FIrst, the Accusation therein is false, his Lordship broke not his Promise concerning the Disputation; For his Lordship promi­sed, by the Accusers own confession, nothing but what the Ho­nourable Houses should condescend unto, and since his Lordship was not sought unto in the first place before the private Disputation which was appointed, but by the multitude prevented, which they so much thronged to heare, having more puslement, then practise in it, certainly his Lordship upon mature deliberation, well considered the many ill conveniences, which might insue, upon such a thronged desi­reable Disputation on your part.

Secondly, Your spreading of your hopes to get the day of your de­sire, which was spread as you say, 30. or 40. mile, might upon the same ground as the former was, have prevented you if the multitude of Ci­ty and Country could do it, and happy were it for both City and Coun­try if there was not so much needlesse dispute and so little practise, which questionlesse his Lordship well perceives.

Thirdly, Concerning his Lordships publishing an adjournment of the Disputation to a convenient time, his Lordship declared sufficient­ly that it was but untill he should receive the pleasure of both Houses about the same.

Fourthly, Your taxing of his Lordship to turn your enemie by ap­proving of the Remonstrance: for answer unto which though something therein may be excepted against, yet it was done doubtlesse upon a mature an advice & to as good purpose as your disputation might have proved: And if so many thousand eyes looke upon his Lordship only as the furtherer of such a Disputation, though the same eyes look ano­ther way, his Lordship need not much to waigh that matter.

Fiftly, Whereas you conclude that the Clergie and his Lordship ha­ving debated the matter suspect the truth of their cause and their owne ability as not daring to shew their faces in the open field, I am perswa­ded [Page 2]rather the needlesnesse of the Dispute and those far fetcht preten­ces of yours, diving more into a circumstance then a substance, prevents the same, your own Weapons abroad sufficiently discover your skill to be no such Master Fencers as you pretend, and though seven Churches can joyne in one for a Confession, it is most certain all the seven are not able to establish one of those seven, though the least Congregation, into a practise of what they could all joyn in one to confesse.

In the sixt place whereas you remember his Lordship to be tearmed one of the builders of Sion, questioning whether it be Gods Sion or the Synagogue of Scotland, and as you say plainly, that it is out of que­stion that the rule of Gods word should be all our rule for Practise.

Stand to your word (Practise) and then what practise do you mean, if by Practise you intend Baptisme of whom you please to bestow it up­on, you must either prove Baptisme to be of more account then Paul makes it, or else lay by this your mention of Practise.

Lastly, to sum up all your perswasions, insinuations and invectives, ex­pecting to obtain your desire in a publique Disputation, rebaptising be­ing found of no concernment to a Christian life, and so plain disagree­ing to circumsission for person, time and place, doth sufficiently satisfie those that are not so much taken up with circumstantiall disputes as re­all practise in Life and Conversation, which in many by this meanes is much abated and eclipsed to that once they were, and if yet you stand in need of more work, cleare those exceptions which Mr. Saltmarsh hath laid down, and there you shall find work enough to settle some that more nearly concern you, and not thus to looke abroad for such a publique Disputation.

And thus leaving that Letter of false accusation, I shall give you in the exceptions of Mr. Saltmarsh against Rebaptising in his smoke in the Temple, page 10. &c. some of which I have here inserted [...]ith little alteration.

1. That Anabaptisticall Disciples cannot so baptise as the first did, because they are not so gifted and qualified as the Disciples of Christ and the Apostles were.

2. That there was nver any one Disciple in all the new Testament, that did baptise by way of Authority, but he was able to make out the truth of his calling and dispensation, either by Miracles, or Gifts.

3. Those ought not now to Rebaptise that take it thus upon them, unlesse they could give out the Holy Ghost with it, which they cannot doe.

[Page 3] 4. That the Churches where Rebaptising is used where they pretend most full and pure practise of ordinances, yet have no greater gists then other Churches. But more particularly now to the main Arguments of one of the chiefe of their Champions.

1. He argues thus: That which God hath joyned together no man ought to separate, But faith or dipping according to the originall no man ought to separate.

1. Reply, Though the major be true, yet the minor and the Argument are both false, for faith and baptisme are not inseparably joyned toge­ther, though the Apostles were sent to preach and baptise all Nations, Math. 28.19. yet many afterward fell and perisht in unbeliefe; And on the contrary many have gone to Heaven that were never baptised, for we are all the Children of God by faith in Christ Jesus, Gal. 3.26. and Baptisme is not here annext, and although a man be baptised or dipt, if he believe not he shall be damned: All Christians or Saints are not made so by Baptisme, but by another worke.

2. Reply, By this Argument none now should be baptised untill they were able to worke signes which Christ said should follow those that did believe, Mark. 16.17. And if you will grant signes or miracles are ceast, so al­so is the spirit of deserning who are believers.

But in the next place he cites the decree of Pope Inocentius the third, and the decree of Gregory to prove baptisme Antichristian.

To which for answer, know that we have a far better ground, 1. be­cause they belong to the Covenant, Gen. 17.7. Secondly, they are cal­led holy, 1 Cor. 7.14. Thirdly, which is most of all, they are redeemed by the blood of Christ, Jo. 11.52. And lastly, The Apostles practise suf­ficiently settles us, who baptised whole Housholds, Acts 16.33. and yet none can affirme that all were believers in the houshold, nor prove no Children to be there. And upon this practise of the Apostles it is, that so many of latter as well as former godly Divines have practised this.

And as for the Covenant in respect of the seales of Circumcission and Baptisme, you and the rest which would make it but an outward seale, are much mistaken, for it is an everlasting covenant, Gen. 17.13. and though Circumcission be taken away because Christ is come, yet as Cal­vin saith, the grace of God which is the inward seale, and Baptisme is a supply thereof.

Your second Reason is, that there was a prefixt day for Circumcission, to wit, the 8. day, Gen. 17.12. but no day appointed for dipping or sprinckling.

For answer whereof, know that although the eighth day be mentio­ned, yet the command was not absolute for the 8. day, and this will appeare plainly in the example of the Children of Israel borne in the Wildernesse, by the way comming out of Aegipt, that were not cir­cumcised till afterward, Josua 5.5. upon necessity circumsission might be deferred, as the eating of the Passeover might be put off, Numb. 9.10.

Your third Reason is, that there was a precept for Circumcission to injoyn it from God himselfe, Gen. 17.11. and an example, Gen. 24.4, But say you neither precept nor example in Scripture to baptise In­fants.

For answer, there is a precept where both young and old are to be baptised, in Acts. 2.38, 39. Be baptised every one of you (saith Peter there) and to encourage all he is most expresse, and tels them the pro­mise is made to them and to their seed, and to those whose children were afar of even to as many as the Lord our God shall call: And there is also an example Acts 2. in the Infancie of the Church, where in one day three thousand soules were added, which received the outward seale of Baptisme, verse 41. and the Children could not but partake of the same outward Priviledges with them.

But to proceed, Argument 2. you argue thus; That which is not of faith is sin to the Church, or that person that doth it: But the Baptisme of In­fants is not of Faith, Ergo a sin.

For answer whereof, to prove Baptisme to Infants that are belie­vers children to be of faith, against you thus;

In the 19 of the Acts Paul tels the Disciples at Ephesus, That John babtised, saying; that the people should believe and repent on him that should come after him, verse 4. this was a command which he gave to those that were very ignorant, and had not learned whether there were a Holy Ghost or not, verse 2. though afterwards Paul laid his hands on them to declare that they were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus, and they received the Holy Ghost, and thus these chil­dren of those believing Parents being of the holy seed have right to Baptisme, Acts 16.33. But to answer your Reasons as you call them.

1. Say you, but Baptisme puts Infants of believing Parents, into a state of grace and Remission of sin before calling.

By which reason your owne Testimony is fully against you, pro­ving formerly that Baptisme hath no such Prerogative.

Because it is only the Election of Gods own purpose and grace, be­fore the world began, that puts us into this state of grace, which is ma­nifested unto, and confer'd upon some before Baptisme, Acts 8.36, 37. and upon others after Baptisme, Acts 19.4. Baptisme being only the outward Seale of the Church, and the work of grace upon the spirit, the inward seale as is formerly proved.

2. Baptisme constitutes the Infants of believing Parents members of a visible Church, for if believing husbands do not keep out unbelie­ving Wives, then are not their Children unclean, in such a sence as to be deprived of entrance into the Congregation. 1. Cor. 7.14.

3. Your next reason in substance is answered already concerning the Covenant of grace to be the inward seale of Gods Elect, and Baptisme only the outward seale of the Visible Church, whose Members not being elected cannot be saved, but must needs fall away and make a mock at Christ, Heb. 6.6. and only those that have the inward seale they being baptised into Christ, whether Jew or Gentile are heires of Heaven, according to the promise, Gal. 3.27, 28, 29.

4. Your Reason is not sound, for none is so unwise to think grace is intail'd to generation, but to regeneration, for it neither doth nor can follow that all that are baptised shall be saved, the contrary being al­ready proved, and God is as well able to give Infants an habit of faith, so far to make them capeable of Ascending to Heaven, if they die in In­fancie as well as men and women, and therefore is it that to such be­longs the Kingdome of God.

5. The further you go the more you erre, where you draw false con­clusions.

First, That all baptised persons are saved.

Or secondly, That some being in the state of grace may fall away afterwards, and thus by your diving into an obscure nicety, you race the foundation of Religion.

6. But now you undertake to prove, that baptising of Infants oppo­seth the Kingly office of Christ in faith and order, for proofe whereof you cite Math. 15.16. wherein Christ requires every one that is bap­tised to be a believer, unto which I answer it is most certain, and in the sight and account of God none have a right to Baptisme but believers, yet this is not in the power of men to distinguish believers from unbe­lievers, and therefore according to that of Matthew 28.29. where [Page 6]you read the place, go teach and make Disciples, and that this must be done by baptising, and then teaching, so that Baptisme in the first order is not opposed.

But to your third Argument, wherein you argue thus; that conse­quence which is upheld by the tradition of men is destructive to the in­stitution of Christ; wherein you abuse the Practise of those whose suf­ficient warrant from Scripture though you all carpe at never so long, yet can never clear, your endeavour being to make the priviledges of the Gospell to the Children of believers, so far short of what the Israe­lites under the Law did enjoy.

And thus forgetting the settlement of peace in the Kingdome, you make the breach very wide, opposing and interrupting a Reformati­on covenanted for and so much endeavoured after by all those who de­sire to live in a conscionable obedience to the plain discovery of Gods holy will, clearly laid down in his holy and sacred Word: whose de­sires and bent, are set to further that work which the wise master buil­ders now have in hand, daily importuning the throne of grace, that the work may be so carried on, that all those that desire to live a holy life in all godlinesse and honesty, may obtain the desire of their soules, and the great endeavour of those whom they have intrusted to carry on that work; who have managed all things so in Church and State, as none can have cause to say or gain-say their wisdome, in an all mighty power assisting them, and the great God of Heaven and Earth perfect his work and praise in this our Sion, so that at the last we may have cause to say, blessed is he that prospered his own worke, and thus gloriously perfected the same, Amen, Amen.