 

L 1 1 1. \^Every true Believer without being ever 
told it by man^ can tell by the fe If ^ evidencing de^ 
monflration of the words , that the Canticles and 
the Books of Judges , Ruth , Chronicles, Jonah, 
are (^amnical^ and that the wtfdom of Solomon, . 
Baruck, Pauls Epiftle to the, Laodiccans, Cla- 


pens to the Corinthians , ^c. are not Cdnofti- 
fM , 

L I V. Either Ged will giiie faith to no one 
that cannot read ( among all the illiterate King- 
doms of the rvorld where the Gojpel is to he preach- 
fdj ) or elfe all that cannot ready may without ever 
reading a word he certain hy fe If -evidence which 
readings in the differing Copies^ and which Tran- 
Rations are true or falje^ and which books and 
verfes and fentences arc Canonical and which 
, not^ 

L V. Either Cod hath promifed that every illi- 
terate Chrtftian ( that cannot read ) Jhall hear 
fame one elfe read every word of the Bible to him 
( in Originals and Tranflations^ or one ) that he 
may judge j or elfe by the felf-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 TranJIatedy without ever hear" 
ing them. 

L V I. when the greatefls Learned Linguifls dif- 
fer about a Legion ^ or Tr an flat ion ^ ( as the 
Septuagmt, Sec. ) ( fuch as Lud. Capellus, Ufher, 
Buxcorf, Bootius, De Dieu, L' Empereur, Wal- 
ton, crc. ) or when fuch oa Luther, Ahhamer, ^c. 
differ about a Canonical Bookj, ( as James ) it is he^ 
caufe they fee not that felf-evidence^ which every 
Chriflian may fee^ that cannot read nor was ever 
told tt , that one part^ ( // not more ) do herein 
erry while their judgcniencs are contrary. 


. None of thefe fifty fix are Articles of my Faith, 
nor Gods CommaHdments ( 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 againft the contrary affertions as heynom ^r- 
rorsj or tell about among the receivers of falfc. 
reports y that I hold dangerous ^rre^r/ for faying the 
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 rajh Calumniator that 
dare reproach or fpeak evil ofthat which he un» 
derftandeth not , nor will not , fo much as by 
reading my plain words , be at the labour to un- 

Perhaps fome better minded perfon will fay. It 
eafteth foor Chrifiians into ferplextty to hearfuch 
doubts about the Scripture readings and tranfiati- 
onsy were they not better concealed f Anfw, They 
are not to be talkt of unfeafonably to uncapable 
perfons : They are not to be told the ignorant in- 
ftead of a Catechifra : But they are all publick- 
ly known to the learned world long ago , and 
lold 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 abfurdicies and falflioods 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 Proteftant Religion and all 
(ober godly Proteftants , from the fcorn of fuch 
imputed dotages. 


But this is the unhappy fruit of overdoing: 
There are fome men artiong us, fo overmfe and 
overrighteoHs in defending the fufficiency of the 
Scriptures, that they would perfwade us , that it 
is fujjicient to exfound it felt without a teaching 
Expoficor, 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 preserve it felf from corruption 
without the care of man, and to tranflate it felf 
without a Tranflator ♦, And that all Priared Ser- 
mons , or books of Diviniiy, all Catechifms , all 
Sermon notes for memory, all forms of Prayer , 
yea the dividing the Bible into Chapters and Ver- 
fes, and Printing Contents, and Citations or Re. 
ferences ( much more the Geneva Notes and Pi- 
d:ures ) are all (inful additions to the Word of 
God. As if the [efficiency of the Statutes of the 
Land lay in Keeping , Printing , Tranfcribing , 
Pleading and Expounding themfelves, without the 
ufe of Scribes , Clerks , Lawyers, Law-books or 

I am well afiured that God needeth not oar 
Lies to his Glory, and that truth and falfhood do 
fo ill agree , that though falfhood may fteal a 
cloak from truth, yet truth will never be behol- 
den to falfhood for friendfhip and defence ^ And 
if ever Lies pretend any kindnefs or fervice to the 
truth, it is but treacheroully to fupplant it , and 
will turn to its difTervice and injury at laft. 


f 330 

In a word. All the Devils in Hell, and all the 
Confiftory at Rome^ could not ealily find out a 
more effedual way ( as far as I can underftand ) 
to turn multitudes to Popery , than i. By calling 
triith 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 Seds, 
and condemning each other as unmeet to be com- 
r^unicatcd with ; and fo making men believe that 
they niuft be Papiftsor diftrafted Dotards, whofe 
felf-conceitednefs in Religion hath made thera 
pad : 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 , 
rnur4ering fome and drawing others byfleflilyand 
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, i. with a 
fmart refledion on Mr. William AHen and Mr. 
Lamb for forfaking the caufe of Anabaptillry 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^ to confider whether He or 
They (hould be moft earneftly called to Repen- 
tance, and raoR fpeedily pradife it. 




REader, having the following vindication of 
Mr. uillen put into my hand, I think it not 
unmeet upon chis occafion to undeceive fome who 
to render his example in receding from the way 
of Separation wherein he was foQietinie engaged 
upon the account of Infant-baptifm, the lefs imita- 
ble, and his endeavours to draw off others, the lefs 
fuccefsful ; have given out that he did but turn 
wiih 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 atfair , and alfo by 
his book called >4 RetraElation of Separation^ pub- 
lifhed 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 formahty in it , but a fpirit of 
Chrillian love and peace. And if the reafons in 
that Book and in his pcrfwajive to peace and uni^ 
ty (ince publifhcd, be fuch as none of the Sepa- 
ratifts can confute or fland before, they will have 
no reafon to impute the Authors change to car- 
nal reafon or worldly interell. I queftion not but 
experience after trial, which is wont to make teach- 
able men wifer, put him tjpon reviewing the grounds 
of his pradice, and fo had a great hand in that ai- 
re ration which he made. And I would have thofe 


who account it a difparageraent to a man to alter 
liis 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 fay alfo of Mr.I/^w^j^whom thofe 
that eafily judge before they know , have accufed 
alfo as turning with the times, when as on my 
knowledge his change was in 1658. or the begin- 
ning of 1659. For by letters I did foUicite him 
to that alteration and received his anfwers, fooner 
than I knew of Mr. Aliens change : And I per- 
ceive that Mr. Lambs words and example arc 
flighted by very many , upon two accufations , 
I. That he is run into the other extream of over- 
much conformity: 2. That he is over hot. As 
to the firft, my diftancc maketh me a ftranger to 
his mind and practice. But as long as he con- 
formeth not 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 
Magiftrates to appoint publick Teachers for the 
people. 2. And as to the fecond ( not juflifying 
my own earneftnefs , much lefs others which I 
am not acquainted with^ to calm' the minds of 
the offended I may well fay, i.That it is no 
v/onder if a man that is naturally of a warm and 
earneft fpirit, do (hew it mod when 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 


gullr, as to be a Teacher of an Anabaptifts Church 
afid to write for them, be an earned exprefler of 
his Repentance when he is recovered , and ear- 
ned! y 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 follovees are Mr. Aliens own words* • 

Worthy Sir J 

1 Having fome intimation that you are about to 
make Tome return to the Author of a late Trea- 
life 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 ftumbling-block , at which forae are too 
apt to dafh their foot , and thereby alfo further 
caution men againft being mifled by giving too 
much credit to the quotation of Authors , as ma- 
naged by that Treatifor. 

In reading a Treatife of Baptifm of the firfl: 
Edition, Penned by H,D. I obferved that in the 
two laft pages of his Poftfcript, he mentions two 
difcourfes that were publi 1 ed 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 vpill-worpjip and Idola- 

Indeed I am forry that that author fhould puc 
me upon any neceility of refleAing fo much up- 
or. him in vindicating my felf, as to tell the world 


that upon this oceafion I having twice reviewed 
that Book of mine, did not find io much as the 
mention of either of thofe two words rvill-worpjip 
er idoUtryi upon iny oceafion whacfoever. Nor 
am I confcious to ray felf of ever being fo abfurd 
as once to think that, to be idolatry , which he 
moft untruly faith I call fo in that Book. That 
caufedoubtlefs whacfoever it is, is little beholding 
to fuch an Advocate as thinks to reconcile men to 
it by abufing difTente'rs. 

As for the alteration I have made, I gave the 
world an account of the reafons and grouiids of 
it, in my RetraEiation of Separations publifhed in 
the year 1659. which was before the turn of 
limes, and in my perjwajive to Peace and Vnity^ 
fmce publifhed. And if this Author could have 
folidly difcovered the infufficiency of thofe rea- 
Ibns and grounds to juftifie fuch an alteration and 
my prefent pradice , 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 fatisfadion 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. Ai 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 fault. 

WiL Men. 


An Admonition to Mr. VanVers, 


YOur vehement importunity having greatfy. 
injured rae, by occafioning the lofs offomc 
©t my time ( who.have none to fpare ) upon this 
writing, which elfe would have been needlefs-t 
you muft bear with me while Idefire you, fome- 
time alone, to anfvver thefe Queftions ferioufly toi- 
your Confcience. 

Qnefi, I. Whether the untruths In martef of 
fad: which you confidently pubUfh , be not of fo! 
ftupendious a magnirude, as fhould have affrighted 
the Confcience of a Turk or Pagan ? When no 
lefs than four whole Bodies of men are fo flafider- 
cd by you, the Donatifls^ the NovatiAtu^ the Old 
Bnttains^ zudths lVaUe?!feSy each containing, it'4 
like many hundred thoufands : And when fo ma- 
ny whole Qookj Cnot particular fentences only J 
are faliified accordingly ? 

2 . How great a number Vfould your untruths sipi 
J)ear,were they all gathered and enumerated to you? 
When in all the lines which I have examined I have! 
met with fo few that are not guilty of them > , > 

3. When yon accufe my Admonition to Mr© 
B^l^^AiA> y and thereby fhew that you read it ^ 
iliould not the eviction of fourfcore undeniable 
untruths, in matter of fad, have been a warning id 
you to avoid the l\ke ? 

Z 4->\Vh8- 


4. Whether you do not more by fuch notori- 
ous fcandal to difhonour your felf and all that are 
fuch, and hinder your own fuccefTes, than many 
writings againft you could have done ? 

5. Whether you do not fcandaloufly tempt 
men to juftifie the contempt of Tender Confciences^ 
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-bief- 

6. Whether men can judge it probable that 
fuch voluminous notorious Forgers and Slande- 
rers , have fo much more illumination than all 
etJier-Chriftians, as to be meet men to call all 
the Chriftian world almoftto be new Chriftned, 
afnd to unchriften almoft all for about thirteen 
hundred years f to leave out the controverted 
time ? ) 

7. AVould 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? f unlefs as (in 
by overruling providence may occafion good./ 
Are thefe likely means to propagate truth ? 

9. Wha: is the matter that men that can do all 
rfiis, cannot (Conform ? What durft I not juhfcribe 
to, if I durft do all this? 

10. Is it not a difhonour to your rebaptized 
Chuirches to be fo polluted, and to have fo loofc. 
or partial a difcipline, as to fuller fuch publick 
fcandals as thefe : and to retain fuch a member asi 
you, and not bring you to repentance or excom-; 

^ . municate 


munlcate you ? Have our worfl Parifli Churches 
tiiany greater fcandals ? 

If pride, partiality and paffion will not let your 
Confcience work upon thefe things, but you will 
turn them into gall inftead of repentance, atleafl; 
I offer them to the Confideration of others , to 
prevent or remedy their infedion. 

And remember (which you have told the world 
how in Print ) that you fent your Bookfeller to 
me, to know what I had to fay againfl your firfl 
Edition, before you publifhed 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 delirc your Recovery from the 
unthankful error , and your Repentance for the 
finful means of propagating it, and for your ini- 
jury to our early Rights and blellingSo 

1 3 

The Third Tart : 


M- Danvers 

R- E P L Y 


Detcding his impenitent proceeding infalfe 
Accufation, in hope of his Repentance, aod 
the undeceiving of others, and to warn this 
Age to take more heed of the common 
ING of things which they have 
not throughly examined, partial- 
ly taking them on their Lea- 
ders trufl. 

By Richard Baxter, 

LONDON^ Printed for Nevil Simmons 
and Jonathan Rooinjon, 1675. 


A Premonition. 

REadcr, ttiere are two ftumbling-blocks to be 
taken out of thy way, which 1 had rather 
have had no occafion to mention. The firft is the 
Name and Authority of that very worthy and ex- 
cellent man , Doft. T. 'Barlow y S. Th, Prof, in 
Oxford , which Mr. D. over and over ciceth as 
for his caufe. Of which till he think meet to 
fpeak for himfelf 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 fubfcribeth the Articles 
and Liturgie of the Church of England^ is againft 
Infant-baptifm, when the Art. 27. faith, The Ba^ 
ftifff} of Yomig Children is in any vaife to be rf- 
tained in the Church as mofl agreeable with the 
JnfiitHtion of Qorift.~\ 

1 1. There is another worthy and eximiousDo- 
d:or of the fame llniverfity ( Dod:. Th, Tullie ) 
who having thought meet in a Latine Treatife of 
Juftification to endeavonr at large fin a zeal for 
Onhodoxnefs no doubt ) to confute rsy fuppofcd 
errors (inmy Aphorifms about twenty two years 
ago revoked -, taking no notice of the many 
Treatifes fince written by me on that fubjed, but 
only of a late Epiftle to Mr. ylllcns Book, ) he 
hath alfo thought good to warn young men to 
Z 4 t-ke 

take heed that they do not rafhiy receive my 
Tbeology as bringing forth novel paradoxes, be- 
caufe I hold forae guilt in Children of their nea- 
rer Parents fins : exclaiming [^ O cjic&s ante The^ 
oloj^Qj quicmque unquam fuifits \ ] It feemeth that 
this Famous Learned man knew not, that this was 
jiuguflins judgement ( and many another ancient 
and modern Writer's, ) and that he is lefs for the 
Letany than I (that fubfcribe or declare not full 
aflent) who heartily pray , Remember not Lord 
oHr offences ^ nor the offences of our fore-fa- 
thers^ &c. This having lome refpcd to the ful> 
jed of this Book , I [bought meet here *to give 
you notice , that if God, will I hope in time to 
give the world yet fuller fatisfadion on both thefc 
iubjeds, (^ Juftification , and fecondary Original 
fin ; ) Though I thought my unanfwered Difpu- 
rations of Juftification , and other Treatifes ha^ 
fully done the firft ; And the publifhing of fome 
old Papers of Original fin, I think will fully do the 


(345) ■ 



M'' T>anveri Reply 


M^- Will s. 


the frightful AfpeCi of his Reply, 

^f, i."]^ JB^ Y Anfwer to Mr. T(7»?^f^ and 
1% /■ Mr. Danvers being written 
1 ^1 1 about the fame time as my 
k, ^ JL Epiftle to Mr. Wills his book, 

hath fince then beew detained in the Fnnters hand, 

if/hoff delay hath allowed me the fight of Mr. 

Panvs^'s Reply to Mr. Wills^ and the opportu- 


nity of animadverting on it, before mine is tonw 
abroad. And upon my mofl impartial confide- 
jfation ic reneweth the grief of my heart to think 
of thefe evils which it fets before me. 

5^.2. I. That the fouls of poor Chriftians (hould 
be under the Temptations of fuch writings an4 
teaching as here we find : Where fuch untruths 
in matter of fad are ftill jollified with fuch a 
face of confidence, and divulged as for God, and 
for the fouls of men, that moft ignorant perfons 
may be tempted to think that Modefly and Cha^ 
rity require them to believe, that they are real 
truths, ic being a harfli unmanly thing to judge 
that iuch a perfon can poffibly be fo hardened, 
as to ftand fo boldly to all thefe things, which 
have fuch publick hiftorical evid<ince, if they were 
all downright falfhoods. 

And it is a hard task for i writer to be put 
to anf^er a Chriftian and a Gentleman as Mr, 
Danvers doth Mr. Wiils^RepL pag, 120. \^^^ Know 
•*' that hence yoit have a further difcovery of th e 
*' great unfai:hfulnefs and want of confcience in 
" the Author, for daring thus to abufe the world 
*' with a Cheat, and that which be k^ov(fcth to be 
*'a meer forgery of his dwn] And fag. 122. 
" [Let it be judged whether he hath not injuri- 
^' oufly belied Ofiander, belied Clnniacenfis^ beli- 
" ed Peter Bruis^ belied, the truth, which by this 
*' forgery he vi;ould cover and hide-, abufedthc 

*' world , belied and abufed me But much 

"more fear his own confcience by this piece of 
,^' folly and faiiliood.3 To be thus at \_Thou Ip- 
■efi J and [_ Thou Heft ~] is anunfavoury work ^ 


y^a !fl (o few lines to give the Lie five times 
«t \c2&. But for an ignorant Reader to believe 
wImE this jimhor hath done till he needs muft^ 
is yet far harder. Though we fay. He that will 
frvear, will lie^ and therefore we hardly believe 
a {wearer •, yet if a man with many hundred bloody 
oaths (hould affert many particulars of publick 
cognifance, we arc ready to think it inhumane 
to fufped that the man is fo inhumane as thus 
to fwear if fome of them were not true. Alas 
for the poor Church of Chrift, that muft have 
fuch fore temptations/ How Ihall theybewith- 
ftood ! 

^.3. 2. And how fad is it that a Chriftian 
man profeilmg not only Trnth and Godlinef, hut 
fo much ofthefe as to be above Communion with 
fuch as we , fhould ever degenerate into fuch a 
thing as his prcfent writing doth dii'cover i O 
what need have we to lay to heart that o^Paul^ 
^om. II. be not high-minded but fear /* and 
to learn over and over. Jam, 3. and Chrift's 
words to the Sons of Thunder, ye kriow not what 
manner offpirit ye are of ? 

^. 4. And alas, that ever the bitter volumi- 
nous Reproaches of the zeal of the prefent age, 
/hould have fuch a fcandal or flumbling block 
laid in their way , to harden them in the ju- 
ftification of their reproaches ! as if our Zeal 
were the Caufe or Cover of fuch heinous lins : 
Woe to the world bccaufc of offences, and woe 
to them by whom they come ! 

^.5. 4. But what a tremendous warning is 
this agaioft the fpirit o^unwaixnnuhk feparatto??^ 


OT true Schiffffy when the fame perfon fhall ven- 
ture upon all that is here wrirten by hina , who 
yec caketh our Infant Baprifcn for a meer AW- 
A'ry, and the Chriftian world that hath no other 
to be uncapable of the Church- Communion of 
fuchas he ? Me-think this is a Pillar of Salt. I 
well remfmber 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 deferted us, fell into. 




/f^ impnitent falfs alU^ation, cfrvi:ngj^i 
Infant Baftipn : TerruUian , (^c, 

(* i.T have before faid, tbat I hive faid fo 
X much out ct' Scripcure and Anri- 
quir^^, for Infanrs Church-men: berfhrp and Ba- 
ptifm, to which I have yet feen no Anfw'er thai 
ihould fatisfie an impaniaiman, eirher frcm Mr. 
Tombes, Mr. DamerSy or any other , that I will 
not lofe time and labour in* replying to their 
frivolous exceptions. Arxi here I meddle diiz- 
dlybut with the matter of fad, becaafe by o- 
ftentation of hiflory , Mr. D. would feduce the 
ignorant into the belief of grofs untruths. I be- 
gan with Tertnllian^ who is his firft wi:nei^, 
in his Catalogue , reprinted here in his re- 

<. 2. And why have we no fatisfadory »- 
fwer to the t'e things Yo. oft replyed ? i. Tiat 
TertuRuins words prove that Infant-Bapcifm wis 
then in cfe : And it is the matter c( fj^ rbat 
we are fearching after ? 2. And doth he think 
that Antichrift was before TertuSiMis time ? 
5. The opinion of TertnllUn feemeth roc at a3 
to be againft the Lawfulnefs of Infint Eaptifirr, 
in oeneral •, but againfl the e! igiblen efs cf it fn 
cafe of no apparent dinger of deach. For I have 
oft proved that the judgement of tha: age, and 

• feme 


fome folIowHig was, that none fhould be compel- 
led to be Baptized, or to Baptize their Infants, 
but they ihould themfelves be chufers of the 
time. For the conceit of the abfolute ne-ceffity 
of Baptifm to falvation, came in arccrwards. 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 
flate of falvation, no wonder ii they were not 
fo hafty and peremptory for the fudden Invefli" 
tare into the Chriilian Church ftate, when they 
look it to be but the publick folemnization of a 
Covenant , really made and valid before. And as 
.Naz.ianz.ene is for Infant-Baptifra (long after ^ 
in cafe of danger, but elfe for ilaying three or 
four years , till they can fpeak : fo Tertulliari 
feemeth to prefer delay for fuch conveniencies, 
as he mentioneih. 4. And if Mr. D, doubt of 
this, let him tell me why he faith, cunBatio uti^ 
lior. 5* And giveth the reafon from the incon- 
venience to the Sponfors. 6. And why he alfo 
perfwadeth the unmarried and young WidJowcs 
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 
Jike reafon with that of Infants. Did bethink thatitr 
was flatly unlawful for maids znd yonng vpiddovps to 
be Baptized ? or only lefsfafe^andeligtblejCxccpt in 
danger of death ? The cafe is plain. 7. And whether 
Jie like his other reafon, JQuidfefiinat innocens m^ 
ta^ adreTyiifJionemfeccatorPim ? And whether TiPr- 
tnEian here do not tell usthar he took thofe Infants 
that were Baptized to receive thereby folemn Remif- 



jlion %f fin, if they had'any fin ? If he thoughi^ f^ 
had^one, we have little reafon to follow his opinion, 
8, Whether his own words plainly (lie w not what 
' I have faid of him, that it was ( as Conflantine , and 
multitudes delayed Baptifm)for fear of falling after* 
wards, which they thought moft dangerous [^yF^;/j 
fondw tntelli^aht Bapttjmiy magis timebunt confr" 
ciitioneni qnam dilationem : Fidts ititegra fecura 
eft defalnte ] 

And lib, (k jiniwa. Tertullian faith, Apofiohs 
€X fanElificato alterutro fexufanSios procreari aitj 
tarn f.v fcminu pr&Yogativa quam ex inftitntionis^ 

dtfciflina Omnis Anima in Adam cenfe-^^ 

tuKy donee in Chriflo rtcenfeatur : See the Teft 
there for Infants birth holinefs. 

^. 3. His renewed reproaches of <7j'/>riVi<^, as ha^ 
ving Ancichriftian dodrine , and his renewed 
q'jeftioning whether there werd ever fuch a 
Council as that at ^^r/^^^f mentioned, are things 
fo audacious and grofs that they need no further 
anfwer. fag* 90. 

' 5^. 4. And his citation of At^ftin pag. 94* 
[ that n'hkh had not hten ivftituted in 
(Itincils^ &cj is nothing againfl this authority , 
or to difprove its Apoftolical tradud:ion • por 
it is eafie for him to fee, i. That it was not 
whether Infants fhould be Baptized that was the 
queftion, but whether it fhould be done before 
the eighth day ? 2. That this Council was fa 
for from Inftttitting Infant Bapcifm, that it was 
never brought into doubt or que (lion among them, 
buttaken as the unqueftioned pradice ofihe Church. 
But O that fuch as Mr. D, wtduM give over- 


tonpOring Anticbrift fo far /and rejoicing' an<^ 
hardningthePapiftsj as to make fuch ^% Cypiart. 
teachers of Antichriftian doArine ^ and Antichr^l 
to have been the Author of Infants Chriftening 
fccfore Cyfrian and Tertnlliarjs time ? The Papifts 
owe fuch advcrfaries thanks. 

(• 5. Tag, 104. He boafts of forty more 
againft Infant Baptifm cited by him, as not yec 
humbled for hisabufe. And becaufe Mr. Wtlls, 
by miftake granted him Adrian and Hincmare\ 
he feemeth to believe himfelf the more confi- 
dently, as if they had indeed been againft Infant: 
Baptifm : of which before. . . 

j: i. 6. Tag. 105. He reciteth his falfe ftory of 
j6m»^, of which before. 

^. 7. Vag. 106. He reciteth his falfiiication 
of the Bifliop of Apamea, And turneth us for 
bis proofs to, fome book oft called ih^Dntch Cen- 
inry Writers, and the Dutch aJUartyrologie : I 
fuppofe both Novel and Ambaptifi Authors 5 
And he may as weU turn us over to our , neigh'-, 
hour Anahaftifts to tell us what is written m 
the ancient Hiftorians and Dodors , when we 
have the books therafelves before us. 
. ^* 8. Tag. 106, 107. Heimpenitently repea- 
teth his flander of ^F/Vj^/^j^, referring us to his profs^ 
p. 283, &c. Where having before fal fly told us 
that he v^rote another book^ called TrialogtA be- 
fidcs his Dialogues (when it is the fame book that 
is called Trialogus in the M. 5. and Dialogus 
in the printed Copy, as he may fee by many citations 
out of the Irialogmm Bifliop Vfher, de fuccejjl 
tcclef, v/hkh are all in the Dialogs )h^ tells 


US of a great many of IVkkJifes words to other 
purpofes , and cannot bring one line or word in 
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 
opere operato ; When he proveth contrarily (of 
young and old J that where Grace concurreth, it 
faveth, andelfe not. 2. That Infants unbaptized 
are damned 5 which in charity he thinks is to 
be denyed : And what's this againfl their Ba- 
ptifm ? 

^. 9. Yea Wickjtjje exprefly aflTcrteth Infant-Ba- 
ptifm. Dialog, it. 4. r. 11. Iwill give the Reader 
Mr. Danvers words and his together. 

Mr. D. Reply^ p. 106, 107. " That mci//f<? 
*' denyed Infant-Baptifm, I produced fo much 
'* evidence to prove it, from pag. 283. 10289. 
*' demonftrating that he not only affirmed that 
^^ Believers were the only fubjeUs of Baptifm^ but 
'* withal that children are not Sacramentally to 
** be Baptized : and what can be more expreff 
*' evidence in the cafe ? 

"And Treat, ed. 2. p. 283. That Believen 
" are the only fibjet} of Baptifm, as appear-; 
*^ eth in his eleventh Chap, of his Trialo^m 
"And p. 287. as a Lollard he denyeth Infant* 
*' Baptifm. 

AA'hether Mr. D. ever faw his cited book 

I know not ; But judge of the mans credit by 

the words ^He cites the eleventh Chap, noctel- 

•ling us of which book. But it is the fourth 

A a book 

book where the matter is handled as follow* 

WicklifFe Trialog. I. 4. Cap. 11. Et prima 

*videamm abi baptifmm in Evangelio fiabihtHr :' 
JVam lege Mat, itlt, quomodo Chrifins manda- 
vit fuis^ Apoftolis , Ite^ docetey 3cc, et hinc Phi^ 
lifpHi baftiz^ans Ennuchnm j4[i. 8. friM inftrnxit 

€Hm in fide et propter hanc for mam verbo* 

rum Chrifti Mat nit. Ecclefia nofira adducit 
fideles pro Infante qui difcretionem nan attigerat 
refpondentes : et tales compatres communiter fa^ 
cinntj qmd filii fni quos de baptifmo elevant^ 
fint in Oratione domimca et fymboloinfirH^i •' 
et alii qui difcretionem attigerant ^ dnm inftru- 
trntur m fide Chrifii , ante fuum baptifmam 
vocantHr Catechtimeni : Hoc autem facramenthm 
efi tarn necejfarittm viatori , quod Chrifins dictt 
Nicodemo^ J oh. 3, Nifi quts renatm fuerit 
exaqnay &c. Ex tamaitaque amhoritate fidei. 
Scripturji fnnt fideles generaliter baptiz^ati : et! 
ordinavit ecclefia quod qu.dibet perfona fidelis- 

ii. neceffitatis articnlo poterit baptiz.ari Necl 

refert five immergantHr femel vel ter ; fiv^ 
aqU(Z fuper capita fna effUndantar -' fed facien* 
dum eft fecundnm confnetudinem loci quern quis' 
incolit , tarn in uno ritn legitimo quam in alio 1^ 
Quia certnm efi: qmd corporalis baptizatip pv^ 
lutio modicum valet , nifi adfit lotio mentis per* 
fijiritHm fanBum^ a peccato originali vel alluU" 
li* Hoc efi enim Principium tn hac fide^ quod. 
qiiicunqHe rite baptiz^atus fuerit , haptifmtu dg'^ 
let qiiodciinque peccatum invenerit in homine ba^ 



ptiz.Ando, Et quia ad delationem -peccaii requi-* 
ritur fatiifuBio , et non fotefi fieri futisfactio^ 
pro peccato nifi per mortem Chrifti^ tdeo dictt 
j(ipoflolu6 Rom. 6. QuicUnque ha^tiz^ati fimiU 
in Chrifio Jejlt, in mo7te ejm bapttz^ati [h-* 

ALITH. Sed die rogo clarim quomodo 
Chrifim qui tantum odivit figna [enfihilia , tan^ 
tarn necejfitatem falvationps pofuit tn hniufimodi 
lotione : yidttur enim derogare divtrino liber alt- 
: rati at que potent ia, quod Dens non po(fet inter- 
cedere toto merito fno atque pajjlone , falvare In- 
fa^iterfy vel adultum fidelem^ nifi vethla vel alio 
viante baptiz^einr communiter infideli : fimiliter , 
delato Infante fidelium ad ecclcjiamy ut fecundum 
Chrifli regulam baptizctur , et deficiente aqua vel 
requifitis aliis , flante pia intentione totint popu- 
U , interim mortno natHraliterj nuru Dei , vtde- 
tur grave damnationem Infant is hujufmodi defi^ 
nire Jpecialitery cum nee in fans ijh^ nee pop h Ins 
peccavit ut taltter damnaretur, Vbi efi ergo 
rntfertcors liber alitas (^lorifli Dei , fi talts proles 
fidelium propter illud quod non efi in pote flute 
eomm datnnabitur, cum Dem fecundum princi- 
pia Theologi(£, communia fit pronior ad pr^mian^ 
dum homines quam ad dammandum : et fpeciali- 
ter merito et pajfione Chrifli tantum fua tentori^ 
a dilatante ? 

Which is thus Englifhed. 

And firft let Hi fee rphere Eaptifm is ftablifiied 

in the Gojpel. For read Mat. 28. how Chrifl 

corhmanded his jipofilesy ^0 Teach &c. And 

A a 2 hence 

hence Philip BapttT^ing the Eunuch, firfi infirn- 
Ihd him in the Fuithy Kdi, 8. And hecaufe of 
this form of Chrtfis words Mzx, 28. O^r Church 
bringeth Believers atjfwering for the Infam wha 
had not attained to difcretion r And fncb God- 
fathers commonly make the children whom they 
take from "Bapttfm^ to Hre infiritlied in the Lords 
Prayer y and the (^reed. And others that had at^ 
tained to difcretion^ while they are infiruUed in the^ 
faith ofChrifl he fore their Baptifm^are called Cate- 
chumeni : And tins Sacrament is fo neceffary to a vi- 
aiov that Chri ft faith to Nicodemusjoh.3. Except a" 
man be born again of w.iter, &c. So that hy fa. 
great authority of Scripture beliefs the faithful 
are generallyBaptiz.ed:And the Church hath ordain- 
ed that in the point of neceffi' 
^ That is of death, ty *, every faithful perfon 
may be Baptized, Nor is it 
material whether they be dipped once or thrice^ 
cr the water be poured on their heads : but it muft be 
done according to the citftom of the place where 
one dwclleth , as well in one as in another IaW' 
ful rite : For it is certain that corporal Baptifm 
er wajlji^g little availeth unlcfs there be a wafij" 
*^^ ^f ^^^^ Mind by the Holy Ghofl, from Ori- 
ginal or A(^Uil ftn. For this is a principle in this 
belief that whoevtr is rightly Baptiz^ed ^ Baptifm 
' blotreth out whatever Jin itfindeth in the man to be 
BjiptiT^ed, And bee anfe fatisfaBion is neceffary to 
the blotting out of fin ^ and fatisfatiion for fin 
cannot be made but by the death of Chrifl:^ there^ 
fore faith the Apoftle, that as many of tu as are 
Baptised into Chrift^ are Baptiz^cd into his death, 



A L I T H. Bm tell me flaw Her J pray you, how 
Chrifl who fo much h4teth Jenfble fgncs y h^th 
fut fo great neceffity of [dhation in this w.ilhing^ 
For it feemeth to derogate from Gods liberality 
and power ^ that God cannot by all his merit ar:d 
pajjion intercede to fave an Infant or an adult he- 
liver , unlefs he be Baptiz.ed by an old Woman or 
fome othtr viant^ commonly an Lifdcl .%fo alfo , 
when the Infant of believers is broHght to 
the QoHrch , that ((O* ) according to Chrifts Rule 
he may be Baptiz^ed , and for want of water or 
other reqmfttcs , the peoples piom intention 
continning , he is dead in the mean time 
naturally by the will of Gody it feemeth hard to 
define that fuch an Infant is damned ^ (pecially 
when neither the Infant nor the people have fn- 
ved that he ^mild fo be damned : Where then ic 
the merciful Ulerality of ChriJhGod if fiich a 
child of believers Jiiallbe damned for that which 
is not m their power f when God^ according to 
the common Principles ef Theologie^ is proner to 
reward men than to damn the-ft ^ and jpccially 
when the merit and paffon of 0yrifl have fo far 
Jh etc he J out their tents ^ 

Toilirs WuLjtffe anAvcretli, i. Tn this Chap, thai 
fonie things he fpeaketh aiTertively, and fome thingi 
rcputarively;,androrevieweth the cafe- And i. faith 
that Chrill approveih outward fgns^ but not the 
abnfe of them. That is, i. When the Hgns of tf e old 
fewijh Law are kepi. 2. Ly an inmodeft cfpoL- 
ting them, and preferring them before Gods De- 
calogue. 3. By hunhcning the Church with 
A a 3 them 


them which Chrift would have free I even raqrc 
than' the JfivzJJ? Church was burthened : And thus 
the Religious now ( faith he ) abufe them the two 
hft wayes. 

And in the Twelfth Chapter he proceedeth to 
anfvver the reft [_ V'tdetur rniH frobahile quod 
Chriflj^atls fojfet fine lot tone hujm^ infantes ^iri- 
tHaliter baptiz,are ^ et fer confequens falvare : 
Unde dicitHr communiter quod triplex efi haptif- 
was Ecclefi^ , viz,, bapttfmHS f^nminis , hapttfmm 
fangmnis , haptifrntu fiaminiij et qmlihtt eorum 

companhm fn^cit ad faUtem -— — Nee audeo 

ajferere quod Inf antes occip pro Chriflo fint 
damnati — Bapti]mii^ antem faminis efi bapt, 
Ip. fanU:i , qni efi fimpliciter necefiarim cmli- 
bet homini fi falvetur, Ideo duo baptifmi priores 
pint figna antecedentia, et ex fiippofitione necef- 
faria ad ifium tertium baptifmum flaminis* 
Ideo abfqHc dubietate , fi ifie infenfibtlis baptif- 
mpcs adfuerit, haptiz^attis eft a crimine munda- 
tvu, Et fi ifie defuerit y quant am cun que adfint 
priores , bapttfmm non prodefi anima ad falntem, 
Ideo cHjn reEle fit infeirifibilis , o- tantpim nobis 
ignotm^ videthr mihi imprndem pra^fumptio tali-* 
ter falvationem hominls vel damnationem ex ba- 
ytifimo definire, Repntamns tamen abfque dnbietate 
flty^Quod Infantes recfte baptizati flumine^y/;/^ ba^ 
ftiz^ti tertio baptifmate , cum habcnt gratiam 

baptifimalcm, No?i enim licet fidelibm 

fupponendo baptifmnm fljiminis , baptifn^um flu^ 
minis omnino reUnqucre , fed neceffe efi data op- 
fort an it ate ctrcHriiftanti<^ ipfum accipere, Et 



etim omnid qu^ eveninnt de fteceffttate eveninntt 
did fotefl quod talis homo mn potefi falvari fi- 
nt tali bafttfrnate. Thus Englifhed. 

[]/r feemeth to me probable that Qjrift can 
fftfficiently Baptiz.e Infants fpiritually without 
thts wajhw^^ and by CO nfc que nee ^ can Jave them. 
Whence it ts commonly jatd, that there is a three- 
fold Baptifm of the Church , that u^ the Ba- 
pttfm of water , the Baptifm of blood , and the 
Baptifm of the Spirit : ty^nd eijcry one of them 
to the meet , fhfjiceth to fahatton — Nor dare 
I ajfert that the Infants Mat. 2. lulled for Chrtfi 
arc damned* But the Baptifm of the fpirtt ts 
the Baptifm of the Holy Ghofi^ which is /imply 
necejfary to every one that he be faved. There- 
fore the other two Baptifmi are antecedent fgns^ 
and fuppofttively necejfary to this third Baptifm 
of the fpirit. Therefore without doubt where th^t 
infenpble baptifm is^ the Baptiz^ed perfon is clean- 
fed from his fm : and if that be wanting , let 
the former be never fo much preftnty Baptifm pro- 
fiteth not the foul to falvation. Seeing therefore 
this is infenfible , and fo much unknown to us^ 
it feemeth to me imprudent prefumptionfo to defi-ne 
mens jalvation^ or damnation by their Bapttfnr* 
But yet we hold without doubting^ that Infants 
rightly Baptiz^ed with water ^ arc B^ptiTicd with 
the third Baptifm , when ( or feeing ) they have 

B apt if mat grace. -For it is not lanful for 

the faithful^ on fuppofition of the 'Baptifm of the 

fpirit^ to cafi off the Baptifm of water^ but it is 

mceffury to receive it , when the opportu?nty 

A a 4. of 


cf circHmflance u offered. And feeing K>phatever 
Cometh to pafsy doth\come to fafs of necejjityyip may be 
fatd that fuch a one cannot be faved rvithout 
fHchBaftifm. J 

And to the queftion of an old woman Ba- 
ptizing children in neceiHty,he faith, [^ ^\ Credimm 
**' tamen qnod qudcunc^ue Vetula vet abje&a per- 
^^ fona rite Uvante hominem cum verbis facra* 
*' mentalibm Baftifmum fiaminis Dem complet, J 
The Reader mufl: pardon the Latine to the Au- 
thor or Printer , which may thus be Englifhed. 
£ " But we believe that what old woman foever 
"or abjed perfon rightly wafheth one with the 
*' Sacramental words, God fulfilleth the Baptifm 
*;*ofthe fpirif. ] 

It fecmeth that whereas Tertutlian ( Mr. D,'s 
fir ft witnefs ) was for Lay- mens Baptizing in c?,^^ 
of neceffity , but not for womens^ that Wickjiffe 
was for womens alfo. 

And to the next queftion , Whether Infants 
unbaptiz,ed when *3apttfm could not be hady be all 
damned^hz anfwereth(i:f per h^c refpondeo ad 3cc,) 
that is [ " And by this I anfwer your third ob- 
*' jedion , granting, that God if he will, may 
''damn fuch an Infant, and do him no wrong, 
*' and if he will he can fave him : And J dare 
*' not define eiiher part : nor am I careful about 
^' reputation , or getting evidence in the cafe ; 
[^ but as a dumb man am fiient, humbly cpnfef- 
'Mng ray ignorance , ufing 
^ w\. If he will, ''^conditional words* -becaufe 
*^i£ is not yet clear to me, 

'* whether fuch an Infant ftiaU be faved or damned : 
^' But I know that whatever God doth in it will 
*' be juft and a work of mercy, to be praifed of 
*'all the faithful : And let not them like pre- 
*' fumptjous fools, pour out themfelves, that of 
*' their own authority, without knowledge, de- 

*'fine any thing in that matter./]- ^i 

" autem McU, &c. But he that faith that in this 
*' cafe put , an Infant fhall be faved , as ic is 
*' pious to believe, he doth fuperfluoully uncertain 
" hirafelf *, more than will 
** profit him. ButtHcreare '<• That is, determine 
^ ' fome things in Parents pow- an uncertainty. - 
*^ er though lapfed into a thi^g 
'' Pafi^ for which it is neceflary by Gods juft 
** judgement , that fo it fhould come to pafs : 
*' Therefore he that defineth, that neither Pa- 
*' rents nor people fo finned, that it fhould fo 
'' come to pais, doth fpeak as a Pie on the head 
*'ofhis own knowledge. But we believe it as 
*' a point of faith , that nothing befalls a man 
" after the firft grace, unlefs fome part of raan- 
'' kind either merit or demerit, that this f jail come 
" to pafs. 3 

In the next (^thirteenth ) Chapter, he proceed- 
cth to anfwcr the queflion [^ Quomodo aniwa tu- 
linm Jnfamium fine peccato attuali dccedentiHm 
pumenthr ( Having before fpoken of Infants dy- 
ing unbapt;zcd unavoidably ) that is. How the 
fouls of Juch Infa?Jts jhall be pHnifljed f whether 
/ill equally or nnecjually ? and whether only with 
she pHnijhmentof lofsy or alfoof f/if .<*] . And he 



(concludeih contrary to the greater part of the PaZ 
pifts, that they fhaH have both the -pttnijhment 
of Lofs and Senfe^^ and (^Notethat ) that [^ Necef^ 
fe eft feccata origir^alia hommnm ejfe inaqualiaj^ 
ficHt dece denies in originaltbHs feint fr^pter ilia 
in^^qualiter condemTiandi : Nam jfixta di^a omnes 
condemnati fro originalibm fum condemnandi tarn 
-poena damni quam poena fetifens ': fed impojjibilg 
efi quod condentnentHr (zqualiter omnino illis posfnif : 
ergo relinqmtHr quod peccata quibm ittas posnas 
demerfiernnty indqualia fnnt dicenda. ~\ That is, 
[] *' It muft needs be that the Original fins of 
*^ men are unequal, as thofe that die in Original 
*' fins are unequally to be condemned for them: For 
** as is faid, all that are condemned for original fin 
'^ are condemned both with the punifhmenc of Lof§ 
*'and ofSenfe ♦, But it is impoffible that they 
*^ fhould be damned altogether equally with thofe 
^' pains. Therefore it remaineth that the fins 
*^ by which they deferved thofe punifhments be 
'*^faid to be unequal J. 

Reader, I have been the larger in tranfcribing 
and tranflating the words of Wkkltjfe^ becaufe 
an Author is not fo well underftood by a line 
or two difmembred from the refl , as by whole 
difcourfes : and ib that his fenfe may be paft 
all controverfie : Here it is vifible that Wkkjiff' 
was fo far from denying Infant-Baptifm , thac 
I. He exprefly afTerteth it, 2. He never fo 
much as noteth it for any controverfie, nor raaketh 
any doubt or queflion about it. 3. Yeahctaketb it 
to be bold prefumption for any to take upon them to 


know, whether an Infant that dyeth unavoidably 
unbaptized be faved or nor, but only faith God 
can do it if he will , and he can damn him. 
4. And to thofe that fay that the Parents arc 
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 conciudeth 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. 6. But Baptifm he 
afiferteth doth put away all fin 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- 

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 Chrifls Church, and of their particular bre- 
thren , by fuch a man as this ? And whether 
they that dare ufe fouls at this rare , are fo 
much better than us , as to be above our com* 
munion ? Nay whether thofe that lately revile 
the Zeal of diflenters , as cheriibing the moil 
odious crimes , be not too much fcandalized and 
hardened by fuch dealings ? When a man as plea- 

ding for Chrift and Baptifm dare not only prinE 
fuch things , but ftand to them in a Cecond edi- 
tion, and defend them by a fecond book, and Rage ' 
and be C^«^^^«t in revihng 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 ;, ** "i. Saith he. He 
^' aflened two Sacraments. 2. That believers mufl: 
*' be baptized in pure water, (And what are thcfc 
*^ to the purpofe ?) 3 That believers are the 
^^only fthje^s of Baftifm (A grofs untruth ) 
" ( But he giveth you the words that prove \t 
£ Idea ahjqpte duhitatione fi ifle infenfibilis ba-^ 
ftifmtis apterity baptiz,atm h cnmine eft mun" 
datm : c-r fi ille defnerity qnantiimcHnqm ejfent 
friores^ hafti[mm non ^rodeft anm(t ad falittenf}, 
I gave you^he words before. And did the man think 
that this is any thing to his purpofe ? Wickliff faith, 
[_ Water Baftifm faveth no foal' ( young or old ) 
without the Baptifm of the Spirit. ] Therefore 
faith Mr. D. Wickliff faith , that Believers are 
the only fubjetis of Baftifm, '] Will he make 
the Church of his mind by fuch palpable fal/hoods 

But he adds, [^ He faith that perfons are firft 
to be Baptiz^ed with that he calls the infenftble 
Baptifm^ before voater^ &c.] A^fvc. i . Utterly 
falie : It is his own forgery. Wickliff {mh no 
fuch thing that it mufl be firfl : Nay I doubt 
he faith quite contrary as I h^ve recited. [ Ideo 



duo baftifmi friores funt ftgna Antecedemia^ c* 
ex fuppojitiofje neceffaria ad iftHmtertium baptij^ 
wHm flaminis. 3 ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^'s man is 
to be believed. 2. But though Wickliff czWti Wa- 
ter-Baftifm an antecedent fign^ yet men: Protc- 
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 ads if they live) ^ and that 
they are in a ftate of falvation before they are 
Baptized, being the children of the faithful by 
them dedicated to God, by heart-confent, and 
that Baptifm is but the publick folemnization of 
the fame Covenant, and delivery of the blellings 
by way of inveftiture. Let Mr, D, read but all 
the teftimonies cited by Mr. Gataker in his book 
of Baptifm, againft Dr. Wardj and Bifliop Dave* 
nanty and he will fee this is no opinion proper 
to the Anahaptifts : And I fcarce believe that 
he can prov«: me and all Proteftants that hold 
that opinion, to be therefore againft Infant-Ba- 
ptifm : How then would it have proved Wick^ 
Itfio ? 

4. He. faith that Wickliff faith that Baptifm 
doth not confer y bnt only fgnifie grace given, J 
Anfrv. I. And what's that to prove, that he was 
againft Infant- Baptifm ? 2.And how proveth he this? 
Why, Fhller ont of Cochleus faith fo. 

Anfw. I. But CochleHs'\s one of the moft no- 
table Lyars of all the Papifts that oppofed Luther^ 
and hath left his Calumnies to pofterity 1 And 
muft he be believed againft Wicklijf} 2. And 



Antler wrote but about twenty yeats ago : And 
muft one of our neighbours tell us what Cochleni 
faith was the opinion of WkkLijf^ when we can 
read his words our felves ? 3. But (io make this 
like its fellows ) even this much is untrue, ^pnlUr 
tells us no fuch thing out of Cochleus , but tells 
lis that Gregory charged Wickliff with eighteen 
Errors • Tho, Arundel with twenty three ^ the 
Council oi Con jlance with /^.'^.Tho.Wddenjis with 
80. Dr. Lncke with 266. and CoMem with 303. 
and then he reciteth 62.out ofWaUenJisy where the 
words are. 4, And Waldenfis is known to be a falfe 
accufer of him in many particulars, though a learn- 
ed Papifti 5. And even this Waldenfis that faith 
his worft, and fought to make the moft 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. ^. f that by this trick which he is fa 
ready at , can make Herefies and Hereticks al- 
fo too eafily) tells us of a popifli Herepe^siz^ 
for Baptifm [^ to take away all fm^ to confer 
grace , to work^regeneration and fave the fonl^ 
as flill held by them that teach young children 
to fay J that by their Baptifm they were wade 
children of God , members of Qjrifl , and Inhe- 
ritors fthat is, heirs) of the Kingdom of hea- 
ven. ] 

Anfw. i. By this it feems the £nglijh Pro- 
teftants and all the reft that take this to be true 
dodrine , hold a Popifh Herefie, 2. Let the 
Reader perufe Gataker againft Davcnant of Ba- 


( 3«7 ) 
ptifm, and he will find almoft all the ancient 
Fathers Latineand Greek of the fanie 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 vpas out Church 
and the Kingdom of Chrift before Luther ^ot rather 
before thofe whom he oppofed ? 3 . It is unqueftio- 
nabletrue dodrine 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 perfedeth the 
title: even fo, the Heart-Confent orCovenanyngCof 
the perfon,or parents for Infants^ doth lay the firft 
ground of Chriftian right, which is folemnizedand 
perfeded regularly by Baptiim, which by the way 
of tradition or publick inveftiture , doth take 
avpay all gnilt of fm^ Saaramentally 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 
rights of which the Church did take lefs cogni- 
fance ; And one would think that no Jinaba- 
ftifi ftiould deny this,(called Herefie)as to the adult. 

5, He next addeth from IVickJif, They are fools 
And frefnmpHOHs which affirm fich Infants not to 
he favedj which die without Baftifm ] fo Fuller 
words it out of Cochletis» 

jinfw* I. Falfc ftill : It is not out of Coch- 
leui^ but Waldenfis. 2. And what's this to the 
cjueftion of Infant-Baptifm ? 

He adds, f And Wicklijfs own words as r. 2. 
de Trialdg, Quod definentes parvules fdelium f" 
nebaftifmoy^c, J 

AnfvQ. Still falfe : i 1 have before tranfcri- 
bed the words out of the Printed book which 
arc far otherwiCe-. 2. It is not depnentes but qui 
quicquam defimunt. 3. It is not of all children 
dying without Baptifm^ but of thofc that conld 
mt have it , being prevented by death , when it 
was de fired. 4. He faith this of thofe that de- 
termine that they are faved alfo, 5, And inftead 
of c, 2. this is lib, 4. c.iz, 

6. He faith ,[" That all truth is contained in 
'^ 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 
*'teftimony, and that whoever holds thecontra- 
^^ ry opinion cannot be a Chriftian but flatly the 
*' Devils Champion ~\ with more fuch cited part- 
*^ ly out of CochLeus by Fuller , ( falfe again ) 
*' and partly de Verit. Script. ] a book of Wick: 
tiff's which I have not , and I conjeduri he n*- 
v€r faw : For i. I told you before the very 
words of Wickliffthzx. condemn only fuch abnfes 
of omxvardfgns^ as (hew him to be of a contra- 
ry opinion. 2. Will any fober man believe that 
he damned all as no Chriftians , but Cham^ 
pons of the Devil J that thought that fome Conclufi- 
ons Phyfical, Mathematical, Metaphyfical, Medici- 
nal , Logical , ^c. may be true that are not 
-proved by Scripture teftimony ? and fo that 
almoft all Chriftiansin the world are no Chri- 

^, Saitb 


7- Saieh he " [^That he (lighted the Authori:y of 
"General Councils, as ]FHlkr out of Cochle^ 
*^«i, &c. 

j^r/ftv. r. Falfe again as to the Author. 2. But 
vvhK is that to Infant-baptifm ? 

But his dired proof is out of Waldenfis faying 
that \Vic'4'jj im\\ that children arc not ftcra^ 
mentally to be baftiz^ed. 

zy^nfw. I. Wxdi'^tnoiWaldenfis at haad , but 
have little caufe to believe Mr. D, 2. And Fnl- 
ler who undertakeih to recite Waldenfis charge , 
haih not a word of any fuch fenfe. 3, Tf bitter 
Papifts fo accufe him, is it therefore true ? Judge 
by his own words. Indeed Wickjif held that y^- 
cramental haptifm faveth none (young or old J 
without the baptifm of, the fpirit ; and that it 
may be feparated from it : And hence was the 
Papifts noife againft him. 

8. Saithhe *'f As a further argument that he 
'' denied Infant-baptifm, may appear, becaufe he 
"did fo vehemently impugn Confirmation, d-c. 

ji^ifw. li Here we have Fuller out ofCochle^ 
m falfly again. 2. Are all Proteftants againft Ir=» 
fant-baptifm , that are againft the Popifh Sacra- 
ment of Confirmation ? What a prover is this 
man? Is DalUm that hath written fo large a difpa- 
tacion of Confirmation, an Anabapcift ? And the 
Englifh Nonconformifts too? 3. But in very deed, 
Mr. D.*s fallhood and Wickjiffs opinion for In- 
fant-baptifm, may very probably be gathered from 
that (not fifteenth as he, but J fourteenth Chapt, 
of Confirmation : For, i. He rcprehendeth the 

B b BiOiois 




Biihops f ;r adding fo many Ceremonies to In-* 
fanc-bapdroi, never blan:iing theif bapiiim it fdL 
2. He aigiieth againfl coriiirniing children, as 
luprrfluous, becaure the fpiric is given in bapciToi 
it fth \^& corifirmatHr ex hoc qmdbaftiz^Mos no- 
ft/ OS dicimm rcgaUnter Spirit urn San^nm acci- 
fere to ipfo qno legitime baftiz^anti^r , that is ^ 
And it is hence confirmed , in that we fay that 
our bapdzid ones do regularly receive the Holy 
Ghoil , in that (ox by that very thing) that 
*" they are lawfully baptized. ~| And he had before 
fa id thar ihey are ofrcrcd to Eaptifm in the Church 
according to Chrifis RyJe» 

0* II. Af:er ail this Mr* D. addeth Wicklfs 
opinions againft Popery to the nun"iber of 29. 
But w'nat all this is tojh# cafe of Infanr-baptifm, 
what man bcfides himfelfcan tell? But let me 
tell hirn that I would not have him too eafily be- 
lieve bitter adverfary Papius, left he forfeit the 
little relids of his o^vn credit : And that it is 
hot like that V/kkiiff ^^3,s againft enjoyning the 
Lords-Prayer as he citeth : Yea , I would not 
have Mr, D. come fo near the Papifts yet as 
Wickliff <^'A, How doth he like fuch words gs 
thefefTrialog. li. 4. c. 22. {o\,i 'i^'^. Et t dis efl tri- 
flexEcclefia • Ecclsfiafcilicet Aiditans^ DormUnSy 

C^ Triiiwfhans Ecclefia Dormkns eftpra- 

defiinati, in Piirgatorio patientes^ that is y 

" There is fuch a threefold Church ; The mili- 
" tant Churth, the deeping Church, the trium- 
*' phant Church : The i]ee[*ing Church is 

*^ the Predeilinatc fuffering in Purgatory. 3 


AnJ lib*2iC, 10. fee what he faith of Angels 
and adoration of them. And c, ii, of Angels 
o.fices , and iheir being virtually every where. 
And what he hkh of Kings, and Mairinriony 
(^(jHod excedit aliaSacrame?jfa^ ac.J li.4. c. 19, 
20. fol. 1 3.1, 133. Nor would I fay thac orr^nia cjha 
eveni^nt de rieccffitute evc/Hnnt ^ as fol. 120. a. 
Or ihat Deti^ poteji ejfc j4fhim fi vcltt^nt fol.po. b. 

One of the worft things I like in IVtckJijf is , 
that he plungtih himfeif into the deepefl School- 
fubtihies, or di(Viculties, with kfs fub:ilty or di- 
ligence than the cafe requireih, and than School- 
men ufe. And indeed 1 like not divers of his 
conclufions^ as lib. 2. c. 14. fol. 41. [^Onod Dc- 
iu fiecejfitat creatnrus firignLts a^ivas ad o^aemli- 
bet aBam fnnm : J It is fuppofed that Hohbs by the 
fame Dodrine overchroweth a'l the Chriftian faith : 
And I believe that his dod:rine there /t//. 41. and 
elfewhere, for merit, avA ^how tempor ale /ic c^utfy 
fr^dejimationis atertm^ will d.fpleafe fume. And 
his diftindiion oi" Mortal and Venial fin, as //. 3. 
c, 5. fol. 52. And that he makcth fmal irr}fcni' 
fence the fin againfi ths Holy Ghofl •, And that 
none can know what fm is mortal in tts ^ and 
what not ? And cap. 6. Concedi potcfi quod mitl- 
ti pr^fciti pint in gratia fecundiim prxfentem //<- 
fiitiam : It may he granted that many reprobates 
tire in ( a fta^.e of ) Grace , according to their 

prefent righteoufnep — : Pr^fciti ant em ?inn- 

qHam funt in gratia finalis perfeverantttz : The 
Reprobate are never in the grace of final perfe- 
verance* So that he held that prefent true grace 

Bb 2 was 

( 572 ) 
Was loft by fome , as u4ufiin 6^\di , which he ex- 
plaineth* cap. 7. And cap. 8. again he is at his 
Omnia eveniunt neceffitate ahfoluta reviewing 
what he had (aid , and concludeth that [| no man 
can do better than he doth ^ but he could if God 
would ] and denieth not fin to be hereby necelli- 
tated, &c, 

^.12. Pag, 115. He again impenitently re- 
neweth his flander of BerengariiHj as being againft 
Infant-baptifm : Concerning whom faith Vjloer 
de fnccef, Ecclef. cap. 7* p. 207. '' [^ Author 
*' Aoiortim , &c. The Author of the Ads of 
" Brnno f found in the Library of the Noble Ba- 
'*ron Carevff of Clopton) who faith he was at 
^' this examination, faith, that they ffome of ^^- 
^^rengarim followers J faid that baptifm profi- 
*^ ted not children to faIv^ion,as alfo Deodvinm Lc- 
*' odienfis firft from common fame, and then Gmt^ 
*' mnndm Arch, Averfanui on the credit of Leodi^ 
^' enfis report that Bruno Andegavenjis ^ Beren- 
" gariw Tiironenfis ^ qnantum in ipfis erat ha-^ 
^'' ftifmum farvulorum evert ijfe^ did as much as 
*' in them lay overthrow the baptifm of chil* 
" dren ; But we find no charge ever brought 
" 2ig2\v[^Berengarim concerning Anabaptifm, in fo 
*-*' many Synods as were held againft him : Nor 
*' do they feem to have denied any thing elfe , 
*' who are faid to deny that baptifm proficeth lit- 
*' tie Ones to Salvation, but that Baptifm confer- 
*' reth Grace ex opere operato : As gathering 
" from the Apoftles words , He that planteth and 
^' he that watereth is nothing , but God that gi^ 

*' veth 

^*veth theincreare: ^^y Alanm li. i.corit. luret. 
^' fiii tem^, takeiluhem as ifihey had faid [ Ba- 
" ptifm hath no efficacy either on young or old ^ 
^^ therefore m.n are not bound to be bapii- 

And that this was the plain cafe is proveabic , 
in that it was juft the cafe of IVicklfff ^ind the 
Wuldenfcs , who were faid to do" as much as in 
them lay to caft out Infant-baptifm, becaufe they 
thought that every wicked Prieft did not fandiiie 
them ex of ere operato, and infallibly convey Gods 
grace to the unprepared. 

But his proofs are " [ i. The Magdeh. tell us 
*'that Bererigarins maintained his herefies, whicli 
''they fet down to be denying Tranfulftan- 
*' tiation, and Baptifm to little ones, under five 
"heads, which Lanfrank^ Arch-Bi.lop of Can- 
" terbiiry anfwers at large in his book called 
^' SctmilUris : and as to that of denying Infant- 
*' baptifm he anfwers by faying, he doth thereby 
*' oppofe the general Dodrine and univerfal Con- 
*' fent of the Church. 

Anfvc. I. I have not the Maideb. at hand, but 
he hath little to do that will ask Illyricus^ andC?^/- 
liu dS{A Amfdorpiu what Lanfrm\ writeth , if he 
have his book before him. Thepublifher ofL^w- 
frankj book againft Berengartiu giveth us notice 
of no other, Trithemim de fcript, Ecclef, knew 
of no other but this, which is in Bihl. Pdtr, Toir, 
6. p, 190. And I have lookt over every line of it 
( fuch labour dothefe men put us toj and I find 
not one word where any fuch thing is mentioned 

B b 3 by 

by LAnfrank.: but only his accufations'of Jfr, 
aboui Tranfubdantiation : He never once cIiargciN 
him as denying Infant-baptifm, nor mentioneth in^ 
See, Reader, -into whac hands the poor feduced 
ones are fallen. 

<<. 15. His fecond proof is "this, ^^C^jl/^??^/"^ in 
" his Epiftle to the Duke of Cleve faith , that 
^' GuitmMnd Biihop of Averfe doih aifirm thaic 
^^ he did deny baptifm to Little Ones, c^c, 

Ajif\v» t. Caffander in neither of his Epiftles 
to the Diike of Cleve mentioneth any fuch mat- 
ter. But in his Preface to his Book for Infant- 
baptifm to the Duke oi Cleve ^ he faith that G'///>- 
7f:iwd faith [^ Oitod inter cateros erroreSj farvHlo- 
rum baptiffmm evertent^ qncm tamen err or em in 
fiihVxum non produjiit^ cjuod earn bUjfhemiani ut 
Gititm» loquitHr , ne feffiworum qmdem homitium 
aures toleraturds fiiret\^ c^* in Scriptkris facris 
locum ejus erroris tiiendi penitus non vtderet, ~] 

Mark here Reader , i. Berengarius is not faid. 
to deny Infint-bapttfm, but to overturn it, (that 
is, by feme confequence it's like. ) 2. He did net 
fublijl) chis his opinion , but held it unpublifhed : 
And how then did Guitmund know it? 3, Was 
Berengarius as honed or as ftout a man as he is 
fuppofed, and yec when Infants were daily bapti- 
2cd, would never fp-ak out his thoughts of the 
evil of it ? 4. Either he baptized Infants himfelf, 
or not. If hedii, was he againfl it then ? What 
a Knave do chey make him that fofay ? If not, 
^! is opinion muft needs be publifhed by his pra- 
QiKt^ when ^hcy whofe ears could not tolerate ir, 
' ■ • would 

( 375) 
wonlJ lefs tolerate the rcfufing of rheir Chil- 
drens Chriftning. 5. Was that an honeft man 
that would kcrcily hold an opinion \^hich he 
knew he had no .Scripiure lor > 6. Note that 
even Caffandcr there tells us, ihac indeed the Wnt- 
denfes though agreeing much with the Catharifisy 
did yet boih approve and i]1e Infanr-baprifm, 
f, Cji. and that this error ilepc till his age when 
StQrk, and MuhtJ^er rair;rd it, 

0. 14. 2. But what need we ask Ca^^ndcr 
what Guitwund faid ? What childiih play is this? 
His own book is as common di^Cajjandtrsin Bibl, 
Pair. To, 6. f. 215. And Guithutrids words are 
ihefe " [[ Berer/j^arius opened thole things by 
" which he might pleafe worldly me'b, that love 
" always ( it they may do it unpuni fhed ) to iin : 
*'to wit, deftroying as much as in him lay Law- 
^ ful Marriages, and overturning Infants baptifm : 
*' So that in one the Devil by his mouth perfwa- 
*' drd the worft men that it was lawful ro abufe 
*' all women •, and in the oiher [ Cajfato b^ptif- 
mate Infant i£ in ^rofiindum omnium m^Jorumj ;«f- 
■pote pofimoditm baptiz^andis^ imfnne mere : Lege 
Epift, Leodienfis Epifbopi contra Berengar, ad 
Henr, Reg, Franc. & eifdem pene verhii eadem 
jpfa ibi fcrtpta repertes ] that is , " [^ making void 
*"' the baptifm oi Infancie, they might ruHi unpu- 
'' nillied into the depth of all evils , as being af- 
**terward to be baptized. Read the Epiflle of 
*' the Bilhop of Liege tor/. H. of France againil 
'* BerengartHs, and there you (hall find thefefame 
" things written, almoft in the fame words. J 

B b 4 Ani 


And now, Reader, Judge further, i. Whether 
this Papifl who never knew the matter himfelf, 
and whofebook fheweth him a/Afy bitter kWow 
profeffing to tranfcribe or take his words from the 
Biftop of Liege who took it from fame , be to 
be believed in his accufacions of fuch a man, when 
Lanfranh^ih^i difputed with him before the Pope, 
nor the Pope himfclf, 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 I 
2. If he be to be believed in this, why not in 
the firft article , of the lawfulnefs of abufing all 
women commonly? 3. Do not the very words 
[^ quantum in fe^ and everterit ] and [^ caffato ha- 
ftifmate'} open the cafe, that malice gathered this 
as a forced confequence only of fome words of 
BerengartHs /* It is like becaufe he defined a Sa- 
crament to their diflike, which Lanfrank^xt'gxO' 
ycth him for. 

And fo fottifh a fellow was this Gaitmund that 
his fellow Papifts are put todifown him for fay- 
ing that their Euchariftical Hoft cannot be cor- 
rupted or pucrifie , or be eaten by Mice, or any 
Bruits, but only (cemeth fo to be; ib. f, 230. 
/. 2, 

(5. 15. His third proof is " [^ In the BibU Patr. 

^^ Paris p.^^l. it is recorded that Dnrandm 

*t' writes — the denying and as much as in them 
*^ lay the deftroying the baptifm of Infants, ^c. 

Artfvi\ I. Did this man ever fee the Books he 
citeth, who citeth vag, 4.32. of the BibL Pat, as 


if were but one Tomb or Volume, that long ago 
was tlevcn great Volumes, and now many more? 
It is like ^farg, le BigMes Edit, is that he mean- 
etb. The Epifllcis Tow, 3. p. 319. Qii\\t Eigne 
Paris 1624. The Author, (aith V^hcr de fuccef, 
EccL p, 196. is falily called Durandus^ and is 
DeodutriHs or Dictwinns, His words are ^Fama 
fhfrerhos Gallidc fines frAtergreffa tot am Ctrmant^ 
am pervaft^ ^arrqiic oTKninm no ft rum replevit an- 
res , qualtter Bruno cy^ndeg^ Eptfc. item Beren^ 
gar ins Throncnfis - — aftrnant Corpus Dorr/i- 
ni non tarn Corpus effe quam umhram cr figuram 
Corporis Domint, Le^tttma conjugia deftrnantj ^ 
quantum in ipfs eft, baptifryjum parvulorum ever- 
tant,'} This is it that Vftjer cited: i. You fee 
here is nothing but a Papift Prelates tale to a 
King , upon far fetcht fame, 2. Charging hinci 
equally, yea more wiih deftroying marriage, 

3. And faying but [^quantum in fc\\ ofbaptifm; 

4. And part of the fame is that [he 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 Amichrift perfwade poor Anabaptifls to 
believe fuch fellows and tales as thefe > 

^, 16. In his Reply he addeth fourthly [T/;^- 
anus witnefTeth that Bruno Arch- Bi ill op of Tri- 
crs did perfecute Berengartus for denying Infants 
baptifm, asp. 242. 

Anfvs^* I. Again he tells us of Thuanus^ and 
tells not where, as if we raufl: read over five vo- 
lumes in folio to be able to difprove fuch a Tale- 

feller as tliis ? But he faith Viler faith (o de fuc^ 
cef, EccL pa^, 252. But all ftill is falle : my book 
there hath not fuch a word. Vficrs words are 
pa^. 207. and them alfo he moft h; rribly fidlih- 
eth. They are but ihdt'\^BrHrfonem quoqueTre^ 
vtrornm Arch. Diceceft fua exfuliffe qHofdam ex 
Bcrengarii Sdlatorihm qui tllms Dodri?7am in 
"EbHrontbHs Aniaticis & aliis Belgii popnli' dif- 
femmabant , narrat Thua^nts, ~\ That is, |_ Thna^ 
nm faith th.n Brmo Arch-Biihop of Trevers ex- 
pelled out of his Diocefs fome of Bcnngaripts^ 
followers, who fowed his dodrine, ^c. ]] fo that 
here is no talk of perfecuting Btrenganus ^ buc 
fome of his followers, nor a word of Infanr-ba-r 
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- 
piils or any other Sed. 

In ThnanHs the words are found in his Epiftle 
to the King before all his works, excellently dif- 
fvvading him from blood , and perfection , and 
there is not one fylhble of Infant- baptifm ^ but 
only that v/hich Vilier cited : yet durft this man 
juftiHe thefe horrid ialfhoods in a fecond Ejdition 
and a Reply. , 




c^/r. D.'i jHftification of his flandcr of the Wal- 
dcnfes, Co-njuted rr.ore largely , 

C. J. IN his Reply/). loS.hereafiumeth tbi^Ca- 
JL lumny. And hrll he recireth their Con- 
fclTiun to prove it : as if he wanted matter to fill 
liis Book, not having one word againft Infant-ba- 
ptifm in that which is by himfelf recited : But it 
iriufl be interred, it luth a roan as ih s be to be 
beheved, becaufe faith is required fin the adult, 
and them that Covenant for Infants ) and becaufe 
Traditions and Inventions are difclaimed , and 
fuch hke. Had the man dealt by the Waldenfes 
but as he doth by me, when citing my words he 
will prove that my vror^j are for him while I am 
againft him, (as if 1 underftood not what I fay) 
it had been much lefs. But to hct down the 
world that the Waldenfes denied Infant-baptifm 
for fuch filly reafons , is intolerable. It is not 
worth the labour to iliew him how the Prote- 
ftants agree with the IVuldenfes in all the points 
where he feigneth a difagreement, p. 112. 

^. 2. Yet doth the man break out into admi- 
ration that he having with exactnefs given a 
fartimliir account of all thofe Confejfwns veord 


for v»ordy a^id proved by amfle demon flra- 

tions y I, That none of them vccre extant till the 
fixteenth Cemnry^ dec, 

Anfw. Wonderful I That fuch a man fhould 
talk of exacinefs and demonfiration. Slay Reader 
a little, and teil me whether it call not for ihame 
and tears that one fuch Book fhould be written 
by a Chriftian ? Much more that this calumny 
fhould be thus over and over audacioufly jufli- 

<. 3, In Roger Wendover (our chiefeft ancient 
Chronicler, and one that he oft citeth himfclf, 
and therefore fhould have read ) In Hen, 2. foL 
319. h» You have a Confeilion of the Tholoujians 
called Boni homines in which are thefe words 
*' ^Credimu^ etiam quod non falvatnr qau , nifi 
^^ qui haptiz.atHr •, Ct* farvhlos falvari per ba- 
" pttfma, ]] That is, [_ We believe alfo that none 
*' is faved but he that is baptized , and that little 
* ^ children are faved by baptifm ]] ( For we find 
that it was the denial of the iaving virtue of 
wicked Priefts baptifm ( to young or old ) as 
working ex opere operato^ which occafioned their 
accufations : ) would you have a fuller proof? 

Vfier de fncccf,Eccl,c,6. p, 155, &c, giveth 
us the Catalogue of their opinions as reported 
by zy^neas Sylvim ( after Pope Fins the fe- 
cond ) where there is fomewhat of theirs againft 
Confirmation , Chrifm, Extream Undion , c^c, 
but not a word againfl Infant- baptifm ^ adding 
the confent of Jacob, Picolomin, Anton. Bon- 
fin, Bern, Lntz^erthiirg. Another Catalogue he 

giveth out of the Magdeh, hifl. Centur, 12. c. 8. 
coL 1206, 1207. as taken ouc of an old ^JU.S. 
where is not a word againft Infant-baptifm : Yea 
rcciteth Wt II, Reynolds 2i bitter Papifts Catalogue, 
where there is no fuch thing: Yea, mentioneth 
nine points more in which Parfons, Sandnj^Coc- 
ciM lay they differ from us , but none of this* 
And fag» 242. r. 8. he tells you of Gretfers own 
confelTion that they were none but the IValder/fes, 
that Hoveden fpeaketh of, that made the fore- 
faid Confellion, though accufed of Artanifm. See 
more teftimoniesof many others, fag. 306, 507, 

Thuams ( falfly cited by him as before of Be- ^ 
rsngarius) lib, 6. an. 2550. reciteth their opini- 
ons, }ag, 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 fidions. And fag, 188. he tells 
you of an inquiry made into their Original and 
Dodrine by Gul, Bell. Langaiis^ commanded by 
Authority thereto, wherein no fuch thing is men- 
tioned of them, but their avoiding Popifh fuper- 

In the firft Confeflion recited by Terin ( p. 60.) 
they own baptifm, but fay not a word againft In- 

The fame is true of the fecond Confeflion re- 
cited by him, p. 62,63. 

In the end of Perin you have their Catechifm, 
and the fumm of their Dodrine out of feveral 
of their old Books 5 and therein not a word againft 



lofant-haptifm , but exprcfly they afTert it : Caf"^ 
i. p.41,42,43. in their Dodrine of the Sacra- 
ments 5 they fuy '^L -^"d for this caufe we pre- 
••' fent our Children in bapcifm ; which they ought 
*'to ^0 ^ to whom the children are neareft, as 
*' their Parents, and they to whom God hathgi- 
^^ ven this charity, 3 Jutl: as WickUff* Judge 
now of this mans words ? 

^, 4. " But his fecond Demonftratiori is from 
"the witnefs born againfl it by fome of iheir 
" moft eminent leading men, viz,, Berengarins ^ 
*' Peter 3rHlSy HenricHs Arnoldns 

A^ifvo, Beren^arim is not ufed to be reckoned 
as one of the IValdenfes , but if you will fo calt 
him, I have confuted the (lander of him be- 

His proof againd Bmli is Peter Clunincenfis^ 
of whom I have faid enough to Mr, Tombes which 
I will not recite. 

c. 5. It is true that fome Papifls do raile at 
the Walde-fifes with abominable calumnies , as 
guilty of the mod odious herefies, [] denying the 
refurredion, and the falvationof Infants, aflerting 
the cottimoji ufe 6f women, and abundance fuch .• J 
Infomuch that it is become a hardqueftion whether 
really there were any fuch people, or whether all 
were llanders : and among other things they 
charge them with denying Infanc-baptifm. And 
the Authors go fo much on fame , and (liew fo 
much falfhood, that many think that all are fidi- 
ons. But Bi(hop Vjlier ( de fnccef. EccL ) and 
fome others bring many teftimonies to prove that 

in that age tliere were abundacce of Aianlchtts 
that came mo/ LomharMe ^ and Irom thence came 
into I he country of the Waldenfts ; and that for 
their fakes the Papiils accufed the Waldenfes of 
all thefe villanies and herelies with Anabaptiiim, as 
ii they had been all of a mind. And though I 
confefs that the horrid h'es of abundance of Pa- 
pills of Luther 5 Calvin , ZmngUm and Other 
iiich, and fome experiments in this age, have gi- 
ven men occafion to qutftion 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- 
furrcdion, and for comm.on undeannefs, and de- 
nied Infants falvation and baptifm, even fuch J^<^ 
nichees and Arrians as afcrefaid : Not that I think 
it any whit ftrange that fame among fuch world- 
ly pcrfccurors fliould belie others as much as this 
comes to ; bur bccaufe of the hif^orical reports of 
fuch Manichecs recited by Vjher ubi fnp, fag^ 
225, 226j &:c. caf, 8. & Vtgnier Hifi, Ecclef. 
an, 1023. And that they falily took thtWaUen- 
fes to have been of the Manichees mind , as li- 
ving among them , h all the cloak that any rea- 
fonable charity can afi-ord to thofe old ones that 
faifly accufed them : And to the later ilanderers 
( Cohjfordiis, Crerfer y 6ic.) this will be no cloak, 
niuch lefs to Mr. Danvers if in his zeal for his 
Sed and way, he will own the (landers of blinded 
Papifts, when he crieth them down himfelf, and 
lath had time and means to know their calumni- 
ation. To 


To all this, let the Reader add but the peru- 
fal of the grofs contradidions of their accufers 
againft each other, ( yea the fame Author as re- 
ported by CoHJfardiis faying one thing , and as 
publifhed by Gretfer faying the contrary, I mean 
KayneriHs, ) And let him confider of the tefti- 
mony of Vignier concerning an old Copy of their 
Dodrine Hiewed to the great .and excellent Chan- 
cellour of France^ Aiich, Hofpitalius , wholly 
agreeing with the dodrine of the later Walden- 
fesy and renouncing only the Popilh fupcrftiti- 
ons : And the tcftimony of PoflinertH) 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^xnd Mr. Arnolty and by their 
own Confellions which many aiTured him they 
hadfeen, the old Alhigenfes dodrine ^3,% altoge- 
ther conform to the Frotefiants dodrine ^ Vjher i 
p. 308. (^.10. And then judge whether the charge 
of Anabaptiftry, and all JUanichaan abhominati- 
ons be credible. 

<^.6. " But ( faith Mr, D. ) Caffander teftifiet-h 
** in his Epiftle to the Duke of Cleve that Peter 
*^ Brui^ and HenricHs denied baptifm to little 
*^ones, affirming that only the adult (hould be 
*' baptized* 

Anfw. Read but Caffanders Pref. and judge 
of the Credit of this mans accufations. i. Caf- 
fander faith , that it was the oJ^famchees and 
Prifcillianifis ( who were Gnoftickj faith ShU 
fit. Ssverpti who lived in Prifcillians time ) 


^ (385) 

that brought in the errors after mentioned by 
him, which fwarmed in Bernards daies ^ And 
that this Herefie bred them that were called 
Cath,^rtfls^2L name belonging to one of the three feds 
of <iJ4<(a:uchees \ but in France they were called 
Albtgif/jiSy from the place, and that it was to 
thefc Mankhean and Prifct/ltan errours, than 
they added, the denyal of Infant-Bapiilm. 2. 
He faiihj Peter Bruis^ and Henry ^ feem to have 
been the chief Authors of this addition •, but in 
a far differing fenle from the lacer Anabaftifts -^ 
For Peter and He72ry equally denyed Baptifm 
and falvation to Infants, or any but adual belie- 
vers. 3. And for ihe furmife of Peter and 
Hetiry he taketh the word of Peter the Avbot 
Qumacenfis : Co that Cdff^nder doth but what Mr. 
D. doth, even report Qumacenfi , 4. And he 
profcfTeth that the Wuldeftfes called Picards , 
whofe re! ids were in tJHoravia and Bohemia 
to that day , [; d:d approve and ufe hj/afit^Ba- 
ptffm as con[entaneGm to the G off el ]] as I beiore 
cited him. 

c . 7. His next proof is [ ^' Dr* Prideanx faith 
"in his Lm, Councils,, that Peter Br nis and Ar*- 
^^ nold of Brixia, were in tlic fecond Laterane 
*' Council cenfured for the herelie of rejeding 
*'Infant-Baptifmj ct-c } 

Anfxv. I have feldum read an Author whofe 
Proofs arc hker one another : i. Why mult 
we be told what Dr. Prtdeaux faith of the 
ads of an old Council, as eafiiy k/i:--^'n by us 
as by him ? . 2* Reader, there is not the Icaft 
G c proof 


proof of any fuch matter raedled with' in that 
Council : Peter Crab doth not fomuch asnanfie 
that Council : Binii^.s only te41s you that the 
Atts of the Council are not extant^ but that Ah^ 
bos Vrjpergerifts , and Otto Icrifmaenfts give us 
fome account of what they did, whofe words 
have not a fyllable about any fuch fubjed , but 
only that they condemned the Schifmaticks 
who adhered to Peter Leoy an Aattfofe. 3. But^, 
how came Dr. Prideaitx fo to miitake ? Anfvs^ 
Thofe Papers of Dr. Prtdcaitx were pofthu- 
tnous fhreds, which whether he would have own- 
ed we cannot tell. But that which he faith, iff f 
that there were thirty Canons lately publiflied 
as that Council's, which BeiUrmine himfelf reje- 
deth as falfe : And feeing I never faw that for* 
gery 1 cannot fay whether any fuch thing be in 
it, which Pridemx's words recite : But it muft 
be from that or from nothing. And is this a 
good proof for Pride anx to tell you what a for- 
ged writing faith , which Crab and Bintiu and 
BelLirwine ejed or take for falfe ? 4. But what 
if that Council had fo accufed Brnis and Ar- 
mid J 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- 
fcmder^ Vfier and others have oft faid , that it 
was the forefard Mdnicbean Hef eticks called Ca- 
iharifis that Bernard defcribeth by the name of* 
Apoftolick* And that heweht by fame (d^sLeo-- 
dtenfis did ) which falfly accufed the Albtgenfes^ 


( 38? ) 
among* them aS guilty of the fame herefies . And 
that the fame Bernard accuKth thcfv,- that he 
fpake of , of other heinous things -, If you be- 
lieve from him that the jit'ot^enjes were guilcy 
oi the one^you have the fame tcftimony that they 
Were guilty of the other. 

c. 9. His next proof is the report oi a late 
Papift fc/ Ftcccomes ^ 1,2. c, i. Whom he alfo 
after mtiicionech in his Rfply , who as truly 
numbreth LHther^Calvw^ anJ Bex^a with the ad- 
verfaries of Infant-Bapcifm. if fuch wicnefles be 
his proof, he could not have chofen better for 
his turn than him and CochLem^ and fome fuch 
calumniators, of which fort I could name him 

^. 10. "His laft wirrtefsis. Dr. Hammond 
"eonfelfcth that Peter Bruis and Henry his 
*' Scholar and the Pctrobrnfiant and Henricani 
*' that fprung from them oppofed Infant-Ba- 
*^ ptifm. J 

AnfvQ. I. Not a word of Dr. Hammonds 
books is cited to prove this , but Mr. Tomhes 
his Review. And muft we know of Mr»Tombes 
^hat Dr. Hcimmond held ? No wonder then if 
1 and the world mud: learn what I hold my felf, 
and what I have written, from fuch as Mr. i).-z«- 
'vers and Mr* Tomhesi And why not alfo from 
all the reft that have written againft me ? 
2» I think it not 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 
Cq % h^d 


had no other means to know what thefe two 
men and their followers held, than what we and 
others have as well as he. You mud give us 
elder proofs than this. 3. And if ir were af- 
ferted by him or proved by others, it were no 
proof that the Waldenfes denyed Infant-Baptifm ^ 
but it would only follow that Bruis and Henry 
were Mamchees and not Waldenfes ^ which feem- 
cth to be the mi (lake of their later accuftrs at 

<■» II. Pa^, 120. He proveth Mr. WiMs 
guiUy o'iHnfaithfulmfsj warn of corifcience^ ^hea- 
ting^ forgery •, and aiter, pag. 12 2. of manifold Ly- 
ing. Eecaufe, i. He knoweth that Clnniacen^ 
fis — hath given no fuch vi>ickeda?jd falfeteftlmo^ 
ny^^c. And how proveth he thatf [For both Oftan- 
der and the Magdeb, from whom he had it, 
give an account of Fifteen particidars &:c.] Anfw, 

1. Doth that prove that CUtniac. hath no more? 

2, Do they f.y that thofe fifteen are all ? 3. 
And doth that prove that Mr. Wills knew ity 
who never faith, that he ever faw Cluniaccnps 
book ? as it feems Mr. D. did nor, 4. Doth 
Mr. D, 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 Ofirnder, 
or the ^dagdeb. and will not be at the labour to 
^tx. and fearch them for nothing. 

<^. 12. Tag, 121. he fuith , \_He know ts that 
thefe particulars he mentions^ were not charged 
on Peter Bruis hut on the Aibigeo's in the foU 
lowing Century by other hands than Bernard 



and Cluniacenfis who were dejid long he- 

^/ifw, I. Ho7; know vou another mans know- 
ledge ? 2. Long before what <' Before anyluch 
accufations on i\\t Aibigenfes ? Rt-ad Bernards 
Serm. 66. in Ca^jt, Siith Vjher ( than whom 
few men ever knew fuch matters better, or more 
truly reported them J de fnccej, c. 8. f. 232. 
Ber?turd Serm, 65. (^ 66. in Cant, mentioneth 
their oftnions partly connn.on with the Manichees, 
partly with the Orthodox, And that the Mant- 
chees were before among them he before prov- 
ed at large, and that they ( called (^'athari ) 
were by ordinary error miftaken for Waldenfes 
and Leonifis, And p. 236. faith he j^ Sic c^ 
Apoftolic:s Bcrnardm CUreval. Cathari^ Eckc 
berlHS Schnafig, Vope lie ants (juido Armor tca>i. 
at que Albige?i(]hns Regordiis Regts Franc, Chrc- 
yiographnSj hmrefm attiibuit quam j4poflelm frd' 
dixerat — — deteflaruem r?itptiivs , (^ carnem 
comedere prohibcmcm. (Which in Bernard 2iVA 
Bchertus are commonly to be feen ) Qnod itt 
de Manicheis in terra Albig, comn'Jorantthiis cd' 
rrntti potefi , ita de toto Albig. genere diihm 
falfijJirKum ejfe confiat ^ (ive cum Thiiano a Pet, 
Valdo five cum Papir, Majfomo a Pet, Briiifio 

eorum ort^inemplaccat repetere And p. 237, 

238. he faith, A Petro Bmfio cr ejus fucceffo- 
re Henrico c^iii ( Ht ex Pet. Clft77iaccnfi intelli- 

gitur) per annos viginti dot}rinam fnam 

diffeminamnt Albigenfinm feciam deducit P. 

A-f'ijfonihSy Apoftjlicos etiam deqitthns Serm, 

Cc ^ 66, 


66* tn Cant, ag^it Bcrn^rdm^ ^ofdcm effe cfir^a.- 
tiir'Vh ::»-:• Walacnfis cum.Fuhlicayiis, 

<, 13. Pag, 123. he provech that the Wal- 
denfis d;cl deny Infant-Baptifm , fr^.m the De- 
crees of 1 2. feveral Princes, and Popes; For proof 
,of thar. he refcrretb us to his former book. When 
I look there I find as cited p. 248, &c^ his evi- 
(J'^nce is as folio weth. 

I ." Dr. Vjler out of the Fragments oi Jcjuit. 
?'b.y P, Pithxm tells us,- that in the time of^o- 
^^ ben King o\ France^ thv^y oi Aquit and Tho- 
^^ lonfe, (principal places of the V/aldenfes ) did 
"^ deny Bapiifm ( for fo they called denying 
" Baptifm ro little ones ) c^c. 

A^fiv, Mark Reader the truftinefs of this 
man. I. 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 Adarri- 
age , and the eating of fiejijj dec, though con- 
joyned, in the teftimony. 3. He feigneth this 
to be faid of the Waldenfes, which is exprelly 
faid in the hiPcory to be fpoken of the Mani- 
cbecs ? Is not this an excellent Prover ? The 
words of Pith^pu hiftory cited by t^/J^^r de fuc- 
cef. p, 229. are thefe, Bmerfiffe tn Gallta M^- 
nich^os^ &;c. Pith, \ Eveftigio exorti funt per 

AqHitaniam Alanich^i feducentes jnadebant 

ncgare haptifrf?Hm , fignum crucisy Ecclefanty Q" 
^p/ftm Kedemptor.em feculi , honorem Sanciomm, 

conjHgta legit ima , efikm- carniiim — fimilimo' 

do. apid Thole fa^m invent i fant Manichdti^ 0* 

2pf igne crcmatl funt : c^ per diver fas Occi^ 
dcntu pants /UlMnth^t ^ exorti—- Of the real 
prcfer.ce here is noihing. 

5^. 14. 2. Saith Mr. IX [ *^ Dr. Vjher 2X^0 
"tells us out ot Pap. Mujjon. that 14. Cttiz^ens 
'' ot Orleans, were convid: of the fume hei^efie, 
'/for denying Bapcifmai grace, and the real 
'' prefence, annd burnt alive, Herbert , Li(ms and 
" Stephen — 

A'lfxK^, Here note, i. The hiftory cited 6y 
V^)tr ( 'phiiii. Floriaccnfis , rffercnte MAffan.) 
faith, \_ abnegiihant jacrt bapnfrn^ oyattam J buE 
not a vjord oi I^jfarits : And it was known that 
the Wuldenfcs opinion was that Priefls did not 
ex opere opernto give the Holy Ghoft , nor Ba- 
ptifm without the HolyGhofl, fave any ( young 
or old ). 2. It addeih that i\\t\j denied pardon 
of fin to be received^ Aiarrtage^ rrieats -which God 
created^ and fat , 

^, 15. 3. He addeth, [Dr. Oj7;fr tells us, 
. Many of this Sed were about MiU-n , 

Anfw. Vfliers words are out of Chron. Her- 
man. ContraCi, [ Qmfdam h^ereticoSy &c, certain 
hereticks among other opinions of ill error ^ of the 
Manichean Sf.^, execrating the eating of Jl Ani- 
mals — were hanged— J. 1. He proveth by 
this , that they were not the Waldenfes, but Aia- 
nichees. 2. Not eating fleflj is charged on them. 
3. But not a word there of 3aptifm of ymng 
or old. 

Cc 4 5^. 15* 

( ?9% ) 

f, 15. 3. He addeth, \_9^lfeaHt o/RaduIph, 
Ard. that fever at wham they called the 

Manichcan SeCi denyed 'Baptifm^ &c. ] 

u^k/xv. Note I, Ardcns words cited by V^- 
er are, [ Tales [nut dec. Sitch are the Maniche- 

^n heretickj at this time — who f^ljly Jay 

they kjep the life of the Apofrles ^ f^y^'^'g that 
they lie not^ nor fwear at all •, and on pretence 
of ahftinence , and continence , do damn eating 
fiejh and marriage : They fay that it u as hep- 
noma crime to go to a Wifcj as to a Mother^ 
or Daughter : They damn the ■ Old Teflament ,.* 
of the New^ fome they receive, and fame ,not ' 
and which is worfcj they predicate two Afakjrs. 
of the Worldy believe thatij ad made In^vifiblcs and the 
pevil vipbles. So that they fecretly adore the Devil^ 
who they thinkjnade their bodies* The Sacrament of 
the Altar they fay ts meer bread : Bapttfm they dc^- 
ny : They fay none can be faved but by their 
hands : They deny the Refmre^lion of the bo- 


J. 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 
n not , or at leail forge not fuch words a$ aire 
not here, 

#. 16. He addeth, [[Pope i^<? the Ninth in his 
Pecret^ to Bifbop A<^mt,2Lhout 1050. commandeth 
that young children be Baptized, becaufe of ori- 
ginal fin ]. 

Anfvp^^ I will not turn to fte whether it be 
Co ; but what's this (o the purp ofe ? The Pope 


bids Baptize Infants : Ergo not only tbc Mani^ 
chees but ihe Waldenfts dcnyed it ? I deny that 

<-. 17. He add?, \_ ^^ Greg, 7. decreed 1070* 
^' that ihofe young children vvhofe Parents 
*' were abCcnt or unknown , fhould according 
*' fo the Tradition of the Fathers be Baptized.]] 

A^'fw. If this prove that the Waldejifcs were 
againft Infant -Baptifm , it will prove that Pa- 
pifts, Proteftanrs and all arc fo } what proving 
is this ? Oi Bernard (next cited) we fpake before. 

c. 18. His. next wimefs is, \^Ecberttis a great 
DoUor againft the Cathariy &c. 

A'ifvr, Note Reader, that this Great DoBor 
was a Monk , and after an Abbot •, who faith 
that ''the Cathartfts againft whom he wrote, 
^ I. Deny and damn Marriage, 2. And ail 
eating of ficfh , becaufe it comes by copulati- 
on. 3. That they fay that the Devil made all 
*'flcfh. 4. That they do not only fayBaptifm 
^'profiteth not Infants, but more commonly 
*'thoii<5h more privately, that no water Bapcifm 
*^ proiiteih any one to falvation - — And 
^' that Chrift was not truly born of a Virgin , 
*' nor had humane flefh , but a fhew of it , nor 
*^rofe from the dead , but Teemed to die, and 
'•rife. They are Manichees : They keep the 
*'feaft of A^a»icheHs death : That they hold 
"that mens fouls are nothing but the apoftate 
^^ Spirits caft out of heaven , which by good 
'' works here may procure falvation : ] If all 
f bis be true, were thefe the I'Fi^/^f^r/Jr;.^ and is this 


Mr. D.s praof Bihllot. Fat, To, 4. p. 2. p. 

p. 19. His next proof is, [^ Erhrdrdns another 
great 1. o^or^ ^'c,] 

Anfw. This Erhrardiis profefTeth to confute 
in the hereticks that he dealcih with, 1. That 
the Law is not of faith , but is to be repro- 
bate o-'C, 2. He proveth itagainft them that the 
Prophets and Patriarchs are faved, 3. That 
it was the true God that gave Mofes ihe Law. 
5.That God made all things and that they falfly 
held a Good and a Bad Mal^r of the World. 
6. That children fhould be Baptized. 7. That 
it is lawful to marry. 9. For the Refurredion, 
and fo on. And are thckWaUenfessLud this man 
10 be believed of them too? 

5<. 20. Ermingendus another great Writer is 
his next ptoof. 

Anjw, This Ermingardus alia^ Errnengandus ^ 
( we pardon him the mifnaming ) writeth a- 
gainft Hereticks that hold, i. 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 Aiofes the Law. 4. 
That Mojts was a Magician. 5. That Marri- 
age is unlawful, and fo on as the rell, even to 
the denyal of the Refurredion. And about 
Baptifm (C<^p. i2,fag. iz^ct^Bihi.Pat, To. 4., Part, 
I. ) that Baptifm profits neither young nor old 
without the impofition of their hands. \\ Is this 
VL good witnefs that the Waldenfss were againfl: 
Infant-Baptifm ? 



Reader, I am almofl: a: the end of his proofs 
hc:re , and yet bive not patience thus to lole 
precious time , .in openinig the reft ot his 
abules : T!ie few remaining are hke the reft 1 
Yet here he foundeth his proof of Twelve Decrees, 
and endcthwiihan inlbitaticn agaipft me and c- 

^. 21, In his AV//)', f. 125. he adds Rel- 
7ierins •, which giveth me occalion to tell the 
Reader, that if he will perufe this one Author, 
he will better underhand the truth of the whole 
bufinefs , than by reading many confounders 
that fpeak upon fame they know not whar. 
This RheiKhcYHs tells us, that he v^as one of 
the Arch-hereticks, and among them feventeen 
years ; that is the Catharijh : He tells us up- 
on his own knowledge, not only how many 
forts of them there were , whom ( being then 
an Inquifitor ) he calleth herecicks , but alfo 
how many Churches the Catharifis had , 
and what number each Church had , and 
where they were , and what every Sed: 
held , as ditferent from the re^^ Whereas ma- 
ny ignorant writers of ihofe times confound 
them. From him we have diftinct notice that 
the Adanichees and Cathayifts then held the 
horrid berefies charged on the WaUenfe s ^ znd 
that the Lio7nfis or T^ufcres de LugdHno 
(the true Waldcnfes and yihijienfcs ) were in- 
deed free from them- and abouiiror/Jj/p and Church 
Government, they differed from the Pontificiariszs 
the Proteftants do : But tor dodiinals (about \ rc- 


deftination, Free-will , Mans Power, Venial 
fm, Juftiiication , Merit, £^c ) there is no re- 
gardable difference charged on them. Cap. 5. 
He givcth you a Catalogue of the Leant ft s opi- 
nions, of wnich twenty are againft 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, i. 
That he maketh them fay that \_Catechifm ts 
nothing ~\ 2, Item cjuod ablntio , (^Ude datnr In- 
fantihiis nthil frofit, J That the xvajlnn^ which 
IS given to Infants^ profits not, ^ 3. That the 
Godfathers underfland not what they jljonld an- 
fwer to the Prieft, 3 4* That they rejeEi exor- 

cifmes J and the bcnedi'dto?u of B^ftifif. 

that a Prieft in mortal fin rnay 7iot confecrate 
the Sacrament^ &c. J And let the Reader note 
that the Popifn dodrine then was, tha^ all Baptized 
Infants were certainly faved, becaufe Baptized, 
how wicked foever the Parents , Prieft , and 
Godfathers were : And that all thefe (Priefts, 
Parents, and Godfathers^ were then fo often grolly 
ignorant and wicked, as became thefcandalof all 
good people. And note that here Reinhe- 
riis faith not that they rejeiJed B^nftifm of In- 
fants^ nor held it unlavpfidy but that, i. ^b- 
iutiOj the outward wajhing, 2. .^<e datur^ 
which dc faclo was then gt^en Infants, 3. Ni- 
hil profit , profits nothings plainly meaning no 
more but that the children of wicked igno- 
rant' Parents, prefented by Godfathers that know 
^lot fo much as what to anfwer the Prieft, and 


Baptized by wicked Priefts who tell them that ex 
optre oferato ihey are now cenainly in a fta:e 
ot falvacion , are not faved by this wafhing , 
iinlefs they have alfo the Baptifm of the fpi- 
rit , which is not this way afcertained to 

And accordingly they meant of Catechizing • 
that is, of the Popiih Catechizing only •, And 
of the other Sacr^.metits , as under the Popilh 
norion of a Sacrament which giveth grace ex 
opere operate. And when he faith that \_Sa' 
crayncmum Conjugii damnant J he openeth the 
my fiery of that accufacion. i . They denyed Mar- 
riage to be a Sacrament. 2. And he faith [D/- 
centes mortaliter peccare conjitges^ fi abfqite fpe 
frolts convemant, J It feems they were too ri- 
gid for Challity , but not againfl: Marri- 


C. 22. And that this is the true meaning of 
Reinherns appeareth, i. By the phrafe of the 
context. 2. In that he never offcreth to con- 
fute any fuch error of theirs, as the denial of 
the lawfulnefsof Infants Baptifm. ::. Andfpeak- 
i g Cap. 6. of the Orththevfes he further expound- 
eth ail [^ Parvulis vero non prodefi nip fmrint 
perfecii in [eBa, ilia ] the words before being 
[^ De haptifmo dicunt^ quod nihil ^jaleat , nip 
cfuantum valeam merit a haptiz.aritis, ] So that it 
is not J'ttpj^dohaptifn that he accufeth them of, 
but {t it Bapiifm pro/ire. h not Infants unlefs the 
BattiTLC'-s ( orParenis) be good-, that is, asafore- 
faid, When done by wicked Priefts to the children 
of the wickcJ. ^•23, 


<fi 2^1 And for funhcr evidence , the next 
Hiftoriaii added by Gretfer, ( BibL Patr. ^o. 4, 
Part,2.p» 776. ) Pet, Pilichdorf feemeth oneof 
the mofi learned and acquainted with what he wrore 
of any other that have then written againft the 
Wald€?ifeSyZx\& he refuteth their opinion of the 
invalidity of Sacraments, when adminiftred by 
wicked Preifts, c, 16, 17. But never faith a word 
of their denying Infant-BapLifm , even when 
he accurately and copioiifly in Thirty fix Chap- 
ters reckons up and confutcih their differences 
from the Papal Church* And can we think fuch 
anaan ( and almoft all that confound them not with 
the Cathariftsihxi were Manichees) would over- 
look this, in fuch a perfecuting bloody time ^ 
when they racked every word of the poor diffen^ 
tg-s to make a herefie otit ? 

^, 24. To Pilichdorf is added another accu- 
rate confucer of their opinions , that hach not a 
word of any fuch charge. 

And next is added an exad: Catalogue of their 
( fuppofcd ) errors to the number of Thirty fe- 
ven , and not a word of this among them 

And next is added the Mjdiu examinandi hsi- 
reticos ; And next de erornhiu Begehpirdorum ; 
and have not a word of it* 

Vv^hat the Panift: dodrine was you need no 
better informer than Lucoa Tndenfis foregoing 
{Part, I, 636. who writeth againd worfe per- 
fons ( though Gretfer intitleth it againft the JU 
bigefifes ) and yet chargeth them not with this J 

( ^99 ) 

viz.. Cap. I . li. 2. r In cafe of neccffuy c^ery 
Neophyte ;?7^j^f Baftiz^ed^of any Lay-man^ Jew, 
Heretici^^ or Gtntile, But for the dignity of 
the Sacrament it mufl be done by a PrelbyLer or 
Deacon , if there be opportunity ^ and received 
from any other , it is not at aH to be iterated. By 
thus Sacrament ^ both Infants and adult are Rege- 
mratedof Water ^ and the Spirit ^ andreceive re^ 
njiffion of all fnis^ with the adoption of the children 
cf God, 

0. 25. If all this will not clear the Waldenfes 
at Mr. £).'jbarr, and if he look that we ihouid 
rake notice of his Dutch A4artyrologie ^ and his 
Merningw^ let him that erreth, err ftill. 




His Impenitence in Calumniating the Donacifts 
(and NovaiiansJ reprehended, 

(. I. "O^cb" ^3^' ^^ ^^^ Reply he returneth.co 
JL this nororious calumny, and charging 
Mr, Willes with diiingeiiuicy he tails lo his wont- 
ed way of proving > i. From Sehfifltan Frank, 
and Trvisk^y whom I neither have at hand, nor 
am obliged to believe in telling me what the Dtf- 
riatifis held , nor to believe that Mr. L\ here f^ 
differs from hirafelf, as truly to report ihem* 
Once for all, It is ufual with Writers to charge 
the Anabaptifts as following the Donatifts in Re- 
baptizing, but not in denying Infant-baptifm : For 
the Dunatifis baptized again both In'ants and adult* 
And it is like this deceived this temerarious man. 

5^,2. Next he repeateth his i^lfhoods of Crc/- 
coniHS, FHlgentiiis , Vine, FiEiory which I have 
(hewed to be done in great temerity. 

5*^.3. Thirdly he repeateth his ftupendious ftan^ 
der of An^in a6 with much z^eal and fury in 
many Books oppofing the Donatifts for denying Jn^ 
fant-haptifn-^ of which in them all (3s far as I 
can find ) he haih not one fyllable, but the clear 
contrary, as is proved by me. 

<f. 4. Bfcaufe Eckbertus and Emericus charge 
the Waldenfes herein oi conforming to the Dona* 
tiils and Novatians. i » Ic was not the Waldenfes 



they rpake of as I proved, but the Manichean 
Catharifts-, 2. Or if they confounded them ihey 
wronged them-, 3. And if they fay as he report- 
eth,ihey belied the Donatifis -^ and why then 
Ihould I believe them } 4. But this time-robber 
hath tempted me once more to perufe EckbntHS 
the Abbot, and to read his Serm. 7. and 8. and 
where-ever this fubjed is his theam, and 1 find 
not one fyllable of any fuch matter in him of ei- 
ther Donatifls or Novatians -jfuch a man have we 
now to deal with. 

^. The reft of his recitals are not worthy the 
recital : The Anfwer before given is fufficient. 
Only I fay again that his contempt of fo full a 
teftimony as the Decreeof a Council at that time 
\ for receiving withont rehaptiz,ifig fnch as the 
Donaiifts hjftiz.ed in Infancy^ cited by C^Jfan- 
tier as a cenain proof, is a proof that there i« 
^vorfe than a weak judgement in faults 




ffls renemd (^alumny of the old Brittaiiis h^^ 


^. I. 13 Epeating and defending Fabians fop- 
JLV P^ry, he arguech that it could be no- 
thing elfe in -which they are [aid to contradiEi 
the yipofiolick, Catholick^ Church^ Anfw. I. If 
Beda fay that Anguftine tells them that in many 
things they do contrary to the Roman Cat ho lie k^ 
and the ApoflolicJ^Churchy doth it follow that 
the three things in which he requireth their con- 
currence were aH part of thofe many ? To preach 
the Gofpel to the Saxons was one. Is that a 
point that they differed from all the Apoftolick 
Church in ? When it feeraeth to be from no 
other 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 faitie reafon they might as. vyell refufe to ba- 
ptize the Saxons children. 2. But there is no 
fuch thing in the words of "Bede, as I have fhew- 
td [* b^t according to the manner of the Church 
€f_ Rome , cfrc, ] And who knoweth not that 
the Church of Ksme , and all in its communion 
ihcn called the amvrffd Ch^inb^ u fed in baptifm, 



^bcWhite Garment ^the tafling Milk,<indHony^anci 
Cioryfme ^ as an jipoftolicat tradition or fuch as 
ihey knew no original of ? Tertitfltan and £/>/- 
fhaniHs alone are full witnefTes of this, if there 
were no more. 

5^.2. There is nothing in the jcft 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 needlcfly* 

Dd 2 CHAP, 



Of his venturous re fort of Eifiof Ufhers cenfitrA 
of me, 

IN his Reply fag. 5 1. he faith {_ I have an ho^ 
nourable regard to his ferfon , and due value 
to hts labours J ejfecially where he has laid out him^ 
felf to promote pratlical holinefi ( and wherein 
as J have judged his grcatefi excellency lies } 
fuppofwg had he let (^ontroverftes alone^ and ad* 
dided hirrfelf thereto y he would much more have 
furthered the peace and union he pretends to prO" 
mote : It having been^ as J have heardy a judge- 
ment that Bijhop Ufher made of himy that if he 
ferfifted in Polemical writings , he was like ta 
prove a trouhlery rather than a promoter of peace* ] 

Here, I. See how he feareth not to make re- 
ports of the dead by this hear fay ? 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 hrm whom he heard this 
from , do you think we fhould get a fatisfying 
anfwer ? No <jne is here named. 

3» It is poffible BifhopUj/jfr upon the coming 
forth of my Aphorifms {which had many crudi- 
ties, andmany quarrelled at it more than there was 
caufcjmight fear any thing that looked like uilufual. 

4« But I ask the Reader whether this be a pro- 
bable report, when he underftandeth, 

I. That I was for ferae weeks familiar with the 
Bifhop , and he never fpake a fyllable to me of 
fuch importance, 2. That when Dod. Kendal 
and I were together with him, and our queftion 
was what was jH^nflins jugement of Redemftton^ 
Pcrfeverance^ and fonie other things, he exprefly 
averred that my AfTertion in all thofe was the 
truth. 3. But I imagine this following might be 
the occalion of the report. Dr. Kendai had feme 
acquaintance with and intereft in the faid Arch- 
Bi/hop , and he having written two difputations 
againft me , I had anlwered the firft , and had 
drawn up part of the anfwer to the fecond ; But 
Mr. Fines and Dr. Kendal defired me to meet at 
EUliop Vfhers lodging in order to the ending of 
our difference. There the Bifhop motioned that 
we fhould promife to write againft eachoiherno 
more : which we did, and I caft by what I had 
begun. But yet Dod. K. after in a Latine Trea- 
tifc broke that promife (which occafioncd my 
verfes in the end of my Difpute of the ObjeA of 
Juftifying Faith againft Mr. Warner^ which fome 
tjnderftood not. ) Now it is not unlikely that the 
Bifhop might fay that if Dr. A', and 1 perfifted in 
that Difpute, it would but trouble the Church. 
I am fure he faid no moretome, nor fo much. 

As for Mr. jD.'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 

kir^l, he is one of theunfirteft to make himfeh a 

Dd 3' Judge, 


Judge, who is fit to meddle with Controveyfe^ 
or to judge himfelf much fitter than me.. Doubt- 
lefs his knowledge bath coft him much lefs time 
and ftndy than mine hath done me •, And if his 
advantage be in greater illumination of Cods Spi- 
rit , as I ferioufly profefs to fear left I fliould 
want it, for my manifold fins againft the Spirit, 
and therefore have caufe moft earneflly to beg for 
it ^ fo I could wiQi that he had better manifeftcd 
it , than in thefe two Voluems he hath done : at 
Icaft by an ordinary humane friendfhip to hiftori- 
cal truth. For my part I had never more pub- 
iilhedany thing in this caufe, if my fenfe of the 
hurt and danger of their Separations and Divifions 
of Chriftians, and deftrudion of Love and Peace, 
had not moved me much more , than any great 
zeal againft bare rebaptizing, in it felf confidered, 
efpecially if hypothetically done» 





I. ^^Incc the writing of this, I have 
perufed Smaragdus, Peter Ahba.s 
CLuniacenfts^ and Bernard^ which 
^^-^ were not before at hand. And 
I (hall give you a true account of their teftimo- 


I. As for Smaragdt^^ I never before read 
him, but on this occafion getting his expoficion 
on the Epiftles and Gofpels I find that there is 
a great agreement indeed among Mr. Banvers 
witnefTes, that in his citations he is flill Hke him- 

j. 2. Smaragdpu on i Vet, 2. in oth Pafch, 
foL 87. faith, Q Sinite farvulos venire ad mcy 
taliHm enim efl regnum coelorum : Hanc cnimfan- 
Ham^ fHram cfr innocentem infamiam^ -per hap- 
tifmi gratiam cafia mater gignit Ecclefa ~\ 
'That is ]^fHfftr little children to come to me^for 
cf fuch is the Kingdom of Cod ^ ^' For this ho- 
Dd 4 ly 

^^ ly pure and innocent Infancie , the Church 
" their chaft Mother doth by the grace of Bi- 
" ptifra beget.] 

vV 3. And on Mar» 16. in A[cenf. fol. ici, 
[[ Cum autem dicatur , Q^i vera non crediderit 
coiidemnabit^r^ quid hie dtcimm de farvidis^ qni 
per atatem adhnc credere mn 'valent ^ Nam de 
majoribiu nulla, qnxfiio efi : In Ecclefia ergo 
fahatoris per altos parvuli credmt^ ficut ex ali^ 
is ea qiu tills in bapttjmo remittunXHr peccata 
traxerunt. "]. That is, [_ He that heluveth and is 
*Bapt.iz,€d jJjall be favedy dec. But when it is faidy 
"But he that believeth not (hall be condemnedy whst 
fay We here to little ones who by their age are 
not yet able to believe f For of the elder there 
is no qmfion, 'therefore in the Church of our 
Savioury little ones believe by others , as from 
others they have drawn thofe fins which in Ba^ 
ptfm are forgiven to them^ 

<<, 4. A^d in fab. Pentecoft. in Ad, ig.fol^ 
J 03, 304. having at large opened how Cate- 
fhumens were injirii^ed before 'Baptifm , and 
defcribed approvedly their Ceremo-nies , of 
f^f^f^jfingj breathing on the^n^ exorciz^ing^ falty the ' 
Creed to be recited and under food , he addeth^ 
[^ Quja ergo Pnrvidi^ nccdum ratione utentes, 
h<f.c minime cap ere poffunt , oportet ut asm ad 
imtclligihiiem (Ztatem ptrveneri7ity doceantur & 
fidei facr,imcnta q^ confcifionis 7r,yftcria^ ut ve-? 
raciter credant , Cr diligent i cur a cuftodiant 
fonfefftonem fuar/i, Plane dixirnus ; (^uia quam^ '' 
<yis vlli necdum loqui voffwnt ^ pro ilUs c^ con^ 


^tentur & loqumtur e^ui tos de Uvacro fomk 
fufcifiunt, Ncc mmertto : dignHm efl ut qni aliof 
rum peccatis obnoxii fnnty altorum etiam confef^ 
fiojje, per mimfieriam haptifnjatu^ remiffionem 
criginalium ferctpiant peccatornm, ~\ That is [ But 
feeing little ones that have not yet the life ofreafon^ 
<aHrJot receive thffe things^it is meet that vphen they 
€ome to age of tinder fi an ding they be taught both the 
Sacraments of faith and the my fiery ofconfeffion^that 
they may truly believe^ and by dtltgznt care may keep 
their cofjffffion : And not andefervedly : It ts meet (^or 
worthy ) that they who are obnoxiopu to {or byjothers 
ftns, by others confeffion alfo jhohld by the my fiery of 
B^tpttfm^ receive the pardon of original fins, \ 

^. 5. Yet it's true that this fame Author doth 
oft call for confeffion from the adult, and per- 
fwade men not to truft to meer outward bapti- 
zing, as may befeen on i Cor.gSoX. 30. &c.^uih^ 
could reconcile ihisto Infant-Baptifm, though Mr, 
D, cannot. See him further fol, 85. c, in Math.iS^ 
andfol.85.in I Pffi3.(^foi,84.<^fol.i9.in//rf.6o. 

<<. 6. II. As to Pet. Cluniacenfts (another 
Abbot near the fame time , and contemporary 
with Bernard ) he is the moft plaufible of all 
Mr. DJs witnefTes , as againft two men, Pet. 
Bmisj and Htnry : But, i, Fol. r. Epiil, i. 
he writcth Twenty years after Peters (owing his 
dodlrine. 2. And though Henry lived in his 
time, yet fol. 2. he faith, [_ Sed cjnia earn ita 
fentire vel pr<£dicare , nondiim miht plene fdes 
f^Eia efl J dtjjcro rcfponfionem quoufqae cr horum 


ly«^ dicmtur indHbitatam habeant certttudinem 3 
that is, ( having called Henry the heir of Peters 
vpickednefs , who rather changed than mended 
his Devi Hi jl J doEixine ) '' But becaufe I have not 
*'yet teftimony fully credible ('or am not furc ) 
'** that he fo thinketh, and preacheth , I delay 
*'my anfwer till 1 can have undoubted cer-^ 
*' taij^ty 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. 

^. 7. 3. And in his firft Propofal fol. 7, 
( of Hojfmeifters Edit* ) he reciteth the words 
fuppofed to be theirs , in which they deny as 
much the Salvation as the Bapttfm of all, Jn-^ 
fants* Ex his domini verbis Mar, 16, aperte 
tnonftrant , nullum nifi credidertt , (^ haftiz.a<» 
tus fuerit , hoc eft , nifi Q^rifiianam fidem ha- 
huerit ^ baptifmum perceperit , pojfe falvari : 
^am non alterum horum , (ed utrumque pariter 
falvat : Vnde Infantes^ licet a vobii baptiz^en^ 
tur , quia tamen credere , ohfiante atate^ non 
fojfunt , nequaqnam falvantur, 1 So that it is 
the falvation of any Infants that they principal- 
ly here deny • accounting Baptifm needful to 

^, 8. "And fol. 8. He addeth their next 
*' charge that fama vUl^avit , fame reported , 
*^ that they wholly believed not Chrift^Prophets^or 
"Apoflles, the Old or New Teftamenr. Sed 
quia fallaci rumor urn monftro non facile affenfum 
frabere debco ( waxime cum quidam vos totum 



iivitium CAnortem ahjectffe afprrrent , alii ^«^- 
dam ex iffo vos Jiffcefiffe contentiAnt ) cuipare 
vos de incertis nolo\: Where he fully confefTeth 
that he knew them not^ but went by famey and 
that he fufpeSied himfelf this fame to be falfe , 
calling it a Monfler , and proving it contrary to 
it felfy and proFefling that he ought not to be- 
lieve it : But yet left it fhould betrue, hegoeth 
on ro .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 : i. That alJ the parties were flande- 
red : 2. Or that Peter and Henry were flan- 
dered by occafion of the mixed Manich^es^ or by 
the vulgar lying levity or Popi/h malice. 3. 
Or whether Peter and Henry were guilty as 
fomc now, though the reft were not. 4. Or 
whether they and the Albigenfes and Walden- 
fcsy really denyed all Infants falvation and Ba- 
ptifm ( their very pretended words being cited.) 
5. Or whether they were (landered 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 opere operato^ by the Baptifm of the Prieft, 
and their rcfuiing 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. 1 11. 


f, 10. Ill- As ioT Bernard J r. Though ci 
boly man, yet his conceit that Papal unity was 
ceceiTary, and that the DlfiTenters caufe dconfufion, 
tranfparted him with fuch prejudice againft them, 
as we have now againft the vikftScds. 2» He 
was acquainted with Clmiacenfis and might be- 
lieve him. 3. He took things ontruft as he did. 
4* He chargeth even the lecret hereticks that 
he writes againft, as holding it unlawful tofwear, 
and yet lawful to forfwear , rather than reveal 
their cafe : Scrm, 65. 5. And that in fccret 
ihey are reported to commit filthy wickednefs, 
not to be named. 6. That he heareth that fome 
of them rejed Pauls writings , and; the Old 
Teftament. 7. That they lived fcandaloujQy with 
Women : and he talketh as if it were impofii- 
ble for men and women to dwell together, and 
yettobechaft. .8. Yet fheweth that he moft un- 
charitably fufpeded them, faying, [ Sifidemin- 
terrogeSy mhiL(^m'iftianim ^ (i convey fat ionem^ ni" 
hil trrefrehenfthilius ^ d' ^^^ loquitur ^ fa^is prs^ 
bat : y'ldeas hominem in teflimonium fuiz fidei 
frequent are Ecclefiam , honor are prefhyteros^ of- 
ferre munm funm^ confejjhnem facer e ^ facra^ 
mentis communiicare ( and did they deny Infant- 
Paftifm then f ) Q^id fdelim ? Jam quod advi- 
tarn morefque jpe^at^ neminem concuttt^ neminem 
circumvemt^ neminem fupergreditur , pallent ora 
jeJHniis , panem non comedtt etiofpu ^ operator 
znanibtii quibm vitam fuftemat : Vbi jam Vul-* 
pes ^3 And what's the proof againft them, [^z- 


fitarum demolitio teftatur vitlpem : AMistes r»- 
ItClps <viriSy o- viri difmi[[is uxortb^j ad iftss 
fe ^onferunt : clerici & facerdotes popnlis Ec^ 
clefiifque relicts intonfi ^ barbati a.pud ecs, xtp- 
de t extorts & t ex trices flerumque ijiv^nti funt. 
Anrton gravis demo lit io iftaf Anmn opera vulpi- 
urn h^c f ] And ihe way he appoints for tlidr 
purgation is to put women out of their houfes. 
9. Serm. 66 » he chargcth them for being 
agairtfi AdurriagCj yea that they taol^filthmefi 
to be only in hanjing Wives, 10. And with for- 
bidding to Marry ^ they joyned ahflaining froo 
meats : and fo holding devilifh dodrine : Bm 
that feme allowed Marriage only to Virgias, 
but not fecond Marriages : That they abhorred 
Milk yt and all that was made of it, and ali ttuc 
was procreated by generation, and that (de w^ 
fania Manichdi,) That they held thcmfelves oa- 
ly to be the Church , and derided them that 
Baptized Infants 1 ( yet he himfelf writes lai-gr- 
ly £p. ad Hug, de SanBo ytBorey for the fai- 
vation of perfons that have faith, and die unba- 
ptized through neceflity ., allcdging Ambrofey 
Anflttij Cyprian ^ And concludeth Infants favel 
by others faith, as they were guilty by others 
fin. J II. In Epijt, ad Hildefonfmn he faitli, 
o^ Henry by name, that he was an Apoftatc, 
that made a trade of preaching, to live by in ne- 
cedity, and what money he could get of fimple peo- 
ple and women more than found him food, he fpem 
in playing at dice, or other more iihhy ufes t 
that after his daies applaufe by the people he was 


found at night with whores : that he ihi^s left 
every where fuch a ftink behind him, that he 
could come but once to a place, naming many 

Now let the Reader judge if Bernard be 
to be believed what a man this wa5 ; If not, 
what his teftiraony is worth* 

AS I am writing this, the Hawkers are cry- 
ing under my window, lAv, Baxters Jr^ 
guments ft)r Believers y &c. The men that cite 
Authors at this rate, cite me againft my felf, 
with the like confidence : Becaufe I have prov^- 
cd in my Treat, of Confirmation^ the neceflity of 
perfonal Profefiion in the Adult : And Jhe 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 ha^c not time to fa- 


T I N I S. 

Infant Baptifm Aftertcd and Vin- 
dicated by Scripture and Antiquity, 
in Anfwer to Mn Henry VaiiVers^ 
with a full detcAion of his Mifre- 
prefentation of Divers Councils and 
Authors both Ancient and <Mo- 
dern, &c. ^yO. Wills: Sold by >. 
^bin/on at the Gdden Lyon in St. 
i^a/^rs Church -yard.