CHAP. I. Containing an Answer to reasons set downe in page 25. why Infants should not be Baptized; the severall Reasons being set downe in order, their severall and respective An­swers doe follow.

Reason I BEcause there is neither command nor example for the baptizing Infants in the New Testament; the order and government of which is no way in­feriour to the old: But in the old there was an expresse rule by command from God what Com­municants were to be admitted to Circumci­son, and other Ordinances of that nature, and what not: But this order is no where found in the New Testament for the baptizing of Infants, and therefore the same is not to be practised.

Answer. This first Reason placed in the front is wholly upon supposition, concluding, and so taking that for granted which is wholly in controversie, and the contrary as confidently affirmed by his O­ponents as denyed by him (namely, That there is neither Precept nor Example for baptizing Infants) which they affirme there is. Againe, this Reason is wholly by way of deduction and inference, without any Scripture either for ground or confirmation of it, of which he [Page 2] complaineth in his Epistle, and yet he practiseth it himselfe, and that in his first Reason.

Secondly, it is observable how he by this Reason excludeth a great and maine part of the Scripture, namely, necessary consequence, and right inference, being such a way as our Lord himselfe used to confute the Sadduces withall,Mat. 22. 32. I am the God, &c. God is not the God of the dead: here is neither command nor example, and yet the truth fully evinced, the minde of God manifested, and the Saddu­ces confuted.

Thirdly, it is an unsound conclusion, that because there is no command or example in the New Testament, therefore not to be done. There is no particular example nor particular command for womens partaking in the Supper, yet they are judged lawfull Com­municants. There is no example nor particular command for translation of Scriptures, or that such translations be used in Church-meetings, yet it is lawfully done. Lastly, there is no com­mand or example for an unbaptized person to baptize himselfe or others. So as if this first Argument were true, I. S. and those of his way would be in a poore case.

Fourthly, it is untrue that which he inferreth, there being both example and precept in the Scripture for the baptizing of Infants, though he cannot see it, 1 Corinth. 10. Matth. 28. compared with Esay 52. 15. which shall be further shewed hereafter in making it to appeare that children are yet a part of the Church; and so, both precept and example being for the washing of the whole, it must include them necessarily as a part, Ephes. 5. 26.

Reason II It is a high contempt and injury to Christ, as he is Husband of the Church his holy Spouse, to force on him a naturall wife, himselfe being spirituall, and desires the like associate; as such a Church is founded upon nature, namely, Infants; because commonly to one borne of the Spirit there is twenty borne of the flesh.

Answer. First, here is a high charge without proofe, no Scripture pro­duced for confirmation. Is not this rather a high contempt and presumption? Is it not a sad thing that a man should fall under the condemnation of his owne law, or otherwise exempt him­selfe from that which he will binde others unto (namely, to bring the Scriptures and not consequences?

Secondly, this Reason accuseth God himselfe, in giving the Church of old, namely, those seed of Abraham by generation [Page 3] (which he calleth carnall) to Christ his Sonne to wife; Jesus Christ our Lord being the same spirituall Head and Husband, Ye­sterday, and to day, and for ever, Heb. 13. 8.

Thirdly, it is no injury to Christ or contempt of him (though without any Word of God he so say) for Christ to have the heathen Psal. 2. 8. given him for inheritance, and the ends of the earth for his possession. It is no injury to him (though the Disciples thought it was) to have lit­tle children brought to him, his Kingdome consisting of such (in quantity as well as quality) Matth. 19. 13.

Fourthly, why cannot Children be spirituall and holy as well now under the Gospell as they were under Abraham and Moses; when they as well as those of yeers were an holy people to the Lord God Exod. 19. 6, 7 Dent. 6, 7. Esay 9. 2.? and the same is said of the Church now: but ye are an holy Nation, a peculiar people, 1 Pet. 2. 9. Beside, what spiritual­nesse was there in the five foolish Virgins Matth. 25,, I would know, that is not, or may not be in children? and is not there as much injury offered to Christ in giving them to Christ to wife? Truly this is weake and inconsiderate so to reason, not minding that many are called, and few chosen, Matth. 22. 14.

Lastly, this Reason is wholly upon supposition, the accusation without proofe: who forceth on Christ? It is his pleasure to take such, and reproveth such as would hinder them, and saith, Suffer such to come, they being of my Kingdom, Matth. 22. The computation in the end is as weake as all the rest, for it was so of old, no new thing at all; all are not Israel that are of Israel, Rom. 9. 27. and if the number of Israel were as the sand of the sea, but a remnant shall be saved.

Reason III It is a practise that over throwes the body of Christ or holy temple of God, for in time it will come to consist of naturall and carnall members; amongst whom if any godly be, they will be brought into bondage, and become sub­jects of scorne and contempt, and the power of government rest in the hands of the wicked.

Answ. This is but onely said, and that by one that may erre and be mistaken. John Baptist though sent of God, yet he cryeth, as it is writ­ten. Matth. 3. 3. I. S. is a stranger in his reasons to what is written, though, as we noted before, he doth account it such a faulty thing in others, yet he pleaseth himselfe all along in his reasons to infer this and the other thing to little purpose, unlesse to deceive.

Secondly, this practice of old (namely of propagating the Church by generation) was so far from destroying the Church, as [Page 4] that it did tend to the increase of it greatly, and was a meanes of Gen. 17. 20. 22. 17. 26 4 24. Esay 4. 8, 19. Psal. 105. 8. the continuing of it according to the gracious Covenant of God to a thousand generations, and his promise to the seeds seed. Esay 59. 14. Now that Covenant is yet in force, and that promise Yea, and Amen 2 Cor. 1. 20. in Christ, as are all other of like nature.

Thirdly, this is an inference savouring of ignorance, or else dif­fidence, or both; hath not God said that he will poure his Spirit upon their seed (to wit of his Church) and his blessing upon Esay 44. 3. their off-spring? and that all their children shall be Esay 54. 13. taught of God? that his Church shall be a praise in the world Esay 62. 7. when he shall returne in fa­vour to Sion, that the Gentiles shall bring their riches to her Esay 60.? nay, hath he not said, that the kingdome and greatnesse thereof shall be given to the Saints of the most high, Dan. 7. 27. and that this honour have all the Saints Psal 144 9.?

Last of all, what ever is or can be conceived in this reason, ei­ther in the parts of it or the whole put together, cannot amount to make good the charge, the whole supposed proofe reaching but to the wel-being and purity of the Church at the most, and not to the being of it, it being so far from destroying of it, as is affirmed; the which I leave to the judgement of the Reader.

Reason IV It is unlawfull to baptize Infants, because it is a ground both of igno­rance and errour; for it holds people in blindnesse, that they cannot come to see and know the nature of that holy Ordinance, nor what the same requires in the subjects thereof; and also it causeth the simple to conceive that Bap­tisme is of necessity to salvation.

Answ. That it is so as this Reason affirmeth, if any please to beleeve it they may; sure there is no Word of God produced to enforce them, nor yet good reason or necessary consequence, which the Author disliketh in others, to move them to it.

Secondly, this Reason savoureth of arrogancy, and intrencheth on the wisdome of God that established this very thing in the sub­stance of it in circumcision of old, it being then no ground of ig­norance nor errour; neither is it now, though he so say, there being no more cause given to simple now to thinke so of Baptisme, then was given them then in case of Circumcision. Indeed it is rather likely their keeping such adoe about Baptisme, and building such high things thereon may occasion some strange thoughts to such as are simple, as surely it doth.

Thirdly, I aske what should be the reason they cannot see the nature of the ordinances, &c. The Baptizing of Infants doth not [Page 5] let or hinder the knowledge of persons of yeers, those are not the persons he meaneth surely; for I appeale to himselfe, whether he in particular be hindred at all thereby. Nay further, it hindreth not Infants when they come to yeers from understanding the nature and ends of the Ordinance, no more then it did in the case of Circum­cision the Israelites of old; it being Gods appointment, that children Ephes. 6. 4. now, as of old, should bee trained up in knowledge and understand­ing. If any be hindred from understanding the nature and ends of this Ordinance, such are a great cause of it, in regard of many that are of the judgement and practice of I. S. who being so mutable in their course, one while laying downe, another time taking up, and then casting away againe. And beside altering the ends of Baptisme and rejecting the proper subjects of it, namely, the lineall seed of the faithfull, that many they converse withall are at their wits end, and know not what to hold or settle upon. And that it is so, and also that this reason hath no force in it against the baptizing In­fants, I leave the Reader to judge.

Reason 5 It keepeth up the state of Antichrist, by granting of him this so chiefe a corner-stone of the Lords House to lie in his foundation; for that Church where Baptisme is the true ordinance of God in the administration of it, is by the rule of the Gospel a true Church; so that if Antichrists Baptisme, which he administreth be Gods Ordinance, then that Church wherein he doth so administer the same must be also the Church of God, and those in sinne that refuse communion with it.

Answer. It may here be minded that divers things are here in this Reason affirmed and concluded, but nothing at all proved; we know what is written to the Law and Testimony, Esay 8. 20. but I. S. seemeth to be a stranger to that, and chuseth inferences, such as he found great fault with in his Epistle. No man needs to beleeve what is said in this Reason unlesse he will.

Secondly, who granteth this to lie in the foundation of Anti­christ? surely I. S. surmiseth and taketh for granted that which is not acknowledged; if any doe or have done, it is not for want of ignorance. Jeroboam made a schisme, set up an idolatrous way of worship and calves; and yet notwithstanding that way of his, there was Circumcision, the Ordinance of God, and no part of the foun­dation of his idolatrous way, nor any corner-stone in the building thereof. Neither is Baptisme now any more a part of the foun­dation of Antichrist, or corner-stone in that building. And if I. S. [Page 8] were not ignorant of this mystery of iniquity, he would not thus reason as he doth. This mystery of iniquity it wrought in the Church 2 Thes. 2. in the Apostles time, when Baptisme was Gods Ordinance, and no part of that foundation or corner-stone in that building, as neither is now any part of it. Let I. S. if he can, shew when Bap­tisme became such a corner-stone in the foundation of that build­ing; or why it should be so, more then Circumcision of old was a corner-stone in that idolatrous state and way of Jeroboam and the Calves: let him shew how long it continued Gods holy Ordinance, and when it ceased so to be.

Thirdly, Christ is the chiefe corner-stone, and this corner-Stone is in Ephes. 2. 20. that dessection (yet no part of it;) I suppose I. S. granteth it, and will not deny it, That there is in many in this Kingdome (especially) and John Hus & alia. else where, as it was also formerly, such as in whom Christ and his Word and Spirit dwell, yet are not come out of that state accord­ing to his sense. Now to grant this is more likely to keep up the state of Antichrist; and to deny this sure he dare not. Let him see how he will avoid his own Argument upon his own ground: Surely some have seene this, and thereupon have held no faith, no grace, no Christ till so separated from Babylon. Sure he must either renounce his reason or fall under the condemnation of it, if he be true to his owne principle. In this particular that now I set downe, if my judgement faile me not, he will never be able to avoid it, by grant­ing the Scriptures translated to be the Word of God, and usefull in the Church; which Babylon hath translated, keepeth and holdeth forth and buildeth upon. Now for him and others to receive, hold, and keep the same, and to acknowledge them as Gods, it must sure be, according to his reason, a keeping up the state of Antichrist, by granting this foundation to his building, and this corner-Stone Jesus Christ; for of the Scriptures its said, and are built up­on the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, Christ the chiefe corner Ephes. 2. 20. Stone.

But now in stead of the Word of the Lord, for proofe of what he had affirmed in his reason, he giveth onely his owne saying to very little purpose surely; That Church, saith he, where Baptisme is the true Ordinance of God (as if God had some false Ordinan­ces) in the administration of it. Observe, he hath got the word true to helpe him along; that Church, saith he, by the rules of the Gospel is a true Church; what rule or rules he meaneth is hard to [Page 7] guesse, he setteth downe no place of Scripture. Againe, it is obser­vable how he closeth with them he opposeth, making the Word and Sacraments infallible marks of the Church; yea, one of them alone, to wit, Baptisme. And yet he holdeth a Church may be Christs without Baptisme, as in his book may be seen.

He inferreth further, and thereby will prove (for want of Scrip­ture) that if Baptisme be true, the Church is true. I aske Master I. S. if the Apostate ten tribes were a true Church, for it is certaine their Circumcision was true. So as here the Reader may see how he ma­keth the Church and Baptisme such speciall relatives, as the one gives being to the other, as the father doth to the sonne, &c. and yet he holdeth an unbaptized Church, as we noted before.

He addeth further, That it being the Church of God, it is sinne in any not to communicate with her. A confident charge, but where is the proofe? alas, it is altogether wanting: Communion with a Church is the question to which I shall say a little, and leave the Reader to judge. First, I distinguish of Churches; secondly, of Communion: Churches are either pure and undefiled, or otherwise corrupt, and in sundry things polluted. Communion, it is either gene­rall, consisting in owning, acknowledging, and standing for, or it is speciall and peculiar in fellowship and worship.

Now for a Church corrupt and defiled, generall communion only can lawfully be extended; especially, if she be greatly defiled, for we may not partake of others sins, though we are to own their vertues and good things that are in them, and hold relation to them while they 1 Tim. 5. 22. hold the head: but with a pure Church we may and ought to ex­tend communion in all the parts of communion. But the question being of communion with a corrupt Church, I say, we are to hold generall communion with the same, and to owne it for the relation it hath to Christ, so long as it holdeth the head. And if particular communion in Ordinance can be extended without partaking in sinne, we should not be wanting that way, as occasion is offered. But though with such a Church in generall, and further as we can without sinne, yet not with her in sinne; we are to keepe our selves pure, as before. And in this case, that is very considerable, Revel. 18. 4. Come out of her, my people, that ye partake not of her sinnes.

So that here I both grant and also deny that which I. S. affirm­eth. I grant, if it be a Church, though corrupt, yet so long as it hath relation to Christ, it is sinne not to owne her and acknowledge [Page 8] her relation. I wish I. S. were free from this sinne that condemneth as no Churches of Christ all the Churches of God in the world; onely those of his way. I pray him to consider of it.

I also deny what he saith, being referred to that speciall commu­nion in ordinance and worship, which we are bound no further un­to then as we may partake with them without sinne and defile­ment; the seven thousand could not, might not, ought not to have bowed to Baal, or kissed the calves, or gone to Gilgal to transgresse; Rom. 11. 4. Hosea 13. 2. Hosea 4. 15. Amos 5. 5. nor yet joyne with those Priests made of the lowest of the people, yet were they the Church of God, and Circumcision and other of Gods Ordinances might be done lawfully of them. Yea, those of the Church did not sinne in abstaining communion in Judah it selfe in the time of Ahaz and Manasses; for, as in going to Gilgal, so in go­ing to Hierusalem they should have transgressed.

All which considered, I conceive it will appeare to be very fa­bulous which I. S. affirmeth of Infants Baptisme keeping up the state of Antichrist; for indeed the contrary is rather true, That the deniall of them right to that holy Ordinance, doth rather keepe up that state by the hardning them, that otherwise would come out. And also by the great confusion (like another Babel) which this opi­nion and practice produceth. All which I leave to the judgement of the godly wise.

Reason VI It is unlawfull to baptize Infants, for that is to build faith upon hu­mane testimony in matters fundamentall; for such as are baptized in in­fancy, have no other way to satisfie themselves or others but the bare word of man that must stand in the place of the Word of God, for such their truly receiving so holy an Ordinance of God.

Answer. This Reason is very unlike, I. S. he promiseth faire for gravity and wisdome, &c. but surely such a shallow and unsound Argu­ment was never framed before: I suppose it is not his owne, but that he hath received it without consideration from some one that he was highly taken withall; and being a new thing, it pleased him, and he set it amongst his reasons why he would not have chil­dren baptized, that they might be something for number, though nothing in substance and weight.

His scope is easie, but his expressions darke and covert; I shall goe over them by way of quere. First, I would faine know what faith he here meaneth, whether Historicall or of some other kinde. Se­condly, I would know what he meaneth by building faith upon [Page 9] humane testimonies. Thirdly, I would know what he meaneth by matters fundamentall, and how the receipt of the Ordinance can be a matter fundamentall, when the person may not onely be matter, but part of a Church without it, as he holdeth. Fourthly, I would know how the word of man stands in the place of the Word of God, and what he meaneth by the bare word of man in this matter of fact. Lastly, I would know what he meaneth by truly receiving this holy Ordinance (and whither he hold there be a false receiving this Ordinance, and yet the Ordinance holy and true to them that receive it. This Reason, as it is set down, I take to be something like a spell.

The summe of it in other words. I take to be this, Infants are not to be baptized, for that they cannot be assured when they come to yeers that they were baptized, but by the witnesse of man; and if that fail, then there is no way of satisfying of them­selves that they were at all baptized.

To which I answer; first, that I would not much strive with a per­son in such a case: If that were the cause that the probablenesse of his not being at all Baptized were the cause that moved him to de­sire to be Baptized; especially if it did appeare to them by whom he should seek to be Baptized, that he had not been Baptized at all. But surely this is far from the case in question; wherein men get themselves baptized: not that they thinke they were not bapti­zed at all, but that they judge it was not the Baptisme of Christ, because of the corruptions in the subject, instrument, or the man­ner of their being baptized, which made the matter null and void.

Secondly, I would have it minded how a person circumcised in youth could be assured when he came to yeers, especially if his Circumcision were gathered and grown, so as he could not see the print in the flesh: For this Reason, if it hath any force in it, it hath the same against Circumcision in Infancy as against Bap­tisme; for such so circumcised, could be no otherwise assured then such a way as will come within the compasse of humane testimo­ny. If it be said, They might satisfie themselves by the sight of the print of the flesh; I answer, that might be gathered and grown so as not to be seen. And again, if it were not, that fight is not the Word of God; and beside, they might be mistaken, or be cir­cumcised unlawfully.

Thirdly, that others were circumcised of old, or are baptized now, especially those to be joyned with in publike Ordinances and speciall communion. Now how could the Israelites know of old, or how can it be known now in particular, how will I. S. to put the case to himselfe, how will he, I say, know and be assured that such and such as he holdeth communion withall are baptized, but by humane testimony, instead of the Word of God, as he saith; he must take their own word in their own case, whether it be not humane, I leave it to him to judge.

And I demand further, whether upon this his ground any can in faith joyn in fellowship and speciall communion, or could of old with any they did not see or have not seen circumcised of old, Ephes. 44. 9. or Baptized now in this dispensation of the Gospell; for suppose they were Baptized in Holland or in some part of this Kingdom, nay in this City, and I not see it done, where am I then? by his ground, I must beleeve the bare word of man in stead of the Word of God in a matter alike fundamentall according to his account.

Fourthly, in matter of fact, I judge Faith of such a nature as we have now in hand, is to goe upon humane testimony (if I. S. will have it so called) and that such testimony is of divine autho­rity and every way satisfactory to be rested in; for at the mouth of two or three witnesses every truth stands ratified. In matter of fact, I Matth. 18. 16. make it appear thus:

That such a people are Christs Church; a Church being a fun­damentall thing, mens witnesses must carry it and give satisfa­ction, especially in regard of the first beginning of a Church, which some much stand upon.

Again, that such a person is the lawfull Minister of Christ and his Church lawfully chosen and ordained, what way is there of satisfaction but the word of man to any but onely to those that were at the acting of it?

Excommunication is an ordinance alike fundamentall with Baptisme, it is to be done in faith; the practike part of it is to be built upon the testimony of men, at the mouth of two or three wit­nesses; so as here expresly the word, the bare word of man carri­eth the same.

So as I conclude, as this reason is a foolish fancy, so it premi­seth wholly upon untruth, and raiseth unprofitable doubts, and hath the same force against other Ordinances of Christ as it hath [Page 11] against Baptisme of Infants, that it can by no means reach so high, as to hinder Infants Baptisme, all which I leave to the judgement of the Reader.

Reason 7 To baptize Infants, makes the Ordinance of God a lying signe, because none of those things can be expected in an Infant, which the said Ordinance holds forth or signifieth in the administration of it; which is the parties re­generation, and spirituall new birth, a dying and buriall with Christ, in respect of sin, and rising with him in a new life to God, and a confirmation of faith in the death and resurection of Christ, and free remission of sins by the same, as Rom. 6. 3, 4. none of all which can be expected in an Infant.

Answ. This is a lying accusation, of a malignant spirit, against a holy practise of an Ordinance of Gods own appointment, for might not any one as truly have said thus of Circumcision of Infants of old, aswell as of the Baptisme of Infants now; for what could be expected of an Infant then, that cannot be now. Did not Cir­cumcision call for, and lead unto then, as much as Baptisme doth now? did not Circumcision call for Circumcision of heart? Circum­cision Rom. 2. 29. being, as the Apostle speaketh of the heart, not of the letter, the praise whereof is of God, not of men, did it not also call for regeneration, and newnesse of life? were not the Infants of it spirituall above the reach of the creature, especially children, yet it was then no lying signe, as I. S. in the case of Baptisme lyingly affirmeth?

Secondly, I say, our Lord was baptized, and this Ordinance was no lying signe, as it was acted on him; yet those things were not in him, nor could be, which I. S. saith, the Ordinance holdeth forth or signifieth, namely, Regeneration, a spirituall new life, dying to sin, burying with Christ, rising with him in newnesse of life, confirmation of faith, and free remission of sins by the same.

What will J. S. say now, will he say it was a living signe, or will he confesse his lying accusation, to be, as indeed it is, lying and false, for none of those things which he is pleased to set downe, as held forth in Baptisme, or else it is a lying signe, could be expected, much lesse be, in Christ: And yet he fulfilled righteousnesse, in being D. Sclater baptized, as is righteousnesse fulfilled in Infants Baptisme, even as it was in their Circumcision of old.

For we may know, that there are other ends in Baptisme, as there was in Circumcision of old, besides those specified by J. S. as namely, the subjecting the creature, and dedicating of him to God outwardly in a way of service. The marking of him for God by [Page 12] such a Character. The differencing of him from the rest of the World, and instructing in inward sanctification by the outward washing.

And here it may be observed, that at length J. S. quoteth a Scripture or two, but to little purpose surely; it is about dipping, for that is new, and pleaseth him; and so in his seventh Reason at length he commeth out with it. So he concludeth, None of all which can be expected in an Infant: And why not, but only because he saith so; but his words are no Oracles: for those, or some of those may be found in Infants, notwithstanding what he saith. God that works those in an elder, can work them in a Infant, he hath done it as in the case of Jeremy, John Baptist, he hath promised to do it, Deut. 30. 6. And all Gods promises are yea & Amen in Christ, 1 Cor. 1. 10. Which when J. S. hath considered of, he may repent of his error and lying accusation, as indeed he hath great cause for to do.

I suppose the indifferent Reader will be able to see how false and unworthy an accusation this is, which makes Christ himself an unlawfull subject, and Baptisme a lying signe to him; if J. S. his accusation were true, in as much as those things could not be expected, or be at all in Christ, which he specifies as necessary, or else it is so.

Reason 8 Because the subject of Baptisme is to be passive; but a Infant is no way passive, as that Ordinance requires, I mean a passive subject in a threefold way. First, a thing uncapable, and so is a stone. Secondly, a thing forced, and thus is a Infant that opposeth it Baptisme what it can, so far is it from being passive in the same. Thirdly, a thing is passive by a subjecting power producing the same in the subject, by bringing of it into a free and volunta­ry subjection, and thus is the true subject of Baptisme, none can be capable to receive grace but by grace, because it consists of self-denyall.

Answ. First, it is marvelous to see how contrary and different, these men are in their Tenents. A. R. in his Treatise of Childish Baptisme, maketh Children to be uncapable Subjects, because they are meer passive, as he is pleased to say: whereas the right subjects of Bap­tisme (he saies) ought to be more then passive: J. S. he maketh them uncapable, because they are not passive at all; as contrary as these men are one to another, even so contrary is their opinion to the truth. Namely, their denying Baptisme to Infants: as untrue also is that which he further addeth, that an Infant is no way pas­sive, as that Ordinance requires. What that Ordinance requires [Page 13] in a passive way, that is not, or cannot be in an Infant in a passive way; sure J. S. cannot shew. Infants were passive in Circumcision of old, so were persons of years; and there was no reall differ­ence in passivenesse, or being patients in that Ordinance of Cir­cumcision, as there is none now in Baptisme, betwixt Infants and men of years, though J. S. would by a foolish distinction of the divers kindes of passivenesse, seek to make it appear otherwise. He first speaketh of a stones being passive, but this he saith is uncapable; of what is it uncapable? not of totall dipping, no not in a passive way. J. S. may please to remember, what is written of such like subjects, namely, The baptizing of cups and pots, &c. which sure he Mark. 7. 4. forgot, else he would not have distinguished so; Secondly for an In­fant, which he saith opposeth its Baptisme what it can; I say it opposeth its Baptisme no more then it did in Circumcision of old. But how knoweth he they oppose their Baptisme, because happily they shrine and cry; a waighty reason sure: did not Infants, nay, did not persons of years in Circumcision do the like: yea more, do not persons of years shrinke and shew an unwillingnesse to be to­tally dipped in J. S. his way.

Thirdly, For passivenesse by a subjecting power, bringing a thing to a free and voluntary subjection; which is, as he saith, the true subject: It may be observed how he rubbeth upon the old sore, there is somthing in Infants wanting, some Faith, some Repentance, some Freenesse, some willingnesse of submission, which he is pleased to make passive qualifications, with little reason surely: for any man may see what the disease is, they bring nothing to Christ, therefore they must have no acceptance of him, nor grace from him. Indeed it is works and not grace that here lets: For certainly Infants are as capable of grace, and grace as free to them, as to persons of years. As both old and young are meer passive, in regard of inward grace, and God giveth freely; so both are also alike passive, in re­gard of outward grace, to wit, that of the Gen. 17. Covenant, and this in question in particular, namely Baptisme, the Seale of it: even as in Circumcision of old. But he hath a kinde of reason, although no Scripture, to prove either his distinction, or that children are not passive; and that is, That none can be capable to receive grace but hy grace, because it consists of self-denyall. Truly, this had need of some explaining, surely our being sinners and miserable, maketh us meet subjects for mercy: I reckon, that there is nothing in us, [Page 14] (as of our own) of grace, that can make us capable. I suppose he holdeth not with the Papists foreseen works or any preparatives that maketh persons capable of grace. If he mean thus, that none can be capable of the grace of Baptisme, in an orderly way, but by being within the grace of the Covenant first, I should agree with him, and do think, that nothing can be more clear, but that In­fants, being within the Covenant, and interessed in the grace of God that way, they are capable of further grace, namely, to be sealed with the Seale thereof, Baptisme. But what he meaneth I I know not, because he saith It consists of self-denyall; If he be able to apply it to the purpose now in hand, I shall be willing to ac­knowledge my want of judgement, for to me it is, as if he had spake of a man in the Moon: and how far this eight reason is from effecting any thing against the lawfulnesse of Infants Bap­tisme, I leave it to the Reader to judge.

Reason 9 This Doctrine of Infants Baptisme opposeth directly the expresse Word of God, by teaching that Infants are in the Covenant of Grace; being borne of believing parents, and so a holy seed, by vertue of which they have right to Baptisme, as a priviledge of grace. Against which the holy Ghost affirms, that all are conceived in sin, and brought forth in iniquity, and so by na­ture the children of wrath, and under the curse, and except they be horne againe, they cannoe see the Kingdome of God, Psal. 51. 5. &c. Here man saith, that Infants are clear and holy from the wombe, and so are subjects of grace: But God saith, all Infants, as well one as other, are first in sin, and unholy, and subjects of wrath, untill the second birth makes the differ­ence, John 3.

Answ. At the length I. S. hath attayned to the full number of his Rea­sons, which are far more by number then by weight, and surely this last is not in the least behinde the other for shallownesse; for either he was very ignorant of what he set down, or else perverse­nesse of spirit carryed him headlong to the multiplying of words without councell against the truth. For,

First, I would ask of I. S. whether Isaac and Jacob, and the Infants of Israel, were not in the Covenant of Grace? whether he and they were not a holy seed? by vertue of which they had right to Circum­cision, and priviledge of Grace, Rom. 2. 29. That the Covenant to Abraham was a Covenant of Grace, I suppose he denyeth not; that Circumcision was a priviledge of Grace, the Seale of that Cove­nant the Apostle testifieth in the case of Abraham, He received it as the Seal of the righteousnesse of faith, Rom. 4. 11.

Secondly, I would know whether Isaac, the particular Son of Pro­mise, Heb. 11. 9. with Jacob fellow-heire, were not borne in sin? and whether he or they in Infancy were under wrath; so as he could not be in the Covenant of Grace.

Thirdly, I would ask him, whether children, being out of the Covenant of Grace, and born in sin, and so under wrath. accord­ing to his sense, can possibly be converted, so as to see heaven, if they John 3. Rom. 10. 15. die in Infancy, seeing by outward means they cannot come to be­lieve, till they be able to hear, and may not be judged within the Covenant nor baptized, till they manifest faith: sure according to his opinion, to our notion they are all debarred Heaven at a blow.

But truly, as the opinion is, so is the consequences that attend it, erroneous and false: but in as much as this stone is much stum­bled at by some of that way, I shall indeavour to remove it, in shew­ing, that the Doctrine of Infants Baptisme agreeth fully with the Word of God. The Infants of the faithfull being within the Cove­nant of grace externally, Gen. 17. 7. That this Covenant is to a thousand Generations, Psal. 105. 8. That God is not the God of the Jews only, but of the Gentiles, Rom. 4. 29. That the Gentiles are fellow heires of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ, Eph. 3. 6. That there is no Rom. 10. 12. difference, but that he that is Lord of all, is rich to all, Rom. 10. 12. His grace and mercy being not lessened, but inlarged, All his promises of grace being to the Gentiles, yea and amen in Christ, 2 Cor. 1. 24. Act. 15. 18.

Touching inward Sanctity, and inward right in the Covenant, as it is Gods worke and interessing of whom it pleaseth him, so it is only known to him, To whom all his works are known from the Mar. 22. 14. foundation of the World; A thing not within our Spheare; wee being to meddle with things revealed, and to proceed according to that.

Secondly, this Covenant of grace externally, of which we treat; it is extended more largely then according to J. S. his narrow Deu. 29. 29. minding of it, that seemeth as if he would thrust himselfe into the room of God, medling with things secret, and proceeding in his measuring of things that way, making the Covenant of grace externally to be with the invisible Elect, and not with the called in Je­sus Mat. 22. 14. Christ, of whom many are called but few chosen; so as he is not able I am sure as infallible to shew one person of that Covenant) [Page 16] whereas it is and may be known that the Covenant of grace is made with Christs Kingdome, his Church, and that consists of Virgins, five wise, and five foolish; and Israel though as the sand of the Mat. 25. 2. Sea, yet but a remnant shall be saved. If J. S. would but be pleased to Rom. 9. 27. take notice of the outwardnesse of the Covenant of grace as before, as well as the inwardnesse of it; the outwardnesse of the matter to which the Covenant is made, as well as the inwardnesse of the matter known only to God, he would surely be of another minde, and would not say, it crosseth the Word of God to hold children within the Covenant of Grace, for truly if they be not neither inwardly nor outwardly in the same, they are in a sad case, being wonderfull losers by the comming of Christ into the world with grace and Joh. 1. 17. truth, by whom so many gaine: But it is evident by what before is declared, that they are in that Covenant, and so are to be sealed as others, with the Seale of it, and that so doing is fully according to the Word of God.

But, saith he, the Holy Ghost affirmes, that all are conceived in sinne, children of wrath, and under the curse, so as they cannot see the Kingdome Grosse igno­rance. of God unlesse born again.

To which I say, Isaack and Jacob heires of the promise were borne in sinne, and yet in the Covenant of grace, so soon and be­fore they were born: J. S. is yet beside the matter and much to seeke.

A little to unfold this matter so hidden to J. S. and those of his way: There is a different consideration to be had of this matter, even as there is of a person of yeeres, who may truly bee said to be a Saint and also a sinner in a different sense. So the infants of the faithfull may be said to be born in sin and brought forth in iniquity, and so in that consideration under wrath; and yet in another minding, born the holy seed of promise, even as Isaack and the Israelites of old, as witnesseth the Apostle, ye are the Children of the promise; and again, the promise is to you and your chil­dren; Act. 3. 25. Act. 2. 19. let it but be considered in the case of Isaack in particular, who was in a speciall manner the childe of promise, yet he was born in sinne, &c. Let J. S. and those of his way use their wit and reason; in stead of faith, to find out this matter some other way, and they shall but tire themselves in vain: It will appeare a truth fully held forth in the holy Scriptures, that though all men since their fall in Adam (Christ the new or second Adam excepted) have [Page 17] been, and are born in sinne, and so under wrath that way; yet a number have obtained such free grace, as that (though in another consideration) they are and have been by generation the seed of promise, holy, and such as God hath and doth owne for his chil­dren, even as hee did Isaack and the seed of Israel of old, and the seed of the beleeving Gentiles, who are under mercie and grace by promise, as they are under sinne and wrath the other way: And were and are high in the account of God, what ever meane account J. S. hath of them; of all which, and who, and what to beleeve, let the upright heart to God judge, as J. S. in the end of his Reason setteth down, thinking belike he had said something that had concluded all.

But alas, how farre these weak and inconsiderate reasons are from effecting what the Author of them intendeth, any one that is not of a very childish understanding may be able to discerne: for sure men must be childish indeed, that in a matter of such weight and concernment as is their outward Christianity, and re­lation to Christ that way, shall by such reasons be so swayed, as to renounce and reject the same.

CHAP. II. Containing a discovery of the vaine pretence of J. S. of finding Baptisme now lost and fallen out of the world, as hee holdeth, in the holy Scriptures of God.

I. S. At the end of pag. 37. saith, That the substance of his for­mer discourse had been about the subjects of Baptisme, in which (if any please to beleeve his own witnesse in his owne cause) hee hath disproved the Baptisme of two sorts of persons; First, of beleevers in­fants; Secondly, the Baptisme in the defection of Antichrist, being Bap­tisme in infancie also: So as like a work-man indeed he hath over­thrown the outward Christianity, and relation to Christ that way, priviledges of grace, and Saintship, and what not; all which are of much concernment every manner of way, unto men; and that of all persons in the world, onely those few; so of late baptized [Page 18] by totall dipping: Is not this Goliah like, and can any marvell that we poore Israelites thus stripped and left naked, are offended and complain, being such losers, and turned out of all? Had he any great reason to complain as he doth in his Epistle, and else­where in his book again and againe, as pag. 40. Some have so wide mouthes open against them that wished them ever well: Well indeed, to unchristian them, and to strip them of all relation to Christ ex­ternally, quit them of all interest in the Covenant of God, yea making them as without God in the world, so casting them out, that Ephes. 2. 12. 1 Sam. 26. 19. they may goe and serve other gods: And can he think much that they complaine of wrong: What have they more? He saith he will leave them to God, to whom they must be accomptable for all their hard words: But what are those hard words; surely such as these, that they say their way and course is erroneous, a new invention, having evill consequences attending of it; that they are light and mutable in their courses, and very censorious; and is all this so great a mat­ter and hard to be born: Are not his words, or those of his way farre more easie, that condemns all the people and servants of Jesus Christ in the world for unbaptized; the course and way of all Churches, reformed or separate, as Idolatrous and not of God, only those of his way excepted; though the said persons or Churches be endued with never so lively graces, and walk ne­ver so sincerely and uprightly with good conscience in the way God hath made known to them: But, saith he, I leave them to God, to whom they shall give account for all their hard words: Surely he forgetteth, and doth not think of the hard censures and grie­vous condemnations, that he, and those of his way give and lay upon all that follow not their erroneous way and course.

In way of further complaint, he saith, Men doe as the Tyrants did of old: And old story indeed, and ill applyed, but though he be not, he saith certain of the truth of it, he is certain that some are little better minded, that labour to cover the godly with such filth as they vomit out of their self-sick stomacks: To all which I say its more easie to see a moat in anothers eye, then a beam in their own; how doth J. S. and those of his way cover the godly, and the Churches of Christ with the filth of their vomit which they cast forth, and yet he wi­peth his mouth as innocent, and wonderfully as we see complain­eth of others, that have more cause to complaine of him, for he can lay heavie burthens and grievous to be born, making men no [Page 19] Christiant, no Churches of Christ, but Synagogues of Satan, of the world, Antichristians, Idolaters, and what not; all which men must bear, though never so innocent: but now the least of these he will not indure to touch with his finger, but he cryeth out bitterly; but as their dealing is unequall in this, even so it is in other things. But now to return and leave this digression.

In pag. 38. he telleth us, That this falling out so: How is that? That that the Baptisme of all persons and Churches in the world (those few of his way excepted) being void and null, an Idoll, and none of Christs. It followeth, saith he, that we are now to seek for the Lords true Baptisme. This is sure a wonderfull case indeed, that the Baptisme of Christ should be thus lost, and fallen out of the world. Now, saith he, in a case so difficult as some would make it, two things in speciall are to be inquired into: First, How, or where to finde it. Secondly, how it may be obtained, being found.

For the first: If any Ordinance be so deceased and lost, as we do not know where it is afoot in Gods way in the world: (a rare case) Baptisme is thus lost and deceased in his opinion) so as those that find them­selves unbaptized, may be made partakers of it. What are they to do? They are to go to Christ and his Apostles as the godly then did. But I say Christ & his Apostles have left the world, and are in heaven: I but, saith he, That is to the Scriptures, which are the lively Oracles of God. Ans. And so they were when Christ and the Apostles were on the earth. The spirit, saith he, speaking in them to a beleever. Answ. They stand in the place of Christ for advice and counsell, and so they did then, for both our Lord and the Apostles sent us to them, and spake nothing but according to them. But what of this? Truly nothing to the purpose, nor yet that which is added: Namely, That they have ability to furnish a man of faith with all truth, as the Scrip­tures quoted, compared together, will prove. To which, I say, they do easily and fully prove the same, and there were never any that held the perfection of the Scriptures, that did deny the same: yet is J. S. never the nearer for all his pains in multiplying expressions to make the matter seem something; when indeed it is nothing at all to purpose: For, To the Law and the Testimony we are to go: And in Esay 8. 20. 2 Pet. 1, 19. difficult cases, To take heed to the Word, as to a Light that enlighteneth in darknesse.

Now first, I say, the Scripture giveth no light at all concerning such a cessation of the Church and Ordinances: Nay, it is against [Page 20] the light of the Scriptures to beleeve any such thing, Jesus Christ having said, That hell gates shall not prevail against his Church; and Matth. 16. Matth. 28. 20. having also promised his presence for preservation and continuation for ever.

Secondly, I say, it is but directively, that the Scriptures do furnish men in all cases; now their direction in this case, it is to the Church, 2 Tim. 3. 17, 18. and to the ministery of man, for the enjoying, and being made partakers of the holy Ordinances of God.

The holy Scriptures of old in a like manner stood in the stead of Moses and the Prophets in a sense: And yet the heathen were to re­pair to Jerusalem for the Ordinances as they did; and did not act Esay 8. 20. 2 Pet. 1. 19. 2 Chro. 6. 32. them themselves with the help of the Law: The Scriptures in a sense stood in the stead of Christ and the Apostles; yet the people must go to John; yea, our Lord himself, that he might fulfill righ­teousnesse, Matth. 3. 15. must go to him: Cornelius must send for Peter; Paul must Act. 10. 32. Act. 9. 10. have Ananias; and so such as attain the knowledge of the truth, they are to go to the Church and Ministery of man, appointed of God; and so that way to be added to the Church, and made parta­kers of the holy Ordinances of God: for it is most certain, the Act. 2. 47. Scriptures act nothing, neither can they: they onely direct in righ­teousnesse, 2 Tim. 3. 16. their directions is always as aforesaid, and no otherwise.

Thirdly, I say, it is not true that the Scriptures are in the stead of the holy Ministery, ordained by God: The Scriptures were not in the stead of the Priests, in case of Sauls sacrificing, nor in Ʋzzia the King his burning incense, to inable them to do as they did: 1 Sam. 13. 12. The Scriptures were not in stead of circumcised Jews unto the Hea­then to inable them, or make them capable of building the Temple: 2 Chron. 26. 17, 18. They were not in stead of John Baptist to our Lord: They were not in stead of Peter to Cornelius and his friends. As it is not in stead of Ezra 4. 3. Matth. 3. 15. Acts 10. 32. Christ, the Apostles, or holy Ministery to an unbaptized person or persons to inable them warrantably to Baptize, and so without Commission to raise this Ordinance a new, so lost and deceased out of the world, according to his opinion.

The Scriptures which he quoteth, I shall set down, and they are these, 2 Tim. 3. 15. 2 Pet. 1. 19. Rom. 16. 25, &c. Now I appeal to the indifferent Reader whether these Scriptures, all, or any of them, are any other then directive.

Again, whether their direction, it be not to a precedent Stative Church, and ministery of man, appointed by God, as formerly [Page 21] under Moses and the Prophets; so in this latter dispensation, under Christ and the Apostles, as is before declared.

Lastly, whether these Scriptures, or any of these, or all of these, compared together, do give direction to a person unbaptized him­self to baptize either himself or others: and whether they do not rather testifie against such usurpation of Gods holy things, and running before they be sent, in thus doing a thing that never came into Jerem. 23. 21. the minde of God, much lesse did he require it at their hands: Jerem. 32. 35.

J. S. proceedeth, and saith, By all which we see, that all things are contained in the Scriptures.

Answ. Yea, in the way of direction, and therefore such practi­ces as are without the direction of the Scripture, are unwarranta­ble, such as is their casting away as Null their present Baptisme, because of some corruptions that did attend it; and beginning it again with greater corruptions; namely, by an unbaptized person, without Commission, acting of it.

Here he addeth many good words in commendation of the Scriptures; As containing all things concerning faith and obedience, as being the Propheticall mouth of Christ, to which all must repair unto; and all Doctrines and practices must be tryed by; and an Angell from heaven is not to be beleeved, but as they speak according to it. All which is dire­ctive, as I said before: And what then? Truly nothing: Though he go over the same matter again, with some different expressions: and some of them improper; carrying a shew of favouring his con­ceit, and what he would have: As where he saith, The Scriptures is the onely place: How is this proper, or true, unlesse he mean in a directive way? Where any Ordinance of God, in case aforesaid, that is, of cessation, and losse of being again, when, or wheresoever any of these (meaning) Ordinances of God, cannot be found: (What then?) We are, saith he, to go to the Scriptures directly, and recover the same again, as Cant. 1. 7. Esay 8. 19, 20.

Answ. All this is but the same over again, we are to go to the Scripture for direction, (if the case were so) the Scripture direct­ing, and not acting, as Esay 8. 19, 20. the Church acting accord­ing to that direction, and therefore persons are sent thither, ac­cording to that Cant. 1. 7. alleadged, which is according to the di­rection of Scripture, which alwayes sendeth men to the Church in such cases: so as in this copiousnesse, he doth but puzzle his Rea­der to make him beleeve what he is never able to prove.

He proceedeth, saying: Thus having found out the place or subject, (very improper expressions) Is not the Scripture the ground and foundation of all Ordinances in a directive way? Did ever any Chri­stian question it, much lesse deny it? That he should with often going over the same, and with such improper expressions, and far fetches seek to make it appear as a discovery of truth not known, or at least not assented unto: sure he had some further drift in it then ordinary.

In the next place he saith; It is to be known how they that want it may come orderly by it; For, saith he, though God hath joyned his Word and Ordinances together, yet he hath injoyned an orderly way for his people to come to injoy them.

Answ. I would fain know to what end all the former matter serveth, if so be God require an orderly way: for, as I said before, there is none that deny the Scriptures, in a directive way, to be the ground and foundation of all Ordinances. J. S. might have spa­red his labour, for it was to as much purpose as for a man to prove there is a Sun in the firmament; which all grant.

In this it had been far better for him to have made full disco­very, how they that (in such a case) want it, may come orderly by it; in as much as God requireth this. And surely, if God require an orderly way, J. S. and others of his way, will yet remain in a great strait; and will finde it a matter more easie to cast away an Ordinance (as they have done their Baptisme) for the disorder and corruption that did attend it then in an orderly way to ob­tain the same again: for certainly, the Scriptures, according to what before is set forth, direct to a precedent Church, and Mini­stery of man, ordained of God, and sent as John was: And if not a Christ, a Moses, or Elias, or Prophet from heaven, the blinde Jews could John 1. 25. see it to be unlawfull for any other.

How will he do now? He is but where he was, an orderly way according to God is necessary; there being no gathered Church to be found remaining, no, not baptized persons to be found, nor any Prophets sent from God, according as his judgement is: What will he do, or what course will he prescribe? He conceiveth this orderly way is onely in and hy the Church (I had thought he would have rather said in the Scriptures, for to me it seemeth he hath unsaid all he said before) wherein is the power of Christ, he saith, to set on foot his Ordinances: So, as it seemeth, now it is not in the Scrip­tures, [Page 23] (as before he indeavoured to make his Reader believe.) But in the Church of God, so as we are not, as he said before, to go directly to the Scriptures, but we are to go to the Church of God. But now this is the case with J. S. and those of his way, there is no Church remaining in the world to be found, how then will he do? to help now at a dead lift, they will make a Church, that they may make Ordinances anew, and be the spouse of Christ whether he will or no, I suppose greater arrogancy cannot be shewed in Baby­lon. But let us see how they will do it, thus saith he, When God is pleased to take a people to himself, and by the power of his truth to unite them to his Son, and so in an orderly hody among themselves.

Answ. Now this supposed orderly gathered Church, pretended (after the manner of the Church of Rome) to be Gods: consist­eth of persons unbaptized. Now I would hear minde J. S. of his first Argument against Infants Baptisme; namely, that which hath neither precept nor example in Scripture is unlawfull; let him or any of his way shew an example of a unbaptized Church, since Baptisme was on foot in the World, or any command from God for persons unbaptized to congregate and assume, for so he after spea­keth, to become a Church, indeed it may be said presume, for it is without all doubt, great presumption, and a doing that God never spake to any to do, but the contrary, namely, to repaire to the Church before gathered, and by him made partakers of his Ordi­nances in a right way, there to be added and made partakers of the Ordinances with them.

J. S. saith further, When it pleased God to take a people to himself, &c.

Answ. When God is pleased to take a people to himself in such a way, there alwaies was new discoveries of his will, new grants of favour, there were new signes and miracles, there were Pro­phets and men sent immediately to declare his good pleasure: as appeareth first in the case of Abraham, after in the example of Mo­ses, and that people: and last of all in the case of Christ and the Gen: 15. 17, 18. Exod. 19. 16. Heb. 2. 4. Apostles, when not the Jewes only, but the Gentiles, were drawn to God, By signes and miracles and divers gifts, he gave confirmation to his pleasure, as of old he had done.

But alas, here is no such thing attending this supposed gathering of such people to God, for indeed the gathering is of another na­ture, and answerable to Gods gathering of his people in some other cases more ordinary. As namely, his gathering of them out of [Page 24] captivity of old, when they were in Babylon, or his gathering them out of apostacy and defection, under Jeroboam or the like: figures of this spirituall captivity and apostacy of Babylon now. But as then there were no new beginnings of Ordinances, no new Circumcisi­on; nor any signes or miracles for confirmation of their returne and gathering to the Lord: Even so the case being a like, there is no new beginnings of Church and Baptisme, which would require as heretofore, such like confirmation. And certainly, if the return and gathering of Gods people to himself, were any other then ac­cording to those gatherings from captivity and apostacy of old, I say, surely if there were such a new taking of people, and raising of them as is pretended, God would have manifested his pleasure as of old, by signes and miracles, or at least by persons sent from hea­ven for the businesse, as John was.

J. S. further saith, Such a people so gathered and constituted, have right to all the priviledges ordained and appointed by God for their mutuall comfort and well-being.

Answ. Just as Cornelius and his friends had, or might have had, in the like case, without Peter, whose Ministery they must make use of, he being authorized of God to the worke, and they directed of God to him, and not bidden to do it themselves.

Now this he pretendeth to prove from certain Scriptures, as Rom. 8. 17. 1 Cor. 21. 22, 23. Answ. For that in the Romans it is marvellous he should think that to be a proof: I say first, that was spoken of the Church of the Romans, that were gathered by Christ, and washed with his washing in an orderly way, by such as were not only baptized, but had authority to baptize others, they were Gods Church indeed, of whom glorious things are spoken. But what is this to persons unbaptized, pretending to be a Church, and to be gathered by God, when they cannot shew the least war­rant for it.

Againe, it speaketh of heirs, now may heires, because heires, and so every heire of Christ, act Ordinances of so high a nature, because heires; sure they, as obedient children must serve God in an orderly way, and not in such a confused course, as that upon the pretence of heirship, young as well as old, yea, women also might do it, for They are all one in Christ. Nay, which is more, though unbaptized, and so the Eunuch, or Cornelius and his friends, need­ed Gal. 3. 28. not Philip or Peter, but might have done it themselves. I suppose [Page 25] this Scripture, any one that hath but common reason in him, will see it is to no purpose at all.

But that other happily may stand him in stead, and the scope of that is to declare the interest of Christs Church to all things, ac­cording to the Scriptures direction, alwaies provided. And what then? then people may make themselves the Church of Christ, or pretend at least so to be: and then they are so interessed forth­with in all things. The Romish Church can make as large claim as they in this matter, and speak as much for themselves: surely, if persons in earthly cases could do the like, there would not be a few found in such claimes and pretences, but they would by wise men, be thought sitter for Bedlam then any place else. In further answer, I say, that was spoken of the Church of Corinth, and so is true of all other Churches, gathered and instated by Christ in an order­ly way, by such means and instruments as had authority from him. But what is this to persons that want this jnstating, by such instru­ments in such a way: Truly no more then it could for those that called themselves Jewes and were not, or then it would have availed Rev. 3. 9. the Heathen of old, to have injoyed the priviledges with the Jewes in Gods holy things, in particular, of building the Temple, to whom it was told, it was not for them to build, &c. It cannot be imagined, that such large priviledges should, according to due or­der, Esr. 4. 3. appertain to such; the Scripture being wholly silent concer­ning their right: It is but usurpation for such to challenge such a condition, of being called to be Christs Church, as it was in them that said, they were Apostles, and were not, as these in like kinde are Rev. 2. 2. not the Churches of Christ, rightly gathered and constituted, whatever they pretend to be; I suppose it will also appear to the Reader, that this Scripture serveth nothing at all to purpose in the matter in hand.

But J. S. supposing to have made some proofe in the aforesaid matter, saith, that by vertue of this union they have with their head Christ, the body thus joyntly considered, hath the power and authority of Christ within themselves, to chuse or make use of any one or more of her members, as occasioa offers, to administer Baptisme upon the whole body, and so upon themselves in the first place as a part of the same: This is the great conclusion drawn from the former premises; but it is onely said; for alas, that before is no proofe at all of the matter; what precept or example is there in the Scripture for the war­rant [Page 26] of this, certainly none at all, for this is unwritten tradition; and I dare say, as pure popery as any can be: for men thus to faine cases, and then to give authority in such cases as the holy Scrip­ture is altogether silent in.

But saith he further, if any please to take his word for it, such may be as truly said to be sent and authorized by Christ (thus as of old, by Christ in his humane body; even so now in his divine and spirituall body: that is, this unbaptized company pretending to be a Church: Now I mar­vell whether there be any so simple as to beleeve such doctrine as this; that a company of unbaptized persons are Christs divine and spirituall body; and that so, as what they order persons to doe in the matter of ordinances in particular of Baptisme, though it doe not concurre with the Scriptures; is as true and reall a mis­sion and as full authority as the holy Apostles had that were sent of Christ himselfe; and beside, that such high termes of divine and spirituall should be proper to this fained body; and onely the term humane, should belong to Christs person, when he was manifest in the world; it is sure very much; and at least sheweth plainly how wonderfully hee is conceited of his owne Idea.

This strange doctrine he will prove by a reason thus; Where­soever a Church doth rise in her true constitution: I aske from whence is this rising, from the bottomlesse pit: I never heard of Hierusa­lem, Revel. 19. 2. but comming down from heaven: But Babylon, and this little Teret of it, may rise happily from the earth. Againe, in her true constitu­tion, I say, it is likely to be a very true constitution without Bap­tisme. There he saith, are her ordinances; Yes, but in an orderly way they must be acted; it is not for Saul to sacrifice: But saith he, there is power also to administer the same: but sure, not without right or lawfull instruments, God is the God of Order. But the 1 Cor. 14. 37. reason that killeth all dead before it, and concludeth the matter fully, is this, That where a thing is wanting, there must be of necessity a beginning to reduce the thing again into being; this is the conclusion of all. And is not J. S. come to a faire Haven after his sore tra­vell and great hazzard. Necessity hath no law. But where is that due order, and orderly way of seeking of God which he before spake of? Truly it is a sad case, that any by their erroneous judgement and following their own way, should bring themselves into such a snare or straight, and then plead necessity to doe that which is [Page 27] not lawfull for them, and think necessity will beare them out. Disobedient Saul, by his evill course, had brought himselfe into a great straight, whereupon he adventured to doe that which did 1 Sam. 13. 12. not appertain to him to doe; but for all he pleaded necessity it would not serve his turne, for he was told by the Prophet from the Lord, That hee had done foolishly, and that to obey was better then sacrifice. v. 13.

Thus saith he, I have shewed my judgement, that if Baptisme be wan­ting where it is to be had, namely in the holy Scriptures. Secondly, how from thence to be obtained, by Gods calling an unbaptized people into an holy fellowship with Christ, from whom (though unbaptized) they have power to assume as a Church; so the Ordinance of Baptisme upon them­selves.

Now courteous Reader, this is the sum of the matter, consider of it, and see if it be not a faire judgement and well grounded, and whether thou canst judge this to be any other then Popish divi­nitie, which the Romanist can say in the like kind for their course; for cannot they say as much for making Christs reall body in the Eucharist, by hoc est corpus meum, as these can say for making his divine and spirituall body, as they call it; for they pretend the Scriptures as these doe, they assume to themselves such a state, to be Christs Church; and to have such power in what they doe, even as these doe; but truly, as theirs is onely pretended, and not reall; Even so in like is this, meerely faigned and not otherwise.

But he saith, he will cleare up this matter; (Indeed it needs clea­ring, for it is yet very dark and smoakie) this hee will doe, by shewing the manner of the aforesaid Constitution in the causes of it: How will he doe it? in pag. 40. by saying over again what he had said again and again before; namely, that the Scriptures, remaining in the place of the Apostles for us to have recourse unto, and serve as the mouth of Christ: Alas this is but a poore clearing, for this is onely in a directive way, as before I noted. And what then? The Scrip­tures being so; truly nothing at all. Yes, saith he, as the Apostles did before the Scriptures were written; To which I say, there were Scriptures before the Apostles, to which the Apostles had an eye and regard, and directed others to doe the like: The holy Apo­stles they acted Ordinances of Religion preaching, breaking bread, and baptizing. The Scripture acts nothing, neither can they: surely Act. 2. 42. [Page 28] this is a poore clearing; we will minde the Scriptures hee here quoteth, Matth. 28. 20. 2 Pet. 19. 20, 21. Rom. 10. 6, 7, 8. In an­swer, I will not tire my selfe and the Reader; certainly no man can imagine any thing more then direction from that full and perfect rule of the Scriptures, as gatherable from those places of Scripture, which as before I said none deny, let him but call to mind what he said of an orderly way which God requireth, and how that is as he conceiveth by the Church; and then let him tell mee if hee can to what purpose these Scriptures are, or that which followeth; that as the Lords people conferred with the Prophets and Apostles about their great affaires, so have the Lords people now, Moses and the Prophets, Christ and his Apostles in their writings, as Luk. 16. 29. And what then, truly nothing (it is but for direction as before) nor yet that which further followeth in this clearing matter of the constituting causes; which are, saith he, with the spirit of life in them, as effectuall as their personall presence, if not more.

Answ. Stay a while, the matter is sure otherwise, for this effe­ctuallnesse, if it were granted, is but directive. But it is not wholly granted, for that the Apostles were men inspired and sent of God to declare his will, they were a saving meanes of good to men; and God in his good pleasure, as a double mercy, gave his Word, and sent his Apostles and Prophets; sure I take it, it must needs follow, that if the Scriptures were as effectuall without the Apo­stles (and rather more) then with them; then God gave the Apostles in vaine, and the Churches were great losers by their personall presence; but the truth is otherwise, as is most mani­fest: The Scripture (with the Spirit of life in them) act no­thing, but onely direct and furnish men how to act accor­ding to the will of God, in an orderly way, according to what hee holdeth.

For proofe of what before he affirmed of the effectualnesse of the Scripture, he quoteth, Joh. 6. 62. 2 Pet. 1. 18, 19. Revel. 11. 3, 5, 11.

Answ. That in John, speaketh of Christ ascending where he was before, how this should prove any thing is beyond my thoughts, I will say nothing, but leave the Reader to judge of it. That place of Peter is of the sure direction of the Word in dark, and our doing well to take heed to it. That in the Revelation is of [Page 29] the two witnesses; a thing too mysterious to be a proofe in this case.

I suppose J. S. will not hold himselfe to be one of those wit­nesses, nor he, with others of his way, to be both those witnesses there spoken of. I will say no more but leave the Reader to judge whether these Scriptures doe prove that the holy Scriptures with the Spirit of life in them (as he is pleased to say) are in stead of the Apostles personally sent of God with power to act ordi­nances; or whether they in the case of the Ordinances dispensing in an orderly way, are as much or more effectuall then the Apostles personally that were sent of Christ for that end, who did not send the Scriptures, as in the case of the Eunuch, but Philip; and in the case of Cornelius, Peter, as in those and the like instances may be seen.

He proceedeth, and in full concluding of this matter, saith, and thus all succession (what phrase have we here) from the beginning came to Christ. (Of what speakes hee now, of Ordinances?) I had thought all Ordinances had ever proceeded from him, he being ever the Lord of the Church, and sure he meaneth the Ordinan­ces; namely, those ordained of old under Abraham, and Moses, and the Prophets; these lasted & continued to the coming of Christ into the world, the substance indeed of those shadows; so his sense may be good. From Christ, he saith, to the Apostles; from the Apostles to the Scriptures: This is pure non-sense, if I mistake not; and beside, I aske him where is that orderly way he told us of, and how is the case now according to 1 Cor. 3. by him alleadged for the Authority of an unbaptized Church; Doth he not by this discent seclude them from all, rather then inright them to any such au­thorite; happily he will say, Oh from the Scriptures to us; very good: But first, how from Christ to the Apostles? Did Christ our Lord preferre the Apostles before his beloved Spouse for whom he gave himselfe? I alwayes took the Apostles as the ser­vants of the Church for Christs sake. Secondly, did the Ordinances 2 Cor. 4. 5. proceed from Christ to the persons of the Apostles; or to their office as Apostles; So as when they in regard either of person or office left the world, it descended to the Scripture; certainly, the right and interest of the Scriptures was the same before the death and cessation of the Apostles as after; and the Scriptures gained no legacie by such friends, unlesse a sealing to the truth and full [Page 30] authority of their direction: so from the Scriptures to us: a wonder­full matter, a very fair Ring, from the Scriptures to the Scriptures, and so to us, just nothing but a shew of words without matter.

Further he saith, That all succession is now spirituall: So it seemeth he holdeth it was carnall before, when it was from Abraham to Mo­ses, from Moses to Christ and the Apostles, and so to the Scriptures; and now it is from the Scriptures to us, it is spirituall; a rare conceit. He saith, it is now according to faith; whether he mean faith of mi­racles, or what else, is hard to say; but it mattereth not much, for he is beside the Scriptures, and walking in some other field. It fol­loweth not, saith he, the personall succession of any, but onely the Word of God.

Answ. Sure J. S. speaketh in a strange tongue, he is never able to make out his sense, that succession follows the Word, the Word being immoveable, and that which abideth for ever, and hath no place for succession, though he thus speaketh he know not what. And the word of God, he saith, giveth being to all Order and Ordinances: It doth give being of direction and warrant, declaring what is good and lawfull, and what not: It acts nothing: God requireth an orderly way, and that is by the Church.

Now, courteous Reader, do but seriously consider how J. S. hath cleared the way of raising and beginning again Baptisme lost and fallen out of the world, as he beleeveth: and how he hath re­moved the difficulties in the way, which he ealleth clouds that darken the skie: See if thou do not yet finde it very dark and cloudy as ever, and never the clearer for all the labour and pains he hath taken; and whether his labour and travell herein hath been to any more purpose then the washing of the Blackmoore.

For first of all: Whereas he referreth thee to the Scriptures, as the Successours of the Apostles in his opinion: First, Thou seest the Scrip­tures were before the Apostles, and the Apostles themselves were guided by them.

Secondly, That the Scriptures are onely directive, and act no­thing at all, neither can they: and beside, they do not direct to any such course as the constituting an unbaptized Church, or au­thorizing unbaptized persons to baptize.

Thirdly, Thou seest what great cause of doubt and question there is, according to his opinion, whether these Scriptures be the Scriptures of God, and whether they have not lost their being, [Page 31] having been so long in Babylon, and in the hands of Antichristi­ans; especially if it be minded that they were by Antichristians translated into our native Tongue: their translating must needs make them Antichristian, and to be rejected as false, as well as their Baptisme. Where will J. S. be then (do thou but think) for the raising a new his Church and Baptisme, which I would wish him and those of his way to consider of well.

But then in the second place; God being to be sought as he holdeth in an orderly way, according to what he hath declared as his judgement, and this orderly way being by the Church rightly gathered and constituted, to whom Christ hath committed the power.

Consider, good Reader, in the first place, that if the Scriptures be not Antichristian, (as his opinion inforceth) that they have in them no ground or warrant by any example or precept for such an unbaptized Church, neither can such a supposed Church be orderly constituted, or the proceed thereof orderly, the Scripture being wholly silent concerning any such thing: This conceit of so making Christs Church, and so making Baptisme; being a meer Popish Tenent, and the proceed therin like unto theirs in such like cases: So as this Ordinance of Christs Baptisme, being, ac­cording to his opinion, destroyed in Babylon, and there being no orderly Church of Christ in earth to be found, as he holdeth: nor no Christ, Moses, Eliah, or Prophet from heaven appearing: nor yet any that by Signes and Miracles can prove the truth of their Mis­sion; I conceive it necessarily followeth, and I willingly leave all men free to judge of it. That J. S. is yet, for all his clearing, in a great straight, and under a dark cloud; out of, and from under which, he will not be able to get, unlesse he do as Saul did, make bold to do that which is unwarrantable; and so running before he be sent, and doing that which God never spake any word about; the which he shall do well to take further knowledge of.

CHAP. III. Containing a defence of the judgement of such as hold that Baptisme hath continued Gods Ordinance in the Apostacie of Antichrist, notwithstanding the corruptions attending of it; in way of Answer to the Cavils and Exceptions of J. S. against the same.

BEfore that J. S. could finish the matter in the former Chap­ter, and clear it as he pretended to do, he found some Tenents in his way, as opposite to that pretended truth (but indeed er­rour) which he endeavoured to maintain; the which he setteth down thus: First, such as stand for a personall succession: Again thus; A word or two to such as hold succession in the defection of Antichrist: Again, Such as hold Baptisme by personall succession, as in pag. 39. may be seen.

To which I answer: First, That sure J. S. mistaketh himself, being never able to make it appear, that any person, or persons, do so hold. So I might let him alone to contest with his own fancie.

But in as much as he may happily have met with some that hold the continuation of Baptisme, as Gods Ordinance in that defection; not in way of succession, that being no way proper to an Ordinance; returning home unto himself his phrase of successi­on, as darkening the truth: I shall apply my self to take knowledge of his scope and purpose.

First, he saith, Such have received a sufficient Answer that hold so, in what he had writ before.

To which I answer: Indeed, if he might be his own Judge in his own cause, it might be so: It were much better that others should have said so, and praised him, then he thus his own work: But what was it that he had proved before in his conceit? That all the world are unbaptized, onely he, and those of his way: Is he not a mighty Champion, thus to nullifie and make void the Chri­stianity [Page 33] of all Christians in the world? It is more then Turks could ever do by all the force and power they had.

He hath yet a word or two more to say to such as hold contra­ry (to his erroneous conclusion) that Baptisme hath continued, and doth continue Gods Ordinance, &c.

And first, he begins by way of Querie, thus: If they mean by de­fection, the outward form of worship, and Government Ecclesiasticall, as he thinketh they do.

Answ. Is defection of so hard and doubtfull sense with J. S. as he should querie thus, and go by thinking: he may know that de­fection or defilement, pollution or corruption, are of one nature, and that there is a reall difference betwixt corruption, and the thing corrupted; between defilement, and the thing defiled; be­twixt Religion, and Gods Ordinances; and mens additions to, and detractions from the same: They mean that the Ordinances, and in particular, Baptisme hath continued from the Apostles downward, thorow all the apostacie and defilements that have at­tended Religion and it to this day; Just as Circumeision of old did continue Gods Ordinance in the apostacie and defilements of the ten Tribes under Jeroboam: and likewise in the time of Manasses in Judah: This is their meaning, and what then? Then, saith he, all the power and authority that ever carried out any Administration or constituted Ordinance depends on the same: (Just as Circumcision de­pended on the Calves in Jeroboams apostacie) And if so, saith he, then the Ordainer, and Ordinance ordained, are both of one nature: (Yea, they are both of one nature; God is the Author, he is spirituall; and Baptisme, the thing ordained, so also.) If one be, saith he, An­tichristian, the other is also Antichristian: Strong lines without proof. What if neither be Antichristian, neither the Authour nor Ordi­dinance, where is J. S. then? For truly his collective reason is as much, as if a person opposing Circumcision, as none of Gods Or­dinance, because of the Idolatry of the Jews, should have reasoned thus: If the Israelites be Idolaters, and the Calves Idols, and no gods; and the Priests Priests to them that are no gods, then is Cir­cumcision 2 Chro. 13. 9. of the same nature also as are the Calves, & Priests, and Jeroboams whole way of Dan and Bethel. And for proof, should say as J. S. doth, that it was the power of Jeroboams way, or of his Calves that carried on the whole form of worship, and proceed: and the power, and Ordainer, and the Ordinance ordained, must [Page 34] needs be of one stamp; if one so, then so the other: Had not such a way of arguing overthrown Circumcision then, aswell as Bap­tisme now: Let J. S. be Judge himself, and let him tell me whe­ther he would not have distinguished in the case.

Againe, I will propose another instance in the way of his Argu­ment: Thus the Author and thing ordained or made, must be of one and the same nature; if one be Antichristian, the other also, for so he hath proved, be saith. But the Authors, namely, those that translated the Scripture, were according to his opinion, Antichri­stians, and there be additions and detractions, as in some transla­tions there are: Now the thing made or translated, must be of the same nature with the Translators that were the Authors, and if it were added for proof, it was the power of their Antichristian spi­rits that carried on the whole worke and proceed thereof; and so conclude as before, both are one and the same. If J. S. now would in this stand to his own ground, where would he be, he would be as far to seek for new Scriptures, as they are for Church; and Ordi­nances, that hold there neither is nor yet can be any in the World; or as he himself was not long since for Baptisme.

But truly it is much to be pittyed, to see such ignorance in men professing knowledge, that they cannot distinguish betwixt Gods Ezek. 4. 4. posts and mens, when mens are set by Gods. That they cannot di­stinguish between Gods Ordinances and mens inventions and adi­tions; that they cannot put difference betwixt the Arke and Dagon, or his Temple, in which he being placed fell before the Arke: I would 1. Sam. 5. 4. faine know of J. S. when Baptisme, that was Christs, seased, and lost its being, and Antichrists Baptisme came in the roome of it, sure he cannot tell.

But I must here tell J. S. that the power of Jesus Christ supports and carries his Ordinances in the midst of the deepest defections that Satan ever hath or could bring upon the same, wherein his glorious power doth appear; although J. S. would spoile him of it, by faining that he is overcome, & his Church & Ordinances de­stroyed Gods people of old remained his people; his Church, his Church; his Ordinances, his Ordinances; as particularly Circumci­sion in the midst of the greatest defilements that ever attended that dispensation. In like manner it is so now, under al the defilements of Antichrist, in particular, Baptisme, of which is our question; as also the Church: our Lord Christ his power being no way lessened for [Page 35] the upholding of it, nor his faithfulnesse failed for the preserva­tion thereof, according to his promise; who hath said, The gates Mat. 16. of hell shall not prevaile against it: It were good for J. S. to study well that place 2 Thes. 2. 4. Where Antichrist is foretold, sitting in the Temple or Church of God; and if he would please but to take notice, that there is difference between Gods Temple, in which he sitteth, and him sitting there; as there was betwixt the Arke in the Temple of Dagon, in which the Arke was, he happily would change his thoughts, and be of another minde, and so come to have more re­spective thoughts of the power and faithfulnesse of Jesus Christ, then now he seemeth to have. Truly I suppose these foolish infer­ences of J. S. will appear to be but meer fantasies, without any ground, tending only to deceive the simple; for any indifferent Reader will be able to distinguish betwixt Religion and corrupti­on, betwixt Ordinances and the evills, (by way of addition or de­traction) that attends them; Circumcision was of God, and it was the hand and power of God that carried it forth in those evill times. The Idols, Calves, and Jeroboams Priests, and his whole way as they were of, and from another, so another hand and power carried them along. Even as in like manner Baptisme and other like things being of God, are preserved and carried by a hand and power of God; whereas that universall Church, generall Mini­stery and government, with those other forms of Churches Pro­vinciall, Diocesan, and proportionall Ministery and Government, Ceremonies, with additions and detractions innumerable, as they are from another fountain, so they are carried in another chan­nell, and by another power abetted and set on: namely, by the power of the man of sin, the author and inventer of them. So far shall suffice in this.

But saith J. S. praising of himself, He hath proved, that if one be Antichristian, the other is Antichristian: By what Scripture he hath proved it none can tell. And, saith he, To dream of any approved Church by the Word of God, under the defection, and yet a part of the same, is for a man to look for a man in the Moon; and to suppose a Church to con­sist in such matter as is destructive to it self; and therein to hold a successisn of truth is against the light of nature, and a keeping of the Pope upon the Throne of Christ whether he will or no.

Answ. Is not this high Divinity which I. S. belcheth out of his self-sick stomack against the people and truth of God: Is it not a [Page 36] sore and heavy charge? but it is well, it is but said, and not proved. Now least any, as simple as he that said it, should believe it because it is said, and that by a person venerable in their way, I shall take the pains to examine the respective charges as they are laid down. First, saith he, To dream of an approved Church by the Word of God.

A. Sure he dreamed himself in what he fathered thus upon his opposites, who do not hold an approved Church in such a sense as J. S. seemeth to intend, that is, a pure and spotlesse Church: But they hold according to the Scripture, a Church to be really true, and Gods, though corrupt and greatly defiled. I suppose he will not question but that Judah, (not to speak of Israel) was the Church of God in Manasses time, and in other times when Idolatry great­ly prevailed, yet not approved as pure and spotlesse, but reproved for corruption and defilement; yea, and visited with the rods of men Psal. 89. 3 2. because of the same, that she might be reformed, so as to be again approved of her head and husband, that all this time of her back­sliding did not renounce her. In short, she was approved to be, but not approved as pure in that her being. And surely so is the case of the Church where Antichrist sits as God, 2 Thes. 2. 4. The mat­ter so considered, let J. S. when he awaketh make the most he can of it.

The second part of the dream is this, that this is a part of the same, I suppose he meaneth corrupt, as the whole is. To which I answer, though it be corrupt, yet it is no part of the corruption, there be­ing difference, as before, betwixt a thing and the corruption that attends it; the Israelites were a part of the Schisme of Jeroboam, The seven thousand were a part of the ten Tribes which went astray. In a di­verse 1 King. 19. 18. sense persons may be of the Church of God, and members for their parts, and yet in a way of Idolatry, and in that way none 1 Cor. 12. 27. compa­red with 1 Cor. 5. 1. 1 Cor. 25. 12. of Gods, as may be further seen by the case of Manasses, as also of the Priest that went astray, that went along with the Israelites in their Idolatry, sure there is little in this part of the whole.

But in the third place in his deep charge, he saith, this is to look for a man in the Moon.

Answ. Just as J. S. did look for the Church and Baptisme in the Scriptures: Indeed Eliah thought, as his complaint sheweth, that he was left alone, but God told him otherwise: for sure to Rom. 11. 3, 4. minde a Church, as retaining her being, though in a corrupt estate is no looking for a man in a Moon; though he, for want of other [Page 37] matter and better proofe, is pleased out of his sick stomack to say so against the truth, and such as stand for it.

Fourthly, saith he, It is to suppose a Church to consist in such matter as is destructive to it self. Sure J. S. cannot make out this in any ra­tionall way, it is but a part of his dream; to hold a Church to consist of matter corrupt and degenerate, as was the Idolatrous Isra­elites, and as was the lukewarme Laodiceans, is not to hold amisse, is not to hold the matter destructive to the form or being. The faith­full City becomming sometime a harlot: Indeed such matter is against Esa. 1. 21. the well being of the Church, but that is not our question: the matter of the Church ought to be holy and pure, but it is often otherwise.

Fifthly, he saith, to hold a continuednesse of the Churches be­ing, (though not of her well being) his term is here succession of truth, but he meaneth sure, the Churches being: It is against the light of nature.

Answ. A marvellous high ascent and sore charge, but it is but rashly spoken, as one in a dream, that loveth no inferences: But however it is well it is not against the light of the holy Scriptures, J. S. hath left them, and is gone to the light of nature: but how doth the light of nature teach, that a Church and Ordinances, of which is our question, cannot continue their being, if corrupt or greatly corrupted. Truly no more then in the case of Job, that he should not, or could not be a man, because corrupt, Job 2. 7. The folly and weaknesse of this fifth part of the dream, I suppose any weak judgement will be able to see, and I will say no more. In the sixth place to bring up the reare, he addeth a charge of a foule na­ture: That to hold a continuance of the Church and Ordinances under the apostacy of Antichrist, Is a keeping of the Pope upon the throne of Christ whether he will or no: But how doth this appear, truly as all the rest, because he saies so. I would ask J. S. or any other, if the holding the Israelites of the ten Tribes, to be Gods people, and their Circumcision to be Gods Ordinances, did thus keep up that apostacy, and the Calves at Dan and Bethel perforce, as in the place of God and his waies. Againe, doth J. S. and those of his way, because they hold the continuation of the same Scriptures, and which is more translated by Antichristians in their sense, and so successively from Pope Jone: doth he or they in thus doing, keep the Pope upon the throne of Christ whether he will or no? It con­cerns [Page 38] him to see to it, and to renounce and cast away those Anti­christian Scriptures, as he hath done his Baptisme, and so seek new Scriptures too; lest not being true to his owne principles, hee should become guilty of keeping the Pope upon the Throne of Christ whether he will or no.

Experience, the School-mistris of fooles, hath shewed the con­trary of this charge in the Reformed Churches, who have almost unthroned the Pope; of whom J. S. and those of his way, as if they had some compassion, have busied themselves in making a little Terret & Throne for him to sit upon and inhabit in; namely, their Babel practise. And certainly their erroneous practise and way doth more help to keep the Pope upon the Throne of Christ, then any other thing that pretends opposition to it, as that course doth, of which a little more hereafter; and for the present I shall onely here aske J. S. whether he doe think the Pope doth sit up­on the Throne of Christ yea or no; if he say yea, then sure hee sitteth in the Temple of God in the Church, for Christs Throne is there.

He proceedeth after that great charge, thus: But to lay the chain of succession of truth this way, namely through the Popedome of Rome, as all such must doe that hold a personall succession of a Church & Ordinances to consist in the same from the Apostles untill now; What will such doe, and where will their succession of truth lye when they come to the woman Pope, of whom the Papists themselves are ashamed.

In answer I retort it thus, to lay the chain of succession of truth this way; namely, through the Popedome, as all such must doe that hold the writing or the letter of the Scriptures to have con­tinued from the Apostles untill now in a way of personall succes­sion in that defection; what will such doe when they come to the woman Pope, of whom the Papists themselves are ashamed; truly J. S. hath cause to be ashamed of his foolish reason, which if it were true, he would finde himselfe to be at as great a fault as his oponent.

But further, I say, such as hold the continuation of the Church and Ordinances through Popish defection, or under the state of the Popedome, will doe well enough with their tenent, notwith­standing Pope Jone, who could never reach the Churches being, to cause it to cease; nor yet Baptisme, of which in speciall is our question; all the coined words of J. S. put upon the matter will [Page 39] not doe it; as his chain of succession of truth, in stead of continuation of Baptisme; again, hold a personall succession; again, where will their succession of truth lye: All these being returned home to J. S. their master, he will see, or at leastwise any indifferent person will be able to see, that Pope Jone will help nothing in the case, to hinder the continuance of the Churches being, nor yet of the being of Baptisme, with which Pope Jone medled not, nor was any way concerned: this matter at the most is but a relique of the dram before.

I. S. further tells us, that when he speakes of personall succession of truth, as in reference to Church and Church Ordinances, he looks upon this in the power and authority tbat beares the same.

Answ. Now J. S. seemeth something to awaken out of his dreame and to speak sense, what ever sense he have in it (his per­sonall succession of truth set aside) when he speaketh of the Church and Ordinances their continuance, he looketh upon this in the power and au­thority that beares the same. Now surely, the power and authority that beares the Church and Church Ordinance up, is the power of him that beareth up all things by his mighty power, Jesus Christ our Heb. 1. 3. Lord, against the gates of hell, that preserves his Church, as hee did his Arke, when Dagon fell in his owne Temple. Is it not a won­derfull Matth. 16. thing, that he should conceit that Antichrist should by any power of his, support Christs Church and the Ordinances thereof, that with all his might and force indeavoureth their de­struction and ruine? but in vaine, for Christ is stronger, that with his mighty power supports them.

But J. S. looking awry, cannot see any other bearing up the Church and Ordinances, then by Antichrist and the Pope, that are trampling it down what they can, fitting there as God; for by no meanes will he be brought to distinguish and put difference betwixt Gods Temple, and the Man of sinne sitting in it, but like Nicodemus he will say, How can it be, Joh. 3.

For saith he, To hold a Church to be true (in regard of being, you must mind, and not of purity) and the Ordinances their administred the true Ordinances of God, and to leave this, and to set up a way of wor­ship apart from it, and to deny communion with it; is in his darke understanding a meere Schisme and the overthrow of all Order in Religion.

Answ. I am both glad and sorry: Glad, that J. S. is no Apostle, [Page 40] so as we are not bound to beleeve his bare word, unlesse we will: Sorry I am, that he hath so dark a judgement and understanding, as in this he doth discover: For first, I say, a Church may be true, and the Ordinances true, that is Gods; and yet both corrupt, so as they cannot be partaken with all without sin. In such a case there is to be a with-drawing from them, in regard of particular com­munion; in as much as we are to keep our selves pure, not doing evill for good ends: Yea, a Church in regard of membership may be left, and that without the said Churches consent, as plainly ap­peareth by the example of the Apostles and others that left the Church of Israel of old, and that while it was a Church: And God himselfe calleth his people out of Babylon, Rev. 18. 4. though the Church and Ordinances have a being there; in as much as there can be no remaining there, but there will be a partaking in sinne. So as leaving particular communion, and personall relation of membership, I conceive is very necessary, and according to God, after the manner of all the Reformed Churches that have come out of Babylon, & renounced communion with her in the things of God, because of the evills attending of them, lest they should be de­filed. As on the other side, they have drawn nigh to God in the pu­rity of his wayes and worship; as those did that left Israel in the time of their Apostacie, and came to the Lord and his pure wor­ship in Judah. But thus to doe, namely, to leave a Church and Ordinances greatly polluted and defiled, and to worship God to­gether purely, apart from that corrupted estate, with-holding fel­lowship, is in his dark judgement a meer Schisme; (alas poor dark judgement) such a Schisme as he hath oft made and those of his way are full of in their own sense. The holy Apostles and belee­ving Jewes were Schismaticks in his account; and all the Refor­med Churches and Christians that have forsaken Babylon and are come out of her, are all Schismaticks in his dark judgement: But no marvell he so accounteth of these latter, seeing by his reckoning they are not baptized Christians. Truly he, and those of his way, by light and cleare judgements will be discerned to be even such themselves, for doing as they doe.

Now to that latter part of this charge, That it is the overthrow of all order in Religion: I aske him which way it appeareth so to be; sure he cannot tell; for if it be well minded, it will be found to be a speciall meanes of the preserving of religion decayed, and a [Page 41] repayring of it, and of reducing it to the first purity, and an utter putting away all rust and defilement; and therefore the Apostle giveth in charge, having forewarned of the great defection of Antichrist, not to begin a new; but to keep the (old) Ordinances, ac­cording Thes. 2. 15. to the purity they were delivered to us. J. S. his course, I sup­pose, is guilty of the overthrow of all order in Religion, not onely what is of God, remaining, and afoot in the world; but even of that also which is held forth in the Word: in erecting a new Church, and dispensing new Ordinances, without a new Commis­sion, which never any did before.

After this, he tells us of his learning Christ, which sure is very lit­tle, in regard of order, as his way and course doth shew: So far, faith he, as I have learned Christ, men are to stand in their places, and use all means to reclaim and reform (corrupt Churches he meaneth) by the word of truth. Very good; But what if they will not reform, and all means which we can use availeth not? This being done, saith he, so as of necessity I must leave off communion with them. So as it seemeth communion may be left with a Church that is Gods, be­cause of evill, and obstinacie in the same. Then in such a case he thinketh (for he onely giveth us his thoughts without Scripture) he must disclaim them, and separate from them. To which I say, it is but upon the condition of their non-repentance, which challen­geth sometime of waiting: but that such a Church he ought to disclaim, and separate from, he holdeth. First, I would know, whether he may do this while it remaineth a Church of Christ? If he say yea; then I ask him, What is become of that which in his dark judgement was a meer Schisme? But if he say nay, not till the Church ceases to be: Truly, that will be a very hard matter for him to determine, especially to hit upon the very hour of such a Churches death, from which time he is freed from her relation without Schisme. But yet further, he holdeth, as before; He must stand in his place, and use all means to reform, and reclaim such a Church by the word of God. Indeed, I say, that is a good medicine, and wholesome plaister to heal such a disease and maladie: I would fain know whether he be not to wait to see the issue; and whether he be not to exercise long patience after the example of Almighty God, that sent his Prophets to his Church, rising Jer. 25. 4. early, and sending them; and notwithstanding their wickednesse, and abuse of his long patience, did not disclaim them, or his rela­tion [Page 42] unto them, till such time as they rejected the Son himself, and so were broken off through unbeleef. But further, if this his good me­dicine of admonition, reproof, and use of all good means in his Rom. 11. 20. place, shall not avail; but in stead of curing, the Church shall be killed; that were a sad matter indeed. But however, the Physician shall not lose his reward, though the patient die. But oh! to know whether she be dead in all the parts of her, every member, is a hard matter to know: happily she may have life in her inward parts; to bury her, before quite dead, were an ill businesse. Sure out of so great a labyrinth as J. S. his thoughts necessarily led into this way, he will no way know which way to get forth, unlesse he hap­pily shall ingeniously confesse the darknesse of his judgement to have deceived him, and so acknowledge that a Church may be left in regard of communion, and membership, by reason of great corruption and defilement, and that though it retain the being of a Church of Christ, and that without any Schisme.

J. S. goeth over this matter again, on the negative, by a back blow of the left hand, saying, And not to leave a true Church, and true Ordinances, (though never so corrupt and defiled, and therein obstinate and impenitent) and go apart to set up another Church, and Ordinance, (that is, serving God together, in the freedom and pu­rity of his Ordinances, as the reformed Churches do) apart from it, and in opposition to it: This is as far from the Rule of the Gospel, as for a man to baptize himself; neither of which he approveth of.

Answ. J. S. Laying down the matter to his own advantage, may happily make it seem something; but if it be well sifted, and scanned, it will be found just nothing. The leaving a Church in defection, and gathering or going to a Church gathered in free­dome, and purity, is the matter in question: The refraining Or­dinances corrupt, so as they cannot be partaken withall without sin, we being required to keep our selves pure, for the Saints to serve God together in the freedom of his Ordinances purely: Sure he will not count this against the rule of the Gospel; if he do, it is not for want of ignorance: Where is the pinch in this case? It is surely in this, of erecting another Church. To which I say, it is but another in number, by multiplication, not in nature; sure he doth not question that neither, they practise such, multiplying them­selves in their way. What then must it be? That it is in opposition to the other: To which, I say, it is but in opposition to the corrup­tions, [Page 43] and defilements of the other; so as here is a pure Church, and Ordinances in their Administrations, in opposition to a Church and Ordinances administred corruptly. So far is this from an evill, as sure it is a high vertue in Churches and particular per­sons; so, as to say no more, having before treated of this matter. Betwixt thus doing in this case, and a mans baptizing himself, J. S. may see a wide difference, if prejudice doth not let him.

J. S. hath yet a word more: Because some hold it an errour, with­out example or warrant from the Word, for a man to baptize himselfe or others, being himself unbaptized: whereby, saith he, they think to shut up the Ordinance in such a strait, as none can come by it, but through the au­thority of the Popedome.

Answ. A strait it is indeed, as great as Saul was in, when he pre­sumed 1 Sam. 13. 11. foolishly to sacrifice; and this he will finde every day more and more, there being not a few as rationall as himself late of his way, that do see this; and rather then acknowledge their errour and return, proceed to a further and greater errour: namely, to hold no Church of God, nor Ordinance of Christ, existing in the world, nor none to be had, nor injoyed, till Christ personally again appear, or send such to restore them, as by miracles can evince their mission. Such an opinion he is not unacquainted with: I wish him to consider further of it, and see if it be not rationall from his ground, though very irrationall and unreasonable for Christian men to beleeve, without ground of Scripture, against so many clear evidences of holy Writ, and faithfull promises of Jesus Christ, Dan. 7. 27. Mat. 16. 18. & 28. 20. Act. 5. 39. Heh. 12. 28, 29. Luke 1. 55. &c.

For the opening of this cloud, saith he, that seems so to darken the skie, let the Reader consider who baptized John (I say let them rather consider Johns particular & speciall commission) before he baptized others; and if no man did, then, whether he did not baptize others, himself being unbaptized: and if he was baptized, whether it was not by an unbaptized person?

Answ. This Instance referreth it self to the beginning of Bap­tisme at the first, and so it is brought, in way of parallel, to prove the new beginning of Baptisme, that former being lost and cea­sed out of the world.

Now, if this matter be minded, John was (according to what was foretold) sent of God to prepare the way of Christ, and had speciall John 1. 6. [Page 44] warrant in particular wise to Baptize: as it is written: There was a man sent of God, his name was John. So as if this prove any thing, it must be upon the same ground; that is, having the same War­rant and Commission in particular, as John had: for as Iohns ex­ample would not serve any, in those times, to go without Commis­sion, or Baptize without command, being unbaptized themselves; Cornelius must have Peter; Paul, Ananias; and our Lord himself, for righteousnesse sake, must go to John: Even so in like kinde, it will not serve any now to recover and raise (as they pretend) the Ordinance of Baptisme lost and fallen out of the world, without speciall warrant, as he had.

But because this of Iohn the Baptist is still catched at for help, in this helplesse cause, I shall adde a word or two: First, The or­derly way of raising Baptisme, I. S. holdeth to be by the Churches power and appointment, and this way they proceed. But Iohns Commission, it was not from the Church, but it was immediatly from God that sent him to prepare the way of his Son.

Secondly, concerning Iohn, the Scripture testifieth; That he was a Prophet, and more then a Prophet: But how, or what, or whether or Matth. 11. 9. no concerning his particular Baptisme, it is altogether silent. It is not for men to be over wise, or meddle above what is written; but let the body of Moses alone.

Last of all, I will put it upon this Issue; In the judgement of in­different men, whether they think it will follow, that because A­braham and Iohn Baptist were the first beginners and actors in Cir­cumcision and Baptisme, by vertue of speciall Commission to them personally; that therefore it was lawfull of old, in case of Circum­cision, for any of the heathen to have also circumcised themselves and families: or in the case of Baptisme, for others at that time, by ver­tue of his example, to have baptized also as he did, without any Commission at all; for if in those times it was not lawfull for them so to do, but of necessity they must go, as our Lord did, to the Baptist, then in as much as length of time, can give no warrant, to a thing not warrantable at the first; I conceive it will be given, and conclu­ded, that Instance is invalide, and of no force to warrant a person to baptize himself, or others, being himself unbaptized.

Which he in the case of Baptisme, saith, was written for our lear­ning, and teacheth us what to do upon the like occasion. To which I say, supposing the occasion, he here speaketh of, is not that of necessi­tie [Page 45] that hath no law; but leaveth men at liberty to do the best they can: which is the last refuge of I. S. and those of his way: There is, I say, no such occasion as in the case of Iohn, there being no Scripture to be fulfilled by sending a messenger before to prepare Christs Matth. 3. 3. way. There is no such occasion, for that there is no new Commis­sion, nor any new Ordinances to be set on foot. Again, there is no such occasion, for that there is baptized persons in the world to repair unto; that as Christ our Lord went to Iohn, so we might go to them.

Besides, what is not written, cannot be for our learning. Now it is not written, when, or where, or by whom, or whether at all Iohn was baptized, so as none of any such things can be for our learning, unlesse we will go beyond our Lesson: But this is writ­ten, that he was sent of God, and had speciall Commission to do what he did; that we might learn, not to run before we be sent, but to be obedient in going when we are bidden, and doing as we are commanded, as he did.

Further I. S. saith, for the continuance of the Church from Christs words: The gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Here by the way, I take notice, that he hath laid aside his succession, and personall succes­sion, and speaks now plain English; namely, the continuation of the Church, Matth. 16. 18.

Now what saith he to this? He confesseth the same: But in so do­ing, he overthroweth his new way and course; for if the Church continue, and hath continued, what need is there of new begin­ning, and baptizing by persons unbaptized: surely none at all. And therefore he maketh his acknowledgement with a proviso; that is, by a distinction that indeed is either a non-sense, or else a flat deniall. The distinction is thus: That this Church is to be con­sidered, in her instituted State, as it lieth in the Scriptures; in the rules of the foundation. (See what expressions are here; Instituted State, Rules of foundation, Lying in the Scripture; as much, and no more then this, according to the pattern set forth in the Word) Or otherwise in the second place, in her Constitation, or constituted form, in her visible Or­der. As much as if he had said, in her outward being. Now of the pattern is not our question; for as the pattern of the Temple was one thing, and the Temple built, or to be built, was another thing; so it is here. But see what J. S. saith, having made such a distin­ction, as before, to darken the truth: Thus he saith, Against the [Page 46] first hell gates never prevailed. This pattern standing sure in the Scrip­tures, as of old the pattern of the Temple might remaine, when the Temple was destroyed. But against the Church it self, which is the second part of his distinction, it hath prevailed. So the summe is as much, as if he had said, hell gates never prevailed against the Scriptures; but against the Church, built according to the Scrip­tures, it hath. Now let any man excuse the irrationalnesse of I. S. if he can; thus to grant in shew, and deny in substance and truth, with one breath, the continuation of the Church, according to the Word and ptomise of Christ, made to the Church, and not to the Scriptures. And I say unto thee, thou art Peter; and upon this rocke Mat. 16. 18. (to wit himseif) I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevaile against it to destroy it. For why, it was built on a sure founda­tion, not to be moved for ever.

Now this Church, the continuation whereof he granted before, having deceived himself and his Reader, by a groundlesse distincti­on; he denieth the continuation now, and saith, Hell gates hath prevailed often against it. But whence is it that he is thus contrary, and I and no? Saith he, For the Church hath been often in her outward order scattered through persecution and the like. Sure this is a very weigh­ty reason, thus to over power a man; what if the Church hath bin scattered through persecution, must it then follow, a destroying by hell gates: though the Church hath been greatly scattered through persecution, yet she continued her being, and was so far from being by hell gates prevailed against, as that they overcame by suffering Rom. 8. the gates of hell, and were more then conquerers. The blood of the Martyrs being the seed of the Church, and the Church the more oppressed, the more growing and increasing. J. S. saith, in this sense of being scattered, she is said to be overcome. To which I say, that this is not the sense of Mat. 16. 18. nay, it is against the sense of the Scripture, that by afflictions the Church should be overcome, when as in all afflictions the Church hath been more then conquerers through Christ that loved her. I. S. citeth two or three places, Dan. 7. Rev. 12. Act. 8. 1. For that in Daniel, it is utterly against his sense, for spea­ing of the Kingdome of Christ his Church, it saith, it shall not be destroyed, vers. 14. 27. As for that, Rev. 12. it plainly declareth the prevailing of the Church, and not her being overcome or destroy­ed, and that they overcame by the blood of the Lambe, and that the Dra­gon was cast out. It indeed speaketh of the womans fleeing into the Rev. 12. [Page 47] wildernesse, but there she was preserved and not destroyed, the earth helping the woman against the rage of the Dragon. Sure there can no sense hence be gathered, of hell gates prevailing to destroy her. Lastly, Act. 8. 1. It speaketh of Sauls making havock of the Church, and persecuting of it, but this tended greatly to the increase of it, and not to the destroying of it. Certainly I. S. will not think, much lesse say, hell gates at this time prevailed against the Church, indeed it never did, for that was alwaies true which was said of the Church of old, Many a time have they afflicted me from my youth, may Ps. 129. 1. 5. Israel say, but they have not prevailed against me, the righteous Lord hath cut the cords of the wicked in sunder. I suppose I. S. hath but small judgement, and lesse aim, to bring such Scriptures as these to prove that hell gates have prevailed against the Church in any Scripture sense. It were far better for him to hold the continuation of the Church according to the sure Word and faithfull promise of Christ, and if he would not acknowledge her continuance under the apostacy and defection aforesaid, then to indeavour to find her continuance some where else. But in regard this would overthrow his new unbaptized Church, and proceed that way, he rather chu­seth to asperse Christ of unfaithfulnesse in his promise, then by acknowledgement to give him the glory of it.

In regard of the former matter J. S. seemeth to have had an eye to a collaterall reason, which he setteth down thus: Where was their Church before it came out of the defection?

First, let it be observed how he shaketh hands with the Romanists, that use to say in like manner, Where were the reformed Churches be­fore Luther?

But in further answer to this demand, I say, it was in regard of the matter of it in Babylon, as the seven thousand were in the apo­stacy of Jeroboam; out of which apostacy of Babylon, God called them forth, Rev. 18. 4. And so, by the efficacy of that heavenly voice, they being drawn forth, they served God in the purity of his Or­dinances, (a part,) as the Israelites that left Jeroboam and his Idol-worship 1 Thes. 1. 9. at Dan and Bethel, and served God at Hierusalem. These turned from those Idoll waies in Babylon, To the pure service of God in Sion, and so kept according to the injunction the Ordinances, as they were delivered to them, 2 Thes. 2. 15.

This question is of the nature of what we have treated on be­fore, about leaving a corrupt Church for obstinacy in evill; and [Page 48] therefore I shall not further trouble my self nor the Reader about it, being assured, it cannot reach so high, as make good any sense of the destroying of the Church by persecution, to which it is ad­ded here.

I shall only here minde the Reader, that our question is not of one particular Church, but of the state of the Church remaining in one place or other with few or many, in freedome and purity, or in bondage and corruption, according eo various conditions and changes that attends her in the world, wherein she is in all of those conditions preserved by Almighty God. I. S. addeth in his further proceed, saying, That which once was in such a way of being, and ceases for a time, and then comes to the same estate againe, is and may truly be said ever to continue, as Mat. 22. 31. with Luk. 20. 38. In which sense the Church may be said ever to continue, for though she be cast down at one time, yet god will raise her againe at another, so as she shall never be prevailed against, so as to be utterly destryed.

Answ. This is plaine nontsense to me, first granting, then deny­ing, and so the whole amounting to just nothing but a meer conceit.

Here is the Church in a way of being, here is the Church seasing to be for a time; here is the Church comming to live & have being again; here is the Church that ceased to be for a time affirmed; (un­truly) to have ever a being, (just as the Temple had when it was destroyed,) here is the Church cast downe, (that is, without being, for so he must mean, else he deceiveth,) here is the Church said to be raised up by God againe, and her being restored to her; here is concluded the Church was never prevailed against, so as to be ut­terly destroyed. Truly, truth is strong and prevaileth. I. S. speak­eth not as of himself, but as overcome by the truth, which he fought to darken and turn aside, but at last is forced to confesse it, as they were that had hand in crucifying Christ, that said, Truly this was the Son of God, when they had before crucified him. So Mat. 27. 54. he in like manner is in the end forced after all, to confesse that the Church was never prevailed against, so as to be utterly destroyed.

But I shall here observe how that what he before said might be made a rationall matter, if it were rightly applyed, as thus; That which was once in such a way of being, (that is to say, pure and undefiled, and for a time ceases so to be,) (that is, becomes cor­rupt and defiled, like the faithfull City that became an harlot.) And Es. 1. 21. [Page 49] then comes the same estate againe, (that is, to her former purity and holinesse,) is, and may truly be said, ever to have a continu­ation. In this sense I would joine with J. S. touching the Churches continuation, for though she be corrupted at one time, yet God will restore her to purity at another; yea, If by affliction she be diminished Ps. 107. 39. Ps. 105. 24. and made low at one time, yet at another time God increaseth her like a flock of sheep. In either of which senses she hath never been prevailed against, so as to be destroyed: but this genuine sense J. S. may not admit of, for that it will not stand with his way and practice, and therefore by multiplicity of expressions he would produce some thing: namely, That the Church may some time live, and have a being, and at another time die and lose her being, and yet she shall never cease to be. That is, be prevailed against to be destroyed: and this he think­eth to prove by alluding to a place or two of holy Scripture, before quoted, for confirmation of his conceit.

To which I answer, those Scriptures indeed do seem to illustrate his sense, and what he intendeth; namely, that the Church may be said ever to continue, though at some time she ceased to be. But how senselesse a thing it is thus to conceit, will appeare if we minde the matter a little. It is the resurection of the dead which is the case: now as men die, and are not, and yet shall live again, and be; so the Church in like manner. But may such and such men be said to have ever a continuance in the World, (which is our question,) and not to have been destroyed by death, because they shall rise againe? Nay, doth not this prove plainly, that death had dominion over them, and that they were thereby destroyed? for otherwise, how should there be place for their rising again. And indeed the restoring of the Church to her being doth necessarily imply the losse of her being; otherwise there would be no place for restoring. If all men had been destroyed at the deluge of Noah, a new creation had been necessary.

Happily he may think their is something in that, that God is not the God of the dead, but of the living, in as much as all live to him. Indeed this may prove the soules immortality and living with God. But what sense it hath in regard of the Church, is beyond my thoughts; for certainly, if it hath reference to the Church, it will enforce the being and continuace of the Church of the Jewes and the Patriarchall Churches which ceased long agoe: To imagine their continuance, what can be more vaine?

But further, if because all live to God, therefore the Church alwayes hath a being, where is place left for her death and cessa­tion? Truly this is a matter too far fetcht, to prove any thing in this matter that may stand him in any stead, for if any thing be gathered from it, it must be that; as Abraham, and so other Pro­phets dyed and left the world; so the Church of Christ dyed also and was destroyed out of the world. But if he shall say, Abraham and the rest lived notwithstanding: The answer is, they lived indeed another way, not in regard of their mortall bodies, but in regard of their immortall soules. Their outward visible bodies were destroyed and in the dust; so the outward visible Church is destroyed, and ceases to be; but the inwardnesse of it (the life and soule, to wit, Jesus Christ) is in heaven with God, what this maketh to the matter in hand I leave the Reader to judge.

And this way, saith J. S. I suppose Christ may have and enjoy as good a wife ever as any can be preserved for him under the defection of An­tichrist.

Answ. This way is a meere supposition, without reason and against sense: That Christ should have sometime a wife, and sometime none, and then one againe; and yet he should have ever one preserved. It were good to lay aside such senselesse sup­positions, and to beleeve the Scriptures, that tell us that the man of sinne sometime sitteth in the Temple of God; and that Gods Temple 2 Thes. 2. 4. remaineth; and hell gates shall not prevaile against it. Though the Church (Christs wife) may goe astray and be corrupted, yet he Matth. 16. 18 that is her husband will not forsake, but will reform her and re­fine her, and put new garments on her; sure he hath read what God said of old to his Spouse, Thou hast played the harlot with many Jer. 3. 10. 22. lovers, yet return to me, saith the Lord, I am thy husband and thy ma­ker. But happily if he had then lived, hee would have supposed Esa. 54 5. that Christ might have had, or have made to himselfe a new (as he in this case endeavoureth to doe for him) as good a wife as that that was, so corrupt and defiled. The truth is, there is more rich grace and free mercy in Jesus Christ then to take advantage and to refuse, and put away, for he is the Lord that changeth not, and therfore his Church is not destroyed, no, notwithstanding the evils she Mal. 3. 6. falleth into, for he hateth putting away.

It were more sutable for J. S. and those of his way, to professe Mal. 2. 16. the doctrine of workes, which is sutable to their other opi­nions, [Page 51] then the doctrine of free grace, unlesse they would be more true to their principles, as in this particular; more especially, wherein they hold corruption dissolveth the marriage bond, and maketh the relation to cease, and causeth the everlasting Lord to change, and his Covenant to faile for evermore, Psal. 77. 8.

The following complaint and story, by which it is illustrated, I have spoken unto it before; in which matter of guilt, if hee and those of his way should take water and wash their hands, they would notwithstanding be no lesse guilty then Pilate was of Jesus blood.

But after this, he telleth of his feares, and that is, that men put more in Baptisme then doth of right belong to it, that doe preferre it before the Church and all other Ordinances besides.

Answ. Is not J. S. and those of his way sick of this disease, and that as dangerously as those he is in such feare of? how otherwise should it be that they should be so often baptized, over and over, and over againe, and make a Church, that they may make Bap­tisme? I leave the Reader to judge.

2. How doth this appeare which he so feareth in others, that they preferre it before the Cburch and all Ordinances beside.

Answ. It is onely to the qualification of the matter externally, that it might be sutable to the rest of the building, Ephes. 5. 26. But yet this charge is not altogether true, for they doe not preferre Baptisme before the Word and the publishing of it, by which faith comes: Nay they doe not preferre it above, or before the Church; the Church being the pillar and ground of truth; that is, of the truth 1 Tim. 3. 15. of Ordinances and divine worship, and so of Baptisme in the pro­ceed of it in a right way, which Church the matter of it at the preparing of it by John was first baptized, and after laid together in the building. So of this matter thus, by Johns preaching prepa­red, and by his washing in the second place fitted, was in after time gathered and laid into a holy building to the Lord, which Church way begun, and setled in the world, augmented and encreased: those washed washing others, according to Christs appointment; never any unwashed person being added or laid into the building since the Church begun, it being necessary that the matter of the Temple be outwardly fitted, that it may sute with the rest of the building being laid thereon. So as J. S. may be satisfied that his feares in the first place are causelesse, the Church being on foot [Page 52] according to God, Baptisme in administration followeth: But in further declaring the reason of his feares, he saith:

For they can erect a Church, take in and cast out members, elect and ordaine officers, administer the Supper, and all anew without looking after succession any further then the Scriptures. But as for Baptisme they must have that successively from the Apostles, though it come through the hands of Pope Jone: what the reason of this is that men can doe all from the Word but onely Baptisme, and that must come by man, even by the man of sinne.

Answ. To balance the thoughts of J. S. I will present a case to his consideration, supposing he had lived in the Apostacie of the ten Tribes (yea of Judahs Apostacie) and returning to the Lord and his pure service, as those of the ten Tribes that went from Israel to Judah, had other Priests and Ministers of the Law and service of God, and a pure way of serving of God, onely that of circumcision, they would continue that (though according to his conceit in the case of Baptisme) it came from the two Calves. What would he have said or thought of it in this case I would faine know? If they did well, it is good for us to imitate them in a like case.

2. I say, as before more fully, I have shewed that this Church and Ordinances are but new in regard of purity, the other being corrupt; so all this he calleth new, is not like their new raising of the Church and Ordinances, as if those before had lost their being, and were not at all. In this their case which he so excep­teth against, there is expresse warrant, 2 Thes. 2. 15. keep the Or­dinances as they were delivered unto you; that is, purely.

3. Baptized persons, in the case of their returne from idoll­wayes and Apostacie, to the pure service of God, are to look after Baptisme no otherwise then circumcised Jewes did in the like case when they returned unto the Lord, Ezek. 44. 9. They were not to circumcise themselves, or be circumcised again; yet the Heather comming along with them, they must be circumcised. In like manner, Gods people comming out of Babylon, according to the call of God, Rev. 18. 4. are not required to be again baptized, though the Jewes and other Heathen that imbrace the faith of Christ, are required to doe it, which I would wish I. S. and those of his way to consider of.

4. For the continuation of the Church and Baptisme, the out­ward [Page 53] qualification of the matter, the Scriptures fully give witnesse unto (as before is shewed) so as is no need of beginning them a new in any sense (unlesse of purity) but other Ordinances are by neg­ligence laid by and out of use, something in the room of them: and so are by the Church to be restored to their places, when the Church is purged and made pure.

Lastly, for this of Baptisme, comming through the hands of Pope Jone, and from the man of sin: It is a false and scandalous reproach; it cometh no more through the hands of Pope Jone, and the man of sin, then the holy Scriptures did, or then Circumcision did, through the hands of the two Galves of old. J. S. may be ashamed so to re­proch Gods holy Ordinance, by his good pleasure preserved to this day, I would wish him to call to mind his complaint & story before.

And now in regard he is up with Pope Ione again, to disgrace the truth, and those that stand for it; whereby to make persons afraid, and do they know not what; which after, they undo again, and so Gal. 2. 18. make themselves every way trespassers by destroying what they before built.

I will note some particulars, wherein those of his way shake hands with Pope Ioane, and the man of sin, and leave the Reader to judge who may be most justly taxed for affinity with Pope Jone, the reformed or separated Churches, or those of the new way of Baptisme.

First, those of that way of Baptisme hold generall or univer­sall redemption with the man of sin and Pope Jone. 2. Free-will. 3. Falling from grace. 4. Conditionall Election, that men may be saved if they will themselves. 5. They hold an universall Church, and generall ministery, with power universall. 6. That Antichrist is not yet come, and shall be a particular man, and shall continue but three years, &c. 7. They hold with Pope Jone, and according­ly censure all the reformed and separated Churches for meer Schismaticks. 8. They hold with Pope Jone dipping in Baptisme. I do not say that J. S. or all of that way hold all these particulars; but this I am sure, that all these are held by persons in that way; in practice they also shake hands; for as the man of sin hath made a Church, so they also have made a Church; onely the man of sin and Pope Jone have succeeded better in their work, for they have made a Church of a large structure; whereas theirs is yet but a little Terret of the like nature. 2. As Pope Joane hath sent out her mes­sengers to preach and baptize; (namely, the Friers and others) the [Page 54] Moors and Indians: so in like manner these send out their messen­gers to preach and baptize also. 3. As Pope Jone and the man of sin give authority to their instruments and ministers to act things without the cognizance of the Scriptures, so in like kinde do they; namely, authorizing an unbaptized person to baptize others. In this and one thing more they exceed in irrationalnesse Pope Ione; to wit, of giving mission to unbaptized persons to baptize. 2. In Bap­tizing them that were before baptized. I will forbear to adde other particulars. Now let them shew if they can any such doctrines held, or courses taken by the separated, or rightly reformed Chur­ches in way of affinity with Pope Jone, and the man of sin. I say no more, but leave the Reader to judge.

In the end of this Sexion he uttereth divers high Notions, so undigested, unsound, and contradictorie, as a man that should weigh them, could not but wonder.

First, he saith, that we are to know that the truth depends not upon Churches, nor any mortall creature, but onely upon the immortall God, who by his Word and Spirit reveals the same, when, and to whom he pleases.

This is the first of his wonderfull Notions, which we are to know, that the truth of Ordinances, and right serving God (of which is our question) depends not upon Churches.

Where then is J. S. his orderly way he proposed according to God, by the Church and her assignement of one or two of her members, to begin Bap­tisme, being lost, &c.

Secondly, This that he would have us to know, is directly con­trary to that which God teacheth us to know in his Word, 1 Tim. 3. 15. The Church of the living God, God himself saith, is the pillar and ground of truth: that is, of Religion and divine Ordinances, as we said before.

Thirdly, If I. S. say, he do not mean truth of Ordinances, truly he is then beside the matter in hand, deceiving and being deceived.

Fourthly, If he mean as in the former is specied, with whom then doth he contend? Do not all confesse the truth, as Doctrinall, to have God for the Authour of it, and to depend on him? What high words doth he here use to amaze the Reader? as, The truth depends not upon any mortall man. Who ever held so? But upon the Im­mortall God, Who ever held otherwise? But this immortall God re­veales the same by his Word and Spirit. What, doth God reveal new Ordinances of Religion by his Word and Spirit? Sure this is some [Page 55] dark non-sense: He questionlesse meaneth some other thing: What Revelation he herein intendeth, is not hard to guesse; however he is beside the matter, and clean out in this first Notion.

Second Notion: And for succession of truth, (truth of Ordinances you must understand) It comes now by the promise of God, and faith of his people, whom he, as aforesaid, hath taken out of the world to the fellow­ship of the Gospel.

Answ. Setting aside succession, and in stead thereof putting in continuation; What can be more right then this, though not in J. S. his sense? The truth of Ordinances continues by vertue of Gods promise made to his people, they continuing to beleeve in him, and not forgetting his name, though many times greatly fai­ling against him, as of old; yet the truth of Ordinances continue; namely, the Church and Baptisme now, as the Church and Cir­cumcision did of old; and this by the promise of God. J. S. hath no such sense as this, but some inward familisticall sense of inward faith, and Gods promise to such secret beleevers; which he is never able to make out any such thing, that the truth of Ordinances de­pends upon them in regard of continuation, by vertee of the pro­mise of God to them in such a secret way.

Third Notion: To whom the Ordinances of Christ stand only by succes­sion of faith (What faith, outward or inward?) and not of persons (What faith severed from persons?)

Answ. I would fain know what any rationall man can make of this, either in it self, or as it hath relation to what is before de­clared.

Fourth Notion: For the same power the Apostles had in former time, for direction in godlinesse, the Scriptures have in the hand of Christ, as the head of the Church, which make up but one body, 1 Cor. 12. 12.

Answ. such power for direction in godlinesse, the Scriptures had of old, when the Apostles lived. Some other things J. S. aimeth at, but the truth prevaileth, and the words he here useth will no­thing avail: namely of the Scriptures in the hand of Christ joyned with the Church. Its worth observing how the Church is here couched, just after the manner of the Babylonians, that pretend their Church is inspired with the Holy Ghost, and cannot erre: for Christ the head is in Heaven, and hath left his Word for direction in godli­nesse for his Church to take heed unto. Now the holy Apostles had authority to act Ordinances according to Christs command; [Page 56] they were to preach, pray, break bread, and baptize; the Scrip­tures were not sent, neither act they any thing as before. So as in J. S. his sense, it is utterly untrue, that the Scriptures in the hand of Christ, joyned with the body, have the same power to act Or­dinances as the Apostles had.

Notion fift and last, So as what the Apostles and Church together might do, (in acting Ordinances you must understand) the same may the head and body, together with the Scriptures, do now. Reader, observe how J. S. coucheth subtilly his unbaptized Church betwixt Christ and the Scriptures; so as Christ being in heaven, and the Scriptures only directive; the whole matter for action will fall into the hands of the Church. A contrivance, as fine as the Papist found out when they were sore put to it by John Hus and the Bohemians, and not able to defend themselves and their courses against the truth, they invented and abetted this, That holy Church could not erre.

Secondly, observe how I. S. quitteth two of these three; name­ly, the head and body: and concludeth laying all the stresse upon the Scriptures, and so in effect saith nothing at all, the Scriptures being only directive: for saith he, the Scriptures have the same, where­as he should have said, the head and body, with the Scriptures, have it.

Thirdly, observe what a preposterous conjunction I. S. maketh of three, in the matter of fact; one of which, to wit Christ the head is in Heaven; who, though he hath fulnesse of power, acts not here below, but in a providenciall, and ministeriall way, and the like. The Church, the second, Christs wife, is in all things to be obedient to Christ her husband, his will and pleasure contain­ed in the Scripture: the Scriptures they act not, but only direct; where is I. S. now? just where he was at the first, and no further.

Fourthly, this is utterly untrue, which he concludeth, that what the Church and the Apostles, the Ministers of the Churches, might do; that the Scriptures (he quitteth the head and body as before) may do. Now, what might not the Church and the Apostles do, in or­dinances and administration, orderly, according to God; what can the Scriptures act, truly nothing at all, their authority is only directive. I suppose any one may see how far out I. S. is in these conceits. In the close he is up again with revelation, which happi­ly, if he did study and cleave unto, would stand him in more stead then the Scriptures that are so helplesse to him in his cause.

CHAP. IV. Containing a defence of the opinion of them that hold no right or orderly Ministeriall Church, without, or before Bap­tisme.

I. S. Having ended his former matter, against the Churches continuance, and likewise the continuance of Baptisme under the popish defection, proceeds, saying,

And so we come to such as will have no Church before Baptisme, and so make Baptisme the form of the Church.

Answ. Who these (such) are that he intendeth, I cannot tell; they are either some of his own way, or some other: some of his own way do indeed so hold, that Baptisme constitutes, or is the form of the Church. Did I think he intended them, I should leave them to try it out, and should not intermeddle with the strife. I shall only, as the matter relates to them, shew my thoughts brief­ly: namely, that they will be too hard for J. S. in the tenent, he himself being of their belief, but that he is not true to his owne principle: otherwise how should he, without Schisme, and being a Schismatick, leave the reformed and separated Churches, and set up another of his own, as he hath done; only he accounteth them no Churches of Christ, and what is the reason he doth so? no­thing but his Baptisme is wanting, so as that must be the form that gives being; for otherwise, They are companies of Saints professing faith in the righteousnesse of Christ, and living accordingly; that is, in holy­nesse of life. This he describeth to be the matter, and the form he declareth to be their being united and knit together in one fellowship or orderly body; and that is the Covenant of grace by which God becomes (not visibly, as he unawars saith) but in an outward way of relation, a God unto them, and they become visibly his people. Now what is there to hin­der J. S. from being a Schismatick by his own ground: for surely nothing hinders those Churches which he forsaketh and disclai­meth, as no Churches of Christ, by all or any thing, that in his description of the matter or form of the Church, by him set down [Page 58] can be found: and let him take in his five Reasons to help him if he please. So as it must be the want of his new Baptisme or nothing, and then I leave it to him to judge, whether that be not the form of the Church necessarily, according to his ground that gives the be­ing thereunto.

Secondly, if by (such) he meanes those he was an opponent of in the former matter of the Churches continuation, and likewise Baptisme under Popish defection: I shall adde a little in the way of defence.

First, granting that such hold indeed no Church (to wit, right­ly constituted, as a right or lawfull Ministeriall Church) without or before the matter of this Church is baptized.

Secondly, denying that in so holding, they make Baptisme the form of the Church, as he inferreth, (and so make Baptisme the form,) there is more goeth to the proof of a matter then so.

His five Reasons might well have been spared, by which he would prove Baptisme, not to be the form of the Church, till he had made that to appear to be of necessity the right consequence, which sure he is never able to do: for there was no right Ministe­riall Church of old without Circumcision, yet Circumcision was not the form of that Church: an uncircumcised person was not to be admitted a member, much lesse an officer Circumcision was then an externall qualification of the matter; as in like manner is Bap­tisme now.

In this matter we shall have recourse to the first beginning of the Church of the new Testament, and of Baptisme. John the Baptist the forerunner of Christ, sent of God, to prepare the way of his Son, according to Commission, baptized much people, as did also afterward the Disciples of Christ our Lord: to him repaired our Lord to be baptized, that righteousnesse might be fulfilled. It may be observed by the way, that this was in the Church of the Jewes. Of these thus baptized was the Church of the new Testament be­gun, whether the initiation of it be referred to the time before the passion of our Lord, as to himself and the twelve, with whom he brake bread, or whether it be referred to the time after his resur­rection, when he gathered the 120. together and blessed them, (as is most Acts 1. proper) let him take his choice, and refer to which he will, it was begun of the aforesaid baptized matter, which is certainly to the life of the matter in hand, in discovering that the matter of the [Page 59] Church was fitted by Baptisme before it was laid together. As was the Church at the first rise of it, so was the proceed: those 120. baptized, those that joyned with them (being not before baptized) as it is written, they were baptized and added to the Church. This first Church scattered by persecution, became the instrument of in­crease, and the first matter of many Churches; which Churches by their instruments, baptized such as received the faith, and joyned into the Lord, and thus was the Church and Kingdome of Christ spread throughout the World, as the holy history doth shew. And let J. S. or any of his way, shew that there was ever any unbapti­zed Church or Congregation of the new Testament, or that ever any unbaptized person was received into fellowship, or that ever any unbaptized person, after Baptisme was a foot in the World baptised, or was authorized for to do it. And lastly, let him tell me, whether the order of the new Testament, (as in another case he asked,) be not as strict in this case of Baptisme, as it was in Circumcision of old, when no uncircumcised might have part in the Church, or fellowship in the Ordinances, much lesse act Ordi­nances Esek. 44. in way of dispensing of them to others. And let him tell me, whether a precept or example be not as necessary in all those cases, as in that of baptizing Infants. And lastly, whether his pra­ctice of raising and beginning the Church of unbaptized persons, do agree with the primitive practice of our Lord and his Apostles, that began the Church of baptized matter, as before.

J. S. propoundeth a second Reason of his opponents thus, The Scripture speaketh of no Church before Baptisme. To which he answer­eth as he did to that of the Gates of Hell not prevailing against the Church: He must distinguish, he saith. A meer shift to blind his Reader, and avoid the truth; there needs no distinction at all in the case. He would not take it well, if any should distinguish in case of Infants Baptisme. But what is his distinction, it is betwixt the truth of the doctrine of Baptisme, and the administration of it (just as he did in the fore-named case) as much as if he had said, He must distinguish betwixt the Scripture that teacheth Baptisme, and Baptisme or washing according to the Scripture. In this first sense, Baptisme or the doctrine of Baptisme (as much as if he had said, the holy word of God) is before the Church: What this is to the pur­pose, is beyond my judgement; nor yet that which followeth: no Church according to the order of Christs Testament without it or before it. [Page 60] No Church without or before the Scripture; how this is to the matter in hand, and what clearing (or rather darkning) there is in this distinction, I leave the Reader to judge.

But now for the second part of the distinction: Namely, the outward administration of Baptisme that ever followeth the Saints joyning in fellowship, by mutuall faith and agreement in the Doctrine, wherein consists the stating of the Church in her conjoyning in Covenant, which ever goes before in the administration of Baptisme, and gives power and authority for the same; so, saith he, in the first sense the Church is not before Baptisme, but in the last it is.

Answ. The summe and scope of this whole matter amplified and enlarged, is utterly false, being referred to the purpose for which J. S. doth bring it, namely to prove an unbaptized Church, or the Scriptures speaking of such. Alas, this is farre from pro­ving the matter; no not in a seeming way. In this case it may be truly said, from the beginning it was not so: The matter of the Church was fitted outwardly by Baptisme, as is before declared: And the Scriptures give no president of such Church, officer, or member, at any time such a proceed being cleane besides the Scriptures.

2. J. S. deceiveth (if not himselfe) yet others in what he set­teth down; in referring that to the initiation of a Church, which is onely true of the proceed. The Church stated and on foot in the world, according to God, of baptized persons, baptizeth others in way of proceed, in a orderly way of administration; so it was at the beginning, and to begin otherwise is not according to the pattern. So as not taking notice of the difference, between right beginning and orderly proceed, he is clean out, and beside the truth, and his distinction will appeare to be vain and to no purpose unlesse to deceive; for as he setteth down, that Baptisme ever followeth in regard of the administration of it, the Saints joyning in fellowship, &c. this is onely true of the proceed of the Church as before; but this joyning is to be of baptized matter, as it was at the beginning, which necessarily calleth either for a per­son from heaven, as in the instance of John, or the continuance of baptized persons in the world from John downward, as is the case now, though J. S. will not acknowledge the same. The sum of the distinction he maketh to be this in the first sence, the Church is not before the Scriptures. In the last sense, it is before Baptisme; utterly untrue, as before.

J. S. telleth us, his distinction being observed, we are not to deny a Church to be a Church, though the Scriptures doe not so call it. So the Scriptures of which he spake so great things in case of raising Baptisme lost, are now become deficient, and we may be wiser then they teach us; and call a people a Church, though they doe not so call them or teach us so to doe and we are not so ingaged: to speak as the Word of God. His reason of this strange divinity is the Church of the Old Testament, and many of the new were Churches be­fore they were so called. But I say they were not rightly gathered Churches before they were baptized, neither doth the Scriptures give that appellation to any in a relative way to Christ, and we may not be wise above what is written. Cornelius and his friends coming together, were no right orderly gathered Church before Baptisme, neither doth the Scripture so call them. After all said that may be, he demandeth, why it may not be so, that a Church may be a Church before Baptisme be administred: why may not children be baptized, I would aske him? let him tell me that, I will tell him why.

Againe he saith, a Church is so a Church before Baptisme, as that the end of her union is for communion. J. S. at the last doth in effect in a modest way give up the cause; (A Church so a Church) That is, in another way then at the beginning it was, when it was first insta­ted. Againe in another way, then according to a right Constitu­tion and orderly way of serving God. Again, is a Church so as a betrothed Virgin is a wife before the day of her Espouslas, and playeth the Harlot in the mean time, and so defileth the marriage bed: So is an unbaptized Church a Church of Christ.

After this he is up with the substance of his five Reasons before alledged, to prove that Baptisme was not the forme of the Church, but the Covenant. And what then? (for I will not meddle with his Reasons, be they right or wrong.) A Church may be in Covenant and fellowship before Baptisme be administred (so as Cornelius and his friends were:) But I say such a Church can never administer Baptisme according to God, unlesse they had a man sent to them, as Iohn was sent, or as Peter was to Cornelius and his friends. He is pleased to call such a Church, whom the Scripture calleth not so. But what he here setteth down he doth as formerly, but say it and not prove it, so as we need not much stand upon it. A People are a Church by covenant, he saith, to which Ordinances are annexed: But [Page 62] the matter of this Church is to be first outwardly sitted by Baptism. An orderly way is necessary, and that is by persons sent of God, as was John; here he deceiveth again, affirming that of (his so a Church) which is onely true of a Church stated, and on foot, according to God in the world, as was the Church of the new Testament bapti­zed, and so the matter outwardly sitted by John before the building was erected.

He quoteth, Gen. 17. 11. Ezek. 16. 8. Act. 2. 41. Ephes. 4. 5. and con­cludeth thus: So here was a Church before Ordinances, or before ever Baptisme was administred, either by John the Baptist, or the Apostles.

To which I answer, in regard of those two places of the old Testament, alledged in this matter in question: It is at least as far off as the proving the baptizing of Infants from Circumcision, or their being baptized of old to Moses in the cloud and sea, which he 1 Cor. 10. accounteth nothing to the purpose, as indeed this is little to the purpose. They use to ask in the instance before, when produced: whether that Baptisme of the cloud, &c. was the Baptisme of the new Testament. I in like manner ask him whether those were the ministeriall Churches of the new Testament. Alas, this matter is too far fetcht. I could tell him of a Church, and a great one too, without faith, or the profession of it: namely, that gathered by De­metrius and his fellow Crafts-men, Act. 19. 25. 46. he happily will count it to no purpose; truly, so is his matter here.

As for those instances in the new Testament, sure he was much over-seen in them, and very inconsiderate: Those Act. 2. 41. had broken bread, and prayed, and were baptized, before they were a Church. As for the Church of Ephesus, no question but that was also bapti­zed in like manner; and he might from that place as well prove a Church to be before faith, as before Baptisme, by any thing I can perceive. Certainly he had little aim, in bringing such places of Scripture to prove a people to be a Church of the new Testa­ment, before Baptisme was administred to them; at least that it should be so before Johns Baptisme, that according to the Commis­sion of God, administred Baptisme to fit the matter of the Church, before ever it was laid into form.

A further Objection he setteth down thus: Some say from Act. 2. 41. they were added to the Church after they were baptized. What is his Answer?

If it were so; they should neither put on Christ, nor yet be baptized into [Page 63] one body, nor to the true profession of the Father, Son, and holy Ghost, &c. directly against these Scriptures, Gal. 3. 27. 1 Cor. 12. 13. Matth. 28. 19.

Answ. I am very sorry to see such weaknesse in persons preten­ding to, and promising much strength of knowledge. For,

First, all those that John Baptist baptized, could neither put on Christ, nor be baptized into one body, nor into the true profession of the Father, &c. by his account and reckoning; and so his practice of baptizing was contrary to those Scriptures by his reckoning. Was not John Baptist to blame?

Secondly, how appeareth it, that if persons sent of God, as was John of old, (as is necessary to raise Baptisme, if it were lost out of the world, as they hold) baptizing according to their Commis­sion, that those they baptize cannot put on Christ, nor be baptized into one body, nor into the true profession of the Trinity, onely because J. S. saith so, without any shew of ground. For,

Thirdly, those Scriptures cited, have no such thing in them certainly to the judgement of any rationall man; neither can it be imagined that there is any let in regard of any of them, why a person sent of God should not baptize before the Church be formed.

For that in Acts 2. 41. he saith, It is onely declarative of the great in­crease of the Church through Gods goodnesse. To which I answer; That it declareth plainly, that they were of, and by that Church bapti­zed, that they were added unto, in as much as the Church recei­veth no unwashen ones. If it were questioned whether the Church receive them before she baptize them, or baptize them before she re­ceive them; I would give my thoughts, that in strictnesse of conclu­ding, neither are first; for these are so interwoven, that they go toge­ther, & are unseparable: As thus, persons beleeving (being unbapti­zed) the Church openeth her arms to receive them, but before she can fully imbrace them, they must be washed, and so made like the rest of the body. There is a different case to be taken knowledge of:

First, of the seed of the Church (by generation I mean) they are of the Church first, and baptized for righteousnesse sake, because they are of the Church, and for the end before specified.

Secondly, the case of converted Infidels; their accesse to the Church and Ordinances is as before; as it was in like manner of old in Israel, the infants were circumcised, because they were a part of Israel, that they might answer the whole. But the Converts of [Page 64] the Nations they were circumcised, that they might be of the Church, and have fellowship in the same. The case I conceive to be even so now, which I note in way of digression, as a touch to be Exod. 12. 48. considered of, though happily J. S. will think it to no purpose.

There is another Argument, which he setteth down, and maketh answer unto; all the difference amounteth but to that of the cir­cumstance of time, and hath nothing in it substantiall; I shall not make the difference greater, but shall leave J. S. to his constituting causes of his unbaptized Church, and shall forbear to trouble him, or my self, or the Reader any further, but leave all to the judgement of the godly wise.