Observe also 3. arguments.

First, Christ gave his Disciples commis­sion concerning baptisme, to baptise belee­vers, Mark 16.16. and this reacheth to the end of the world, Matth. 28.19, 20. there­fore not to baptise them, or they not to bee baptised, is to disregard his commission, and to baptise others (especially so knowne) is to goe beyond his commission.

Secondly, want of faith, or of the new birth, is the onely bar to baptisme, therefore they that enjoy these things may also enjoy baptisme, but none else, Acts 8.36, 37. and 10.45, 46, 47.

[Page 5] Thirdly, the Scripture holdeth out no o­ther baptisme in any place, but of such as have faith, or repentance wrought in them, therefore they being not baptised, Gods word is taken from them, and to baptise o­thers is to adde to it, the danger of which see Revel. 22.18, 19.

Application.

This informes us of a great mistake about baptisme, even among Gods people them­selves. Some are for it, as it is in the pub­licke assemblies, with all the appurtenances, being so taught. 2. Some finde the signing of the partie with the crosse to bee mans in­vention, and if that were left, they thinke it were right. 3. Some finde sureties no where spoken of in Scripture, and if that were re­medied, they thinke it compleat baptisme, not minding perhaps the blasphemous spee­ches, which is worse then any of them: as that the childe thus baptised is regenerate and borne anew: and that Jesus Christ hath sanctified the river Jordan, and all other waters to the washing away of sins, which is horrible blasphemy, attributing that to wa­ter [Page 6] which is peculiar to the blood of Christ, 1 Iohn 1.7. Also in regard of the subject, there is great mistake. Some think being so taught, that the children of al pro­fessed Protestants are to be baptised. Some thinke the children of beleevers: others thinke only the children of such beleevers as are members of some particular Church are to be baptised, and none else: whereas if they would but search the Scriptures, and embrace this truth, all these newfound and scripturclesse baptismes would fall to the ground at once.

Secondly, they that baptise children, or any that cannot manifest faith, are guilty of the prophanation of Gods ordinance. Tis not their descent from godly parents will serve turne, as appears Luke 3.8, 9. though the Iews had high thoughts of themselves in this respect, Iohn 8.44. and the Gen­tiles were [...]ly swaid that way, as 1 Tim. 1.4. the which opinion is sharply reproved by Iohn, by Christ, and by Paul in those Scriptures.

Thirdly, hence we learne that they that [Page 7] are fit subjects of baptisme, I meane they whose hearts the Lord hath toucht with his feare, and yet keepe off from baptisme, are guilty of the neglect or contempt of Gods ordinance: the danger of which see an example of in the Pharisees and Law­yers, for when the Publicans justified God and were baptised with the baptisme of Iohn, they rejected the counsell of God a­gainst themselves, and were not baptised of him, Luke 7.29, 30.

Fourthly, this may teach Gods people to beware of judging and censuring the professors of this truth, as if they were too nice or too precise, for this discovers in them (though Gods people) the remainders of the old man, for naturally we are all gi­ven to speak evill of the things wee know not, or have not formerly been brought up in: the open prophane people speake ill of Puritans (as they call them) because they run not with them in the same excesse of riot, 1 Pet. 4.3. and those called Puritans speak evil of Brownists (so called) for they out strip them, and they speake evill of us, [Page 8] we going one step higher, to wit, in point of B [...]p [...]isme: thus did Praisgod Barbon of late, his sin being open I may give him o­pen reproofe, 1 Tim. 5.20. who in stead of proving the lawfulnes or baptising infants, taking on him so to doe, in the meane time derides us, and leaves that undone. Much like to peevish Ionah, 4.2. who in stead of praying to God fell a quarrelling with God. But my earnest desire is, that I and Mr. Barbon, and all Gods people, though differing in judgement, might not differ in affections, but that there may be love and tender affections among us, seeing we are brethren, and that we use no such violent speeches to one another, or to any, sith wee have learned that the wrath of man doth not accomplish the righteousnesse of God, Iam. 1.10. and that the wisdome from a­bove is pure and peaceable, and easie to be intreated, and that the fruits of the Spirit are love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentle­nesse, &c hatred, debate, emulations, wrath &c, are the works of the flesh, Gal. 5 21.22▪

You deride us in your booke about the [Page 9] rise, matter, and manner of baptisme, the two last are clearely proved by Scripture already, the rise of it being once lost, is the only thing to clear; of that therefore a few words. Our baptisme received in our in­fancy (being corrupted) is notwithstanding true or false: if true, though corrupted (as you hold) then needs must the other ordi­nances be true, the Church also true, for nothing (I conceive) is more corrupted (if so much) as baptisme, as in the first use; and then it followes that you doe ill in leaving true ordinances, and true Church state, and should then returne againe. Ob. We shift off the corruptions only. Ans. Then should you goe to the root, and strike at the grea­test corruption first, which is I conceive in the subject. Your onely course then would be to let your infants remaine unbaptised, and then such as you and others (upon tri­all) judge to be in covenant, and precious in Gods account; you might safely bap­tise by vertue of your baptisme, if yours be true, though corrupted, as you hold it is; & not doing so, you go a wrong way to work [Page 10] to root out corruption. But for my part, I beleeve Christ will at no rate own the bap­tising of infants for his baptisme, and there­fore not true. And then it followes that it being false, is to be renounced as wel as the Church state being false, and true baptism as well as true Church state is to bee erect­ed; except we turne Familists and Liber­tines, to let all alone, and live loosly, which opinion is held out, for ought I know, only by such as are given up to their own lusts.

Ob. But where is your warrant for so doing? I answer, That every Scripture that gives you warrant, or any of your judgement, to erect a Church state, gives us the same warrant to erect baptisme, sith the one cannot be done without the other, for none can put on Christ (that is visibly by outward profession) but such as are bap­tised into Christ, that is into the way, or profession of Christ, for so is the meaning, Gal. 3.27.

So that as a certaine company of you agreeing in one, may become a body with every ones mutuall consent: just so might [Page 11] we or you take up this ordinance too, I mean if it be so that otherwise wee cannot partake of it (as once it was) and also know that Christ puts not impossibilities upon us; and we are no where so enjoyned, that if we can­not know absolutely a people that hath up­held it ever since John, then not to partake of it, but we are absolutely enjoined to be bap­tised, Mark 16.16. Which is an impossibi­lity if that must needs be a tye. Againe, if Christ had so tied us, then would you bee put to a great strait, to prove that baptisme that you have partakt of to bee so upheld, which thing I beleeve you cannot possibly doe; you must take the Popes word for it, or else some Historie or other, which I dare not credit as I doe the Bible.

After this you affirme many things (I think unsound) desiring the Reader to judge of three things especially. First you affirme that all the children lineally descending from the faithfull, are in the everlasting co­venant of God, and are the children of the promise, and many such expressions; but the word saith, if ye be Christs, then are yee A­brahams [Page 12] seed, and heires by promise, Gal. 3.29. and the children of the flesh are not the children of God, but the children of the promise are accounted for the seed; the chil­dren of the promise are there put in opposi­tion to the children of the flesh. But to bee briefe, weigh also these places following, Gal. 3.7, 9, 14. Rom. 9.6, 7, 8. 2 Cor. 1.20. 1 Tim 4.8. Againe you say, that the chil­dren in the Church at Colosse were bapti­sed is plaine, Col. 3.20, 21. I am sure it is plaine that those words doe not say so. But I thinke you meane there is a plaine conse­quence, as thus, There were children in that Church, Col. 3.20, 21. but no Church doth consist of unbaptised persons; therfore those children were baptised. I grant this fully, that a Church, cannot consist of unbaptised persons, and that some there had parents li­ving, and were children in this sense, sith the Apostle there writes to children, but I think the Apostle doth not write to infants, which you drive at, though I think ashamed to ex­presse it. For any man indued with reason might gainsay that; and I wonder that you [Page 13] being so exceeding large in the foregoing matter, should so passe this place over as you doe. 3. You affirme that Jesus Christ gave plaine and expresse order and command to baptise children, which you will make ap­peare thus; whole nations were to bee bap­tised, but children are a part of nations, ther­fore to be baptised: by the same ground it appeares that you do unbeleevers and their children wrong, excluding them, sith they are a part of nations. But if Christ did plain­ly command that children should bee bapti­sed, as you say he did, Math. 28.19. you need not goe so to worke to make it appeare. A plaine command will appeare to every ones view that reads it. But I desire you hence­forward to father your errors your selfe, and not because they should passe say the Scrip­ture plainly sayes it, for so doing you wrong the Scripture, and double your sin.