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 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 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 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, (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.

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, (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 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 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 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 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. 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 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 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, 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.

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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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, 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 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 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, 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. 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 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 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. 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 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. 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?

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 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 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. 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.