<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2013-01-16</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Alexis Jakobson</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>*Proofed title page(s).
*Reviewed structure.
*Checked division-marking material at heads and feet of divisions (HEADS, CLOSER, OPENER, ARGUMENT, EPIGRAPH, SIGNED, BYLINE, etc.).
*Added TYPEs to DIVs in order to validate.
*Checked for N=""s.
*Checked ^s.
*Checked placement and completeness of PBs.
*Checked for foreign, damage and missing-page GAPs, PROBLEMs, #, --.
*Checked for LBs, startqs / endqs, q;s, ABBRs, LETTERs and Qs.
*Checked for FIGUREs and decorated initials.
*Checked proofsheets and made corrections found there.
*Corrected <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">s etc.
*Converted <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">s to GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="[vendor name]".
*Revalidated.</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="B21030">
<STC T="W">D227</STC>
<BIBNO T="oclc">[ocm]13108986</BIBNO>
<VID>199364</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1">
<PB REF="2">
<P>A REJOYNDER to Mr. WILLS his <HI>Vindiciae:</HI> Wherein The Antiquity for Believers, and Novelty of <HI>Infant Bapti&s;m</HI> is further confirmed.</P>
<P>As al&s;o, His groundle&s;s Appeal di&s;tinctly an&s;wer'd, and the Forgeries and Mi&s;takes boa&s;ted of, &s;till found to be his own.</P>
<P><HI>With an Appeal to his Con&s;cience about the &s;ame.</HI></P>
<P><HI>That the words of</HI> Tertulian <HI>and</HI> Nazianzen <HI>&s;hew it was long before all were agreed of the time or Nece&s;&s;ity of Bap|tizing Infants before the u&s;e of Rea&s;on, in ca&s;e they were like to live to Maturity.</HI></P>
<P>&mdash;<HI>It was thought le&s;s needful to give it</HI> [viz. Infants Bapti&s;m,] <HI>a particular expre&s;s mention in the Records and Hi&s;tory of the Church [viz.</HI> In tho&s;e times] <HI>Mr.</HI> Bax|ter <HI>in his</HI> More Proofs, <HI>p.</HI> 279.</P>
<P>By <HI>H. Danvers.</HI></P>
<Q><BIBL><HI>Matth. 5.11.</HI></BIBL> And &s;hall &s;ay all manner of evil again&s;t you fal&s;ly for my names &s;ake.</Q>
<Q><BIBL><HI>Job 16.10.</HI></BIBL> They have gaped upon me with their mouths, and have &s;mote me upon the cheek reproachfully.</Q>
<Q><BIBL><HI>P&s;al. 119.42.</HI></BIBL> I &s;hall have wherewithal to an&s;wer him that reproach|eth me, for I tru&s;t in thy word.</Q>
<P>Printed for <HI>Francis Smith,</HI> at the <HI>Elephant</HI> and <HI>Ca&s;tle,</HI> near the <HI>Royal-Exchange,</HI> 1675.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="preface">
<PB REF="3">
<PB REF="3">
<HEAD>The PREFACE.</HEAD>
<P>BEfore I had fini&s;hed with Mr. <HI>Baxter,</HI> I was fir&s;t a&s;|&s;aulted by a new adver&s;ary, one Mr. <HI>Whit&s;ton,</HI> and a|gain by my old Antagoni&s;t Mr. <HI>Wills,</HI> not &s;uffering me &s;carce to take breath, and three to one you know is odds. But hearing, that Mr. <HI>H.</HI> a meer &s;tranger to me, had undertaken Mr. <HI>Whit&s;ton,</HI> I have obtained &s;o much lea&s;ure, to con&s;ider what our <HI>3d. Triumvir</HI> hath further to &s;ay to me. And whom I find upon a &s;erious peru&s;al in&s;tead of giving that due &s;atisfaction, my &s;ober <HI>Reply,</HI> (and all good men) might expect from him, for his manifold detected errors in Antiquity, abu&s;e of Authors, &s;currility and indignity to my per&s;on (a meer &s;tranger to him) injurious reproaches to the whole party of Bapti&s;ts, (as well in this as other Nations; not only loading the profe&s;&s;ors thereof with his &s;landers, but the profe&s;&s;ion it &s;elf, as leading to Bla&s;|phemy and Immorality) is plea&s;ed notwith&s;tanding to come forth in this wrathful, &s;elf-ju&s;tifying, and revengeful Spi|rit, abounding &s;till in his repeated and renewed errors and reproaches; as though an impenitent &s;tanding by error was the be&s;t way to defend truth, and to recri|minate others, the faire&s;t way to clear him&s;elf, ju&s;tify|ing that Malefactor, who fell foul upon his Pro&s;ecutor, Judge, Jury, and Witne&s;&s;es, as the be&s;t way to &s;ave him&s;elf: And with the Chaced Fox, rai&s;eth a Du&s;t to make his e&s;cape. Dealing ju&s;t with me; as the Heathens did with the Chri&s;ti|ans of old, putting them into Bears Skins, and then &s;et the Dogs upon them; or as the Papi&s;ts have done with worthy Mr. <HI>Fox,</HI> for detecting their errors and cruelties, have decry'd him as &s;uch a Forger, that none ought to conver&s;e with him. But Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> will find him&s;elf under a di&s;appointment, truth is not &s;o to be baffled, nor innocency foil'd, he will yet meet with a
<PB REF="4"> Vindication of both, in his farther ju&s;t detection and reproof.</P>
<P>The&s;e few Pages therefore do fir&s;t truly di&s;cover to you, not|with&s;tanding the great noi&s;e and clamour of mi&s;takes, that the que&s;tion di&s;cour&s;ed betwixt us is certainly lo&s;t, and given up by him, and that the Antiquity &s;o much boa&s;ted of is wholly for Believers, not Infants Bapti&s;m. With a &s;erious and parti|cular An&s;wer to his groundle&s;s frivolous Appeal; di&s;covering withall, that he is truly guilty of tho&s;e crimes, and many more, that he would &s;o injuriou&s;ly father upon me, though what he di&s;covers to have been my errors, I fully own, which are few, and very incon&s;iderable, mi&s;taking <HI>2</HI> or <HI>3</HI> names one for an<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">|ther, viz. <HI>Aquinas</HI> for <HI>Albertus, Sericius</HI> for <HI>Hincmarus,</HI> not hitting a Popes Name, and not taking <HI>Walden</HI> to &s;o good advantage as I ought for my&s;elf; that of <HI>Lanfrank</HI> mentio|ned before, and w<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ich are all, of any weight, that I know of, none. of them hurting us in the lea&s;t, and and are &s;o frivolous, that an ingenious man would &s;corn to have mentioned, much le&s;s to have made &s;uch a du&s;t about.</P>
<P>But in the mean time I mu&s;t acknowledge, it is very &s;ad the World &s;hould be troubled with &s;uch &s;tuff, as though &s;uch accu|&s;ations, recriminations, and di&s;covery of nakedne&s;s, was for their edification, which I can truly &s;ay is very grieving to me, and were not the truth of God likely to &s;uffer by my &s;ilence, I &s;hould rather have born his reproaches and &s;landers, than have made any return to him. And therefore what I have done on my part to prevent &s;uch mi&s;chiefs and inconvenien|cies, I think will be nece&s;&s;ary to give you &s;ome particular ac|count of, having before only given you a hint thereof, <HI>viz.</HI> how much I have endeavoured with Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> to rectifie mi&s;takes, and mi&s;-under&s;tandings in a more Private, Friendly, Chri&s;tian way, that we might &s;ave the world this unnece&s;sary trouble.</P>
<P>Know therefore, that my fir&s;t Treati&s;e of Bapti&s;m, having &s;lept about <HI>12</HI> Months without any publick notice, and being ready to come forth with a <HI>2d.</HI> Edition, I improved my utmo&s;t
<PB REF="4"> intere&s;t with all &s;orts, to procure what Objections did ratio|nally lye again&s;t it, that if I had committed any mi&s;takes, I might rectifie them, having been con&s;trained to take &s;everal things upon Tru&s;t, for want of opportunity to examine them by their Originals: And therefore did Apologize in my Pre|face for Candor, that if by the multitude of Quotations through &s;o ancient a Track, they might find any particular mi&s;take, mi&s;-quotation, or mi&s;-applicatoon, they would not &s;o dwell or in&s;i&s;t upon it, as to reject the truth of all the re&s;t, that are full, and clear, and without exception, the way that Car|pers and Sophi&s;ters take, and the Method that Papi&s;ts have all along taken in Reply to our Prote&s;tant Writers, though did a&s;&s;ure, (and &s;o I can &s;ay with a good Con&s;cience) that I have not willingly given any &s;uch occa&s;ion, and truly at la&s;t, af|ter all the malicious &s;crutiny, clamour and noi&s;e that has been made, it is matter of Admiration, that no more has been brought forth: Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> having di&s;covered but tho&s;e few before mentioned: Mr. <HI>Baxter</HI> but one that had any &s;ignifi|cancy: And Mr. <HI>Whit&s;ton</HI> not one.</P>
<P>Therefore hearing, That Mr. <HI>B.</HI> had &s;omething to &s;ay a|gain&s;t it, I ventured, as I have told you, to &s;end to him; and under&s;tanding, that Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> had &s;pent &s;ome time in the <HI>Ox|ford</HI> Library, to trace my Authorities, and found me tardy in many, I &s;ent Two or Three Me&s;&s;ages to him, to admit of &s;ome Conver&s;e about it, but in vain; then upon the coming forth of the <HI>2d.</HI> Impre&s;&s;ion, I &s;ent Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> one of them, with this following Letter.</P>
<LETTER LANG="eng">
<OPENER><SALUTE>SIR,</SALUTE></OPENER>
<P>I Under&s;tand you have &s;ome Exceptions again&s;t my Treati&s;e of Bapti&s;m, e&s;pecially the Hi&s;torical Part, and particularly about the <HI>Walden&s;es,</HI> and that you intend &s;peedily to print the &s;ame. I having, <HI>Sir,</HI> printed a 2d. Impre&s;&s;ion, and therein made &s;ome alte|rations, and very con&s;iderable additions, e&s;pecially as to the <HI>Wal|den&s;es,</HI> have taken upon me the confidence to &s;end you one; and which if it may tend to your &s;atisfaction, may &s;ave the world, your &s;elf, and me, the further trouble of An&s;wers and Rejoynders, if not, if you will plea&s;e to Communicate where your principal
<PB REF="5"> Objection lies, either to that, or any thing el&s;e, and admit of the Exchange of a Letter or Two about it; it may not be un&s;erviceable to the Truth, with this a&s;&s;urance, that if it may appear, that I have done any manife&s;t injury to truth, I &s;hall be ready to give the mo&s;t publick &s;atisfaction it may call for; it having been my earne&s;t and importunate de&s;ire, ever &s;ince the Expo&s;ure of the fir&s;t, to procure any rational Objection again&s;t any thing I had &s;aid, and which &s;hould have been as wellcome to me as an Appro|bation, (becau&s;e it is only truth in &s;incerity I de&s;ign to propa|gate) but do a&s;&s;ure you, have not as yet met with the lea&s;t Ob|jection from any one that I had not before obviated. And indeed as to the Hi&s;torical Part, though it is not offered for proof, but illu&s;tration only, would be too great folly to render any willful mi&s;take, which every Scholar in his Library confutes; Which with the render of Chri&s;tian Re&s;pects, is recommended to your Con&s;ideration, by</P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED>Your unknown Friend and Servant, <HI>H. D.</HI></SIGNED>
<DATELINE><DATE><HI>March</HI> 22. 1673.</DATE></DATELINE></CLOSER>
</LETTER>
<P>To which Letter upon the 10th of <HI>May 1674.</HI> Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> returns me an&s;wer, that had not my Letter come too late, it would have been incivility not to have complied with me; but that part of his Book was in the Pre&s;s before mine came to his hand, and therefore de&s;ired my excu&s;e, and not to reckon him a willing di&s;turber of the world, having never before invaded the Pre&s;s.</P>
<P>As though my Me&s;&s;ages &s;ent to him (by a neighbour of the <HI>Devizes,</HI> and an acquaintance of his after, that came by him to <HI>Bri&s;toll</HI> Fair, and &s;everal &s;peakings to his Book-&s;eller to write to him to that end, who &s;till told me he &s;taid the Pre&s;s for my &s;econd Impre&s;&s;ion, having been ready for it &s;ome months) had no &s;ignification, if my Letter had not in time reach'd him, to prevent that di&s;turbance, or at lea&s;t to have obtained &s;ome Civil return from him.</P>
<P>Well, the Book comes forth, and how &s;tufft with prejudice, per&s;onal Reflections, egregious Mi&s;takes, bitter Invectives not only again&s;t my &s;elf, and whole Party, but the Principle it &s;elf, you are be&s;t able to judge; which I endeavoured &s;ome time after, notwith&s;tanding all tho&s;e high provocations given, mode&s;tly to detect in a &s;ober Reply.</P>
<PB REF="5">
<P>Though by the way this piece of Civility and Ingenuity mu&s;t not be forgotten, that the week before my Reply was pub|li&s;hed, they thought meet to put Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> Title into the <HI>Ga|zette,</HI> to proclaim me a Forger all the Nation over, knowing that though I might follow him in the Pre&s;s, yet there I was not capable to attend him for my Vindication.</P>
<P>Some months after mine came forth, I heard Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> was come to Town with a Rejoynder: whereupon I &s;ent &s;ome Friends to him to prevail for a Conference with him, which could not be obtained. Then I wrote to &s;ome of his Friends to acquaint him, that if he would meet with two or three Chri&s;tian Friends of a &s;ide, and communicate to me his Ex|ceptions, I &s;hould a&s;&s;ure him, that if I had done him or the Truth any injury, I would make the mo&s;t publick &s;atisfaction that they &s;hould judge requi&s;ite; which could not prevail with him. Afterwards I hearing that he had been with my Book-&s;eller, to read &s;ome writing of mine re&s;pecting the Con|trover&s;ie, which was &s;hewed him, and &s;uppo&s;ing that might be &s;ome obligation to him to be reciprocal, did &s;end my Book-&s;eller to his to obtain the like freedom, to peru&s;e his Papers in his Book-&s;ellers hand, but could obtain no permi&s;&s;ion thereto.</P>
<P>And yet after the rejection of all the&s;e mode&s;t endeavours of my part, which be&s;poke me far from being ob&s;tinate or te|nacious in any thing that I had writ, he has the Confidence with this clap of Thunder he has come forth with, to tell the world in his Ep. to his <HI>Vindiciae, That he mu&s;t acquaint me that I having treated him with &s;o much rudene&s;s in what is pa&s;t, that he had little heart to have any more to do with me, unle&s;s he &s;ee better cau&s;e, and gives me &s;ecurity of his Silence for the future, to any of my Con|tradictions, there being no gaping again&s;t an oven, and &s;ilence is accounted the be&s;t an&s;wer to &s;uch as &s;uper-add contumacy to their mi&s;takes.</HI></P>
<P>But where has that Contumacy appeared in me? It is true he deals with me in his appeal as a contumacious per&s;on, but
<PB REF="6"> how &s;uch proceedings are to be reconciled to Rea&s;on, Rule, or Religion, I mu&s;t confe&s;s my &s;elf at a great lo&s;s.</P>
<P>Had he dealt with me herein as the Quakers dealt with Mr. <HI>Hicks,</HI> which he makes his pattern, he had been much more excu&s;able, who (I pre&s;ume he'l find) admitted of pri|vate conference, and had Letters exchanged betwixt them; and till they &s;uppo&s;ed Mr. <HI>Hicks</HI> was contumacious, and tena|cious, did not proceed in that their Appeal.</P>
<P>I do not know that it is the practice in <HI>We&s;tmin&s;ter-hall,</HI> for a Plaintiff to procure publication for Tryal before he gives his Declaration, has his An&s;wer, Reply, Rejoynder, &amp;c. and &s;urely Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> &s;hould have had &s;o much patience to have attended what I had &s;aid to his <HI>Vindiciae,</HI> before he had thundred out his Appeal: It may be my An&s;wer to the for|mer, might have prevented the latter. Will nothing &s;atisfie him but my utmo&s;t &s;hame and reproach? Yet would he per|&s;wade the world, <HI>That he loves me as a Brother though erring, and had much rather convince then &s;hame me, advi&s;ing me to leave to&s;&s;ing the Ball of contention,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>But is this dealing with me like a Brother he de&s;igns to convince and reduce from errour? Is this to in&s;truct with meekne&s;s? to u&s;e any Go&s;pel-way to reform and inform, he knows the Soveraign Rule <HI>Mat. 18.</HI> is not publickly to tell the Church, till all other private ways are ineffectual.</P>
<P>I mu&s;t confe&s;s the&s;e are ways and &s;trains that I have not been acquainted withall, either among&s;t men or Chri&s;tians, which only &s;erve as to my own particular to lead me to Chri&s;ts rule, which I de&s;ire more to attend in the ca&s;e, To pray for him that thus de&s;pitefully u&s;es and per&s;ecutes me, and to re|joyce that I am counted worthy to &s;uffer &s;hame, and to have all manner of evil &s;poken again&s;t me fal&s;ly for his Names &s;ake.</P>
<P>Withall &s;atisfying my &s;elf that Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> takes the ready way by the&s;e methods to promote the cau&s;e he oppo&s;es, for few that ever I heard of, that manage a good cau&s;e, are left to &s;uch foul mi&s;carriages.</P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED>H. D.</SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="text">
<PB N="1" REF="6">
<HEAD>The Antiquity of Believers, and No|velty of Infants Bapti&s;m.</HEAD>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>GHAP. I.</HI> Wherein the Antiquity of Believers, and Novel|ty of Infants Bapti&s;m is further confirmed; and that the Bapti&s;m after Faith was the only Bapti&s;m that was owned in the fir&s;t <HI>Cen|turies,</HI> to be Chri&s;ts Ordinance and the Churches Practi&s;e, in full An&s;wer to Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> his <HI>Vindiciae.</HI></HEAD>
<P>THE main que&s;tion di&s;cu&s;&s;ed be|tween Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> and me, has been, whether the <HI>Anabapti&s;ts</HI> (&s;o called) or the <HI>Paedobapti&s;ts</HI> have mo&s;t to plead from <HI>Antiquity</HI> for their Way; <HI>viz.</HI> Tho&s;e that only <HI>Baptize</HI> Men and Women after <HI>Profe&s;|&s;ion</HI> of Faith and Repentance, or tho&s;e that Baptize <HI>Infants</HI> that are capable of neither.</P>
<P>The former of which I fir&s;t a&s;&s;erted in my <HI>Treati&s;e,</HI> and &s;ince defended, in my Reply to Mr. <HI>Wills,</HI> Mr. <HI>Baxter,</HI> and others, <HI>viz.</HI> That the <HI>Anabapti&s;ts,</HI> notwith&s;tanding the great <HI>Cry</HI> to the contrary, have the <HI>Antiquity</HI> of their <HI>&s;ide</HI> for the fir&s;t <HI>Centuries.</HI></P>
<PB N="2" REF="7">
<P>And which notwith&s;tanding all the noi&s;e and clamour after the full di&s;cu&s;&s;ion of that point on both hands, is now clearly mani|fe&s;ted (if not by their own grants confirm|ed) to us. The which you may receive in the following brief <HI>Account.</HI></P>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="century">
<HEAD><HI>CENT.</HI> I.</HEAD>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>1. Cent.</HI> gives Ex|amples on|ly for A|d<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">lt Bap|ti&s;m.</NOTE>FIr&s;t it is mo&s;t <HI>manife&s;t</HI> as is confe&s;t on all hands, that the Scripture Story for the fir&s;t <HI>Century</HI> gives us an account of no other Bapti&s;m, but that after Faith and Repen|tance, <HI>viz.</HI> Produceth In&s;tances, or gives us Examples only for adult Believers, and not Infants Bapti&s;m; As we have ob&s;erv|ed the <HI>Magdeburgs</HI> them&s;elves tho&s;e <HI>Pae|dobapti&s;ts</HI> have &s;o fully own'd acknowledg|ing, <HI>That they find Examples in the</HI> 2, 8, 10, 16, 19. <HI>of the Acts for the Baptizing of adult Believers, hut of Bap<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">izing of Infants they read of no Example</HI> De Infantibus Baptizatis Exempla quidem non leguntur: To which Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> &s;ub&s;cribes, acknowledging, <HI>That there are no particular Examples for Infants Bapti&s;m upon Record,</HI> p. 3. 53. vind. Mr. <HI>Whit&s;ton</HI> confe&s;&s;ing <HI>the &s;ame as generally</HI> own|ed by them.</P>
<P>As for the Allegation, That the <HI>Apo&s;tles Writings</HI> do not expre&s;ly exclude In<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ants, as
<PB N="3" REF="7"> Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> and Mr. <HI>Whit&s;ton</HI> from the <HI>Magd.</HI> affirm is &s;o weak and frivolous, that needs no Reply, which would e&s;tabli&s;h Baptizing of Bells, Chry&s;m, and what not of the Popi&s;h Inventions.</P>
<P>And that if not a&s;&s;erted in Scripture, is yet found in the Writings of <HI>Origen</HI> and <HI>Cyprian</HI> to have been the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> practi&s;e, is as ut|terly in&s;ignificant; for as it has, and will fur|ther appear to you they have writ no <HI>&s;uch thing;</HI> nor &s;econdly if they <HI>had,</HI> would what they <HI>writ</HI> in the third Age, upon their &s;ingle <HI>Te&s;timonies,</HI> prove &s;uch a matter of <HI>fact</HI> in the fir&s;t Age, when as 'tis confe&s;t the Scripture is wholly &s;ilent <HI>therein.</HI></P>
<P>Therefore I hope it cannot be <HI>denyed,</HI> that for what appears in <HI>Scripture Story&punc;</HI> our Ene|mies them&s;elves being <HI>Judges,</HI> that <HI>Anti|quity</HI> for the fir&s;t <HI>Century</HI> is wholly on our &s;ide; &s;o that no mention need be made of the Epi&s;tles of <HI>Clement</HI> and <HI>Ignatius</HI> in Con|firmation thereof.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="century">
<HEAD><HI>CENT.</HI> II.</HEAD>
<P>SEcondly, as to the Second <HI>Century</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>2. Cent.</HI> gives Ex|amples on|ly for A|dult Bap|ti&s;m.</NOTE> we find upon the fulle&s;t di&s;cu&s;&s;ion, it <HI>produ|ceth</HI> as few Examples for Infants Bapti&s;m, as the fir&s;t, and that only tho&s;e are mentioned to have been <HI>Baptized in this Age,</HI> that fir&s;t
<PB N="4" REF="8"> made <HI>a profe&s;sion of Faith,</HI> and <HI>Repentance,</HI> as appears by that mo&s;t remarkable account given us out of <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyrs Apology,</HI> the mo&s;t Authentick piece of <HI>Antiquity</HI> of this Age (not to mention what is &s;aid from <HI>Dio|ny&s;ius,</HI> and <HI>Clem<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nt. Alexandrinus</HI> Treat. p. 49, 50. which is not gain&s;aid by our <HI>Anta|goni&s;t,</HI> only Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> would in&s;inuate, that the <HI>Magd.</HI> did &s;uppo&s;e, <HI>That the Order</HI> Ju&s;tin Martyr <HI>lays down, re&s;pected the recep|tion of Aliens to Bapti&s;m,</HI> which would not hurt us, becau&s;e all are Aliens till Conver|ted, no mention being made of any that were otherwi&s;e received. But <HI>Ju&s;tins</HI> own words are full for &s;atisfaction in the point, as <HI>Treat p.</HI> 49. viz. <HI>I will declare unto you how we offer up our &s;elves to God after we are renewed through Chri&s;t,</HI> &amp;c. Which re&s;pect|ed the Order and Method ob&s;erved by the <HI>Saints</HI> and <HI>Believers</HI> in the Church at that day, and how all of them had their <HI>admi&s;si|on</HI> therein.</P>
<P>So that for the fir&s;t 200 <HI>Years</HI> we carry it, having Examples as is confe&s;t for <HI>the one,</HI> but none to be produced for <HI>the other:</HI> Whereby I &s;hould be &s;ufficiently <HI>ju&s;tified,</HI> (&s;hould we proceed no farther) in that <HI>a&s;ser|tion</HI> Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> &s;o complains of, <HI>p.</HI> 2. <HI>vind.</HI> By affirming, That Antiquity it &s;elf is <HI>alto|gether for Believers, and not for Infants Bap|ti&s;m.</HI>
<PB N="5" REF="8"> For if it be manife&s;t, that there be 200 Years for <HI>the one</HI> before <HI>the other,</HI> well may I &s;ay, That there is <HI>Antiqity</HI> for <HI>the one,</HI> and not for <HI>the other;</HI> for if <HI>Antiquity</HI> be writ upon <HI>Believers Bapti&s;m, Novelty</HI> then mu&s;t needs be writ upon <HI>Infants Bapti&s;m.</HI> Nor but that I grant &s;ome that were called the <HI>Ancient Fathers</HI> of the 5th. Age, as <HI>Au&s;tin, Chry&s;o&s;tom,</HI> and others affirmed it; from whence Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> again and again up|braids me, and Mr. <HI>Whit&s;ton</HI> al&s;o, That I do contradict <HI>my &s;elf,</HI> in &s;aying <HI>Antiquity</HI> was altogether for <HI>the one,</HI> and not for <HI>the other,</HI> they not con&s;idering, or <HI>willingly omit</HI> that I mean <HI>Primitive Antiquity;</HI> the Elder Brother was to carry away, as the <HI>dig|nity</HI> and <HI>preheminency,</HI> &s;o the Inheritance from the Younger, much more the true <HI>born,</HI> from the ba&s;e <HI>born Child.</HI></P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="century">
<HEAD><HI>CENT.</HI> III.</HEAD>
<P>IN the 3d. <HI>Century</HI> we have as few <HI>Exam|ples</HI> to be produced for <HI>Infants Bapti&s;m,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">No Exam|ple for any but Adult Bapti&s;m in the <HI>3. Cen.</HI></NOTE> as in the two <HI>former;</HI> but that they Baptized in this <HI>Age</HI> after the Profe&s;&s;ion of Faith, we have an ample account from <HI>Tertullian, Ori|gen</HI> and <HI>Cyprian,</HI> and &s;everal others, as <HI>Treat. p.</HI> 51, &amp;c. And which our Antago|ni&s;ts are &s;o far from oppo&s;ing, that they
<PB N="6" REF="9"> abundantly confirm, <HI>viz.</HI> Mr. <HI>Baxter,</HI> in his <HI>Saints Re&s;t,</HI> p. 1. cap. 8. &s;ect. 5. telling us, <HI>That</HI> Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, <HI>who lived</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>in the</HI> 2d. <HI>and</HI> 3d. Centuries, <HI>do all of them affirm, That in the Primitive times none were Baptized without an expre&s;s Cove|nanting, wherein they renounced the World; Fle&s;h, and Devil, and engaged them&s;elves to Chri&s;t, and promi&s;ed to obey him.</HI> And Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> al&s;o, 2. <HI>part. p.</HI> 6. of Infants Bapti&s;m, acknowledgeth, <HI>That the</HI> Magdeburgs <HI>do tell us, Thaet</HI> Tertullian <HI>in this age oppo&s;ed him&s;elf to &s;ome that a&s;&s;erted Infants Bapti&s;m, affirming, That the Adult were only proper Subjects.</HI></P>
<P>So that it is manife&s;t by what appears up|on Record from any Authentick Story, that <HI>Believers Bapti&s;m</HI> carries the <HI>Antiquity</HI> of the Third <HI>Century</HI> al&s;o; there being not as yet one Infant upon Record that was actu|ally Baptized, as any Ordinance of Chri&s;t, nor any thing appearing from good Autho|rity by any Scripture Argument, that they ought &s;o to be: What is pretended from <HI>Origen</HI> and <HI>Cyprian</HI> you have fully replyed to afterwards, and the utter in&s;ignificancy of any thing that is urged from them to this end, whil&s;t you have full mouthed Evidence, and undeniable Authority for the other.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="century">
<PB N="7" REF="9">
<HEAD><HI>CENT.</HI> IV.</HEAD>
<P>AS to the 4th. <HI>Century</HI> it doth not yet ap|pear when and where any Infant was Baptized, as an Ordinance of Chri&s;t;<NOTE PLACE="marg">Adult Bap|ti&s;m the general practi&s;e of the <HI>4th.</HI> Age.</NOTE> it is &s;aid indeed that &s;ome <HI>Sick Children</HI> were Baptized for their Health in this Age, and that &s;ome <HI>Dying Children might be Baptized</HI> to &s;ave them, as &s;ome other <HI>Dying Per&s;ons</HI> were; and that &s;ome <HI>Doctors</HI> in this Age enclined from <HI>Circumci&s;ion</HI> to bring it into the <HI>Church;</HI> but as yet none did pretend it to be nece&s;&s;ary, none to have been a Precept of the Go&s;pel, as Dr. <HI>Taylor Treat. p.</HI> 105. Whereas the Baptizing of Believers after the Profe&s;&s;ion of Faith, was the general practi&s;e of the Age, and which appears from the Three Sub&s;tantial In&s;tances given by me in my Treati&s;e, e&s;pecially in the Reply, <HI>viz.</HI> From 1. the <HI>Sayings of Fathers.</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>1&s;t.</HI> From the Sayings of the Fa|thers.</NOTE> 2. <HI>Decrees of Councils.</HI> 3. <HI>Children of Believers un|baptized till aged,</HI> p. 4, &amp;c. 1. From the Sayings of the <HI>Fathers,</HI> and greate&s;t Men of this <HI>Century,</HI> both in<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Atha|na&s;ius <HI>and</HI> Arno|bius.</NOTE> <HI>Affrica,</HI><NOTE N="(b)" PLACE="marg">Ba&s;il, Nazianzen, Eph. Syrus, Epiphanius.</NOTE> <HI>A&s;iae,</HI> and<NOTE N="(c)" PLACE="marg">Hillarii, Ambro&s;e, Jerom, Marius Victorinus.</NOTE> <HI>Europe,</HI> a&s;&s;erting the nece&s;&s;ity of Con|fe&s;&s;ion of Faith before <HI>Bapti&s;m,</HI> both from
<PB N="8" REF="10"> Chri&s;ts <HI>Commi&s;sion,</HI> Apo&s;tles <HI>Practi&s;e,</HI> and ends of the <HI>Ordinance.</HI></P>
<P>Which Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> little oppo&s;eth, only &s;aith, <HI>That &s;ome of the&s;e Doctors were corrupt in other things,</HI> and &s;o they were all, <HI>That &s;ome of them</HI> 3 <HI>or</HI> 4 <HI>a&s;&s;erted Infants Bapti&s;m;</HI> which I deny not, to &s;ave Dying Chil|dren; &s;aith one of them, <HI>viz.</HI> Arnobius <HI>was &s;purious from</HI> Perkins; what then? the re&s;t are <HI>genuine;</HI> and that <HI>Arnobius</HI> on the P&s;alms was ever Doubted is more <HI>than I heard</HI> before; but if he was, it &s;ignifies <HI>no|thing;</HI> he al&s;o <HI>Doubts</HI> Ba&s;ils <HI>Proof,</HI> urged by me <HI>contra Eunomium,</HI> which he calls for, and which he'l find <HI>l.</HI> 2. <HI>p,</HI> 24. viz. <HI>Bap|ti&s;m is the Seal of Faith, but Faith is the con|fe&s;sion of the Diety; for Fir&s;t he ought to be|lieve, and after to be Sealed with Bapti&s;m.</HI> Doubts <HI>whether</HI> Athana&s;ius <HI>is rightly rendred,</HI> for which I give you my Authority&punc; <HI>That what is urged for the nece&s;sity of Faith to pre|cede Bapti&s;m, re&s;pected the Adult,</HI> very true: And <HI>that &s;ome were for the Bapti&s;m of Infants, who were not capable to make Confe&s;sion;</HI> very true al&s;o; <HI>Si aliquid periculi immineat,</HI> If any danger happned otherwi&s;e, the nece&s;|&s;ity thereof from any precept of Chri&s;t was not yet enjoyed.</P>
<P N="2"><PB N="9" REF="10">2. As to the 3 Councils,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>2.</HI> Decrees of Council.</NOTE> (<HI>viz.</HI> the <HI>Car|thaginian, Laodicean,</HI> and <HI>Neoce&s;arian</HI>) &s;o po&s;itively decreeing, That <HI>Teaching, Con|fe&s;sion of Faith,</HI> and <HI>free choice,</HI> ought to precede <HI>Bapti&s;m.</HI> He &s;aith, <HI>That the&s;e De|crees re&s;pected the Adult;</HI> very true; there|fore not Infants. <HI>That the Council of</HI> Car|thage <HI>and</HI> Laodicea <HI>Decreed al&s;o for Exorci&s;m, and giving the Euchari&s;t to dying Per&s;ons, and Penance</HI> &amp;c. What then, if they were cor|rupt in other things, were they not right here? Mo&s;t of the <HI>Fathers</HI> were for the&s;e <HI>Corruptions</HI> al&s;o. And that as to the <HI>Neo|ce&s;arean Council</HI> he &s;aith, <HI>He had as much cau&s;e to que&s;tion, whether there was any &s;uch Council, as I had to que&s;tion</HI> Cyprians Coun|cil. But herein he will find him&s;elf much mi&s;taken, whil&s;t the <HI>Magdeburghs,</HI> Cent. 4 c. 9. p, 615. give the <HI>Bi&s;hops Names</HI> who &s;at in this <HI>Council,</HI> the <HI>time</HI> when it &s;at, <HI>viz.</HI> Immediately after that of <HI>Anoyranus,</HI> which <HI>Helvicus</HI> makes to be about the 10 or 12 of <HI>Con&s;tantine.</HI> Together with the 14 Canons of which this is one expre&s;t at large, and which Dr. <HI>Taylor</HI> gives us in <HI>the Original Greek, Determining as he &s;aith, that none ought to be Baptized without giving an account of their Faith, and de&s;iring the &s;ame,</HI> Whil&s;t Mr. <HI>VVills</HI> can neither produce from any <HI>Ancient</HI> and <HI>Authentick Authority, when,</HI> or
<PB N="10" REF="11"> <HI>where</HI> Cyprians <HI>Council</HI> &s;at, or what they <HI>decreed</HI> or <HI>determined</HI> in that <HI>Council,</HI> but what is pretended from that <HI>Epi&s;tle,</HI> which for its corruption is &s;o much que&s;tioned, whereof more hereafter.</P>
<P>The 3d. In&s;tance, <HI>viz.</HI> from 10 of the mo&s;t eminent Men of the Age, who were not Baptized till aged,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>3.</HI> From <HI>10</HI> of the mo&s;t emi|nent men, not Bapti|zed till aged.</NOTE> though the Children of Chri&s;tian Parents, <HI>viz. Bazel, Gregory, Nazianzen, Ambro&s;e, Chry&s;o&s;tom, Jerom, Au&s;tin, Nectarius, Con&s;tantine, Valentinian,</HI> and <HI>Theodo&s;ius.</HI> Concerning whom, ex|cepting: Two of them, <HI>viz. Con&s;tantine</HI> and <HI>Au&s;tin.</HI> he tells me <HI>he will not contend with me, but for them he doubts whether their Parents were Chri&s;tian,</HI> yet denies not but that <HI>Dr.</HI> Taylor <HI>and Mr.</HI> Baxter <HI>may have been of my mind,</HI> whil&s;t &s;ome others wirh him&s;elf have denyed it, which will be of great force with any con&s;idering per&s;ons; for if they had judged it an Ordinance of Chri&s;t, &s;o many of the Chief of the Age would not &s;o have neglected it.</P>
<P>In the next place Mr. <HI>VVills</HI> quarrels with &s;ome of my modern <HI>Authors,</HI> who &s;peak the &s;ame thing, <HI>viz. That in the&s;e fi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;t times none were Baptized without prefe&s;sion of Faith,</HI> viz. <HI>Strabo Rhevanus Rupertus Boemus</HI> Dr. <HI>Hammond,</HI> Mr. <HI>Baxter,</HI> e&s;pecially que&s;ti|ons <HI>Rhenanus</HI> and <HI>Rupertus</HI> for Forgery; the
<PB N="11" REF="11"> fir&s;t I grant you is not proper to prove only &s;uch were Baptized, that tearm only being not in it as in all the re&s;t, but is no Forgery. As for <HI>Rupertus,</HI> 'tis no <HI>Forgery;</HI> the Treat. &s;aith, They admini&s;tred <HI>Bapti&s;m</HI> only to the <HI>Children of the Church</HI> at <HI>Ea&s;ter;</HI> the Reply &s;aith only the <HI>Cathechumens,</HI> which as I take it is one and the &s;ame, as it re&s;pects the <HI>Children of the Church,</HI> who it &s;eems <HI>were not Baptized till aged.</HI></P>
<P>But concerning Mr. <HI>B.</HI> and my abu&s;ing him, re&s;pecting his witne&s;s, that <HI>Adult Bapti&s;m was the only nece&s;&s;ary Bapti&s;m in the&s;e times,</HI> take his own words &s;o lately given us in his More Proofs, <HI>p.</HI> 279. viz. <HI>Yet again I will confe&s;s, That the words of</HI> Tertullian <HI>and</HI> Nazianzen <HI>&s;hew,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Mr. B's</HI> full grant again&s;t the Antiquity of Infants Bapti&s;m.</NOTE> <HI>that it was long before all were agreed of the very time, or of the nece&s;&s;ity of Baptizing Infants before any u&s;e of rea&s;on, in ca&s;e they were like to live to Ma|turity, for I am per&s;waded, that the Apo&s;tles and fir&s;t Mini&s;ters were &s;o taken up with the Converting of Infidels, Jews and Gentiles, that the ca&s;e of Infant Bapti&s;m was &s;o po&s;t-poned, and taken up as an Appendix to the Bapti&s;m of the Adult, as that it was thought le&s;s needful to give it a particular ex|pre&s;s mention in the Records and Hi&s;tory of the Church.</HI></P>
<P>Thus Mr. <HI>Baxters</HI> own Pen has given him&s;elf <HI>the lye,</HI> and ju&s;t rebuke for all his vain <HI>jangle</HI> about the point of <HI>Antiquity</HI> for <HI>Infants Bapti&s;m,</HI> which now he is thus forc'd to confe&s;s the<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e is no expre&s;s mention in the <HI>Records and Hi&s;tory of the Church for,</HI> and &s;o al&s;o at once &s;poil'd all Mr. <HI>Wills daubery,</HI> and <HI>&s;illy Wranglings</HI> about this Point.</P>
<PB N="12" REF="12">
<P>Therefore I hope it will not now be denyed us that the Anabapti&s;ts have the Antiquity on their &s;ide, not only for the fir&s;t 200, but for the fir&s;t 400 years, there being <HI>nothing in the Records of Church Hi&s;tory,</HI> as is manife&s;t, and confe&s;t to us al&s;o, to prove any <HI>Infant was Bapti|zed,</HI> as a <HI>Church Ordinance,</HI> or that they ought in point of <HI>nece&s;&s;ity</HI> &s;o to be; and therefore there is no cau&s;e to que&s;tion the truth of Dr. <HI>Taylors,</HI> and Dr. <HI>Barlows</HI> po&s;itive a&s;&s;ertions in concurrence herewith, and in confirmation hereof remark'd to us: And it is worthy of con&s;ideration, that Dr. <HI>Barlow,</HI> in his Apolo|getical <HI>Lr.</HI> printed by Mr. <HI>Wills,</HI> doth not gain|&s;ay the Rea&s;on and Truth of what he formerly affirmed, but the indi&s;cretion of writing, and unfaithfulne&s;s of printing the &s;ame.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="5" TYPE="century">
<HEAD><HI>CENT.</HI> V.</HEAD>
<P>THe Fifth <HI>Century,</HI> as we have at large proved <HI>Treat. p.</HI> 105, &amp;c. brings in the nece&s;&s;ity of <HI>Infants Bapti&s;m</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>5. Cent.</HI> Brings in and impo&s;|eth the ne|ce&s;&s;ity of Infants Bapti&s;m.</NOTE> to <HI>regenerate, take away</HI> &s;in, and to <HI>&s;ave the Soul</HI> of the Infant, and that with|out which there was no <HI>Salvation</HI> to be had for them, grounded upon <HI>John</HI> 3.5. as determined in the <HI>Milevitan,</HI> and afterwards in the <HI>Cartha|ginian Councils,</HI> by Pope <HI>Innocentius,</HI> afterwards confirmed by Pope <HI>Zozimus,</HI> and afterwards by Pope <HI>Boniface,</HI> &amp;c. Never determined &s;aith Dr. <HI>Taylor,</HI> till the Canon made in the <HI>Milevitan Council,</HI> &s;o &s;aith <HI>Strabo, Luther, Grotius,</HI> Treat. p. 107. which afterwards by degrees came <HI>ge|nerally</HI> to be received both <HI>Ea&s;t</HI> and <HI>We&s;t.</HI> Yet
<PB N="13" REF="12"> withall this is mo&s;t remarkable in the enjoyning thereof, that the <HI>appointing of Go&s;&s;ips to confe&s;s Faith, and profe&s;s repentance in the name and &s;tead of the Child before Bapti&s;m,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Go&s;&s;ips confirm the nece&s;&s;ity of profe&s;&s;ion before Bap|ti&s;m.</NOTE> and the practi&s;e there|of ever &s;ince to this our day, was a great Con|firmation that the truth of the principle was owned, that Chri&s;t enjoyned in the Com|mi&s;&s;ion, requiring Faith &s;hould precede, and a Witne&s;s of the ancient practi&s;e of per&s;onal profe&s;&s;ion in the former Centuries. This In|vention being found out purpo&s;ely to an&s;wer the Commi&s;&s;ion: And therefore &s;aith <HI>Lud. Vives l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 27. <HI>That none were Baptized of old but tho&s;e of age, who did not only under&s;tand what the Water meant, but de&s;ired the &s;ame; the perfect Image whereof</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>we have yet in our In|fants Bapti&s;m; for it is ask'd of the Infant, wilt thou be Baptized? for whom the Sureties an&s;wer, I will.</HI> And &s;o &s;aith <HI>Strabo</HI> Treat. <HI>p.</HI> 63. and <HI>Boemus</HI> p. 73. And upon this account both <HI>Au|&s;tin, Chry&s;o&s;tom,</HI> and the Doctors and Learned Men produced by me downwards through the Papacy to our day, &s;poke &s;o much (from Chri&s;ts Commi&s;&s;ion, and primitive Saints practi&s;e) for the nece&s;&s;ity of Faith and Repentance before Bapti&s;m, only by their Sureties. And there|fore did I &s;o loudly call upon Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> to prove Go&s;&s;ips to be an appointment of Chri&s;t, or el&s;e to allow me all tho&s;e Paedobapti&s;ts for proper Witne&s;&s;es for Believers, and again&s;t In|fant Bapti&s;m, and to free me from the many Forgeries he loaded me with for the &s;ame. But in&s;tead of doing him&s;elf and me right therein, he only returns thus to me, <HI>p.</HI> 45. <HI>vind. Mr.</HI> Danvers <HI>brings Te&s;timony for Adult Bapti&s;m foom
<PB N="14" REF="13"> Paedobapti&s;ts, and It &s;eems a&s;trange de&s;ign to all that I have &s;poken with about the &s;ame, that he &s;hould offer to bring,</HI> Chry&s;o&s;tom, Au&s;tin, <HI>&amp;c. again&s;t Infant Bapti&s;m, &s;o making the Fathers to contradict them&s;elves, and for which I rebuke him.</HI></P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg">Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> declines an&s;wering the mate|rial point about Go&s;|&s;ips.</NOTE><HI>But he takes much pains to vindicate him&s;elf, in which undertaking I find him &s;o full of Meanders, and tedious Circumlocutions, that I judge it not worth the while to follow him.</HI></P>
<P>By which his declining to an&s;wer &s;o material a thing, we mu&s;t take it for granted he cannot, and therefore mu&s;t &s;till apply all <HI>tho&s;e Authorities</HI> from <HI>Paedobapti&s;ts,</HI> even from <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> to Mr. <HI>Baxter,</HI> in full Confirmation of the practi&s;e of the <HI>Anabapti&s;ts,</HI> in their Baptizing only after profe&s;&s;ion, and in point blank <HI>contradiction</HI> to their own practi&s;e of Baptizing Infants, who are &s;o uncapable either to an&s;wer the Com|mi&s;&s;ion, primitive Saints practi&s;e, or the Spiri|tual ends of that great Ordinance, and &s;o our whole Witne&s;s &s;tands good, as not an&s;wered or owned by them&s;elves. As to what he &s;aith re&s;pecting tho&s;e &s;everal fal&s;hoods returned up|on him; and the ab&s;urdities made out again&s;t him about Tradition, from <HI>p.</HI> 51. to 83. I only de&s;ire the Reader to examine the &s;hortne&s;s and in&s;ufficiency of his An&s;wers by the Reply, from <HI>p.</HI> 29 to 79. it being not worth while to trouble them with his &s;illy wranglings animated by par|tiality, as Mr. <HI>B.</HI> phra&s;es it. And it mu&s;t be remem|bred to him that as to tho&s;e Stories about <HI>John a Leyden,</HI> for which he reflected &s;o much obliquy upon the way of Anabapti&s;try; which was re|turned upon him, and his great error and igno|rance in Story evinced with his malicious &s;lan|ders
<PB N="15" REF="13"> and fal&s;e reports he therein publi&s;hed, not only again&s;t the <HI>Holland,</HI> but <HI>Engli&s;h</HI> Anabap|ti&s;ts di&s;covered to him: Concerning all which he makes no return, and who&s;e &s;ilence therein mu&s;t be taken for his guilt, and bound upon him at lea&s;t till he vindicate him&s;elf, or own his folly and inju&s;tice. As al&s;o in his &s;aying nothing to the Arguments for dipping, again&s;t &s;prinkling or pouring, (about which he has made &s;uch a flouri&s;h heretofore) is becau&s;e if he be not wholly convinced, yet that he is &s;ub|&s;tantially &s;ilenced, and can &s;ay nothing thereto.</P>
<P>And la&s;tly, as to what he has &s;aid again&s;t our Po&s;itive Witne&s;&s;es again&s;t Infants Bapti&s;m, we mu&s;t refer him to what is &s;aid to Mr. <HI>Baxter,</HI> after who&s;e Copy he writes, and he having &s;o fully granted us <HI>Tertullian,</HI> and Mr. <HI>Baxter</HI> hav|ing granted as before, that the <HI>Beringarians, Wickliffians,</HI> and <HI>Walden&s;es</HI> were again&s;t Bapti|zing Infants for Salvation, <HI>Manichees</HI> were ex|pre&s;ly again&s;t it, who were no other than <HI>Wal|den&s;es.</HI> The whole of the Book &s;tands yet firm and untouch'd, and mo&s;t of it confirmed and e&s;tabli&s;hed by their own Pens.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="16" REF="14">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. II.</HI> Some Objections about <HI>Origen</HI> and <HI>Cyprian,</HI> and others, an&s;wered.</HEAD>
<P><MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Obj."> MR. <HI>Wills</HI> tells me, <HI>p.</HI> 4. <HI>That I &s;ilently pa&s;s by what the</HI> Magdeburgs <HI>do expre&s;ly &s;ay was in u&s;e in the</HI> 3d. <HI>age.</HI> viz. <HI>That adult Per&s;ons of both Sexes, and al&s;o Infants were Baptized,</HI> Cent. 3. c. 6. p. 124.</P>
<P><MILESTONE UNIT="An&s;w."> That I have nor pa&s;t it by will ea&s;ily be un|der&s;tood, when it is con&s;idered what I have &s;aid to the Authorities they give for the &s;ame in the &s;aid place, <HI>Cent.</HI> 3. <HI>p.</HI> 124. viz. <HI>Origens Hom. on Leviticus, and Cyprians Epi&s;t. to Fidus,</HI> neither of which proving, as I &s;uppo&s;e, &s;ufficient Authority upon the tryal to make good the &s;ame. The Words of the <HI>Magdeburgs</HI> are the&s;e, <HI>Baptizabantur autem in utro&abque; &s;exu adulti &s;imul &amp; infantes, That adult Per&s;ons of both Sexes and In|fants were Baptized. Nam de Infantibus Bapti|zandis Origines Homil</HI> 8. <HI>in leviticum, Eccle&s;iam ait traditionem accepi&s;&s;e ab Apo&s;tolis: Et Cyprianus</HI> l. 3. Ep. 8. <HI>For concerning the Baptizing of Chil|dren,</HI> Origens 8 <HI>Homily on</HI> Leviticus <HI>&s;aith, That the Church received it as a Tradition from the Apo|po&s;tles, and</HI> Cyprians 8 <HI>Epi&s;tle in his</HI> 3d. <HI>Book to</HI> Fidus. <HI>Contra quod tamen etiam</HI> Tertullian <HI>cen&s;uit in lib. de Bapt. Notwith&s;tanding</HI> Tertullian <HI>thought otherwi&s;e in his Book of Bapti&s;m,</HI> (mind that.)</P>
<PB N="17" REF="14">
<P>The Arguments brought from <HI>Origen</HI> and <HI>Cyprian</HI> have been examined at large in my <HI>Treat. p.</HI> 124. to 151. and further in the <HI>Reply p.</HI> 84. to 97. where I prove that of <HI>Origens</HI> to be <HI>Spu|rious,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">1. Origens <HI>Te&s;timony examined.</HI></NOTE> and not only that upon <HI>Levit.</HI> and <HI>Rom.</HI> which Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> cannot now deny, [whereby the <HI>Magdeburgs</HI> proof is out of doors] but what he &s;aith al&s;o upon <HI>Luke,</HI> with my grounds urged for the &s;ame from <HI>Vo&s;&s;ius, Scultetus, Era&s;|mus,</HI> Dr. <HI>Owen.</HI> (1) Becau&s;e the Original is not extant. (2) Becau&s;e what is therein pre|tended from <HI>Origen, viz.</HI> That Children mu&s;t be Baptized to take away Orignal &s;in, (&s;o con|trary to his own judgment) he being the head of the <HI>Arrians.</HI> Therefore how fair this is for Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> to boa&s;t of this Antiquity, and yet decline An&s;wering to their Arguments, I leave all Men to judge. Who is plea&s;ed without any one word of An&s;wer to that which is &s;o po&s;i|tively &s;aid to enervate what is pretended for <HI>Luke,</HI> yet in a &s;curilous and pedantick way to &s;ay <HI>p.</HI> 93 <HI>Vind. We &s;ee by what is &s;aid, That we have Infants Bapti&s;m owned, as from the Apo&s;tles, by</HI> Origen <HI>on</HI> Luke, <HI>what ev<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="MURP" EXTENT="1 letter">r becomes on the</HI> Ro|mans, <HI>and tran&s;lated by</HI> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 word">, <HI>&amp;c. So that the Fabreck &s;tands yet uprig<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">, never like to be demo|li&s;h'd by Mr.</HI> Danvers, <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">hat ever great Exploits he hath done heretofore in the days of his Collo|nel&s;hip.</HI></P>
<P>Concerning which proof from <HI>Origen,</HI> you have Dr. <HI>Taylor</HI> in his liberty of Prophecy, <HI>p.</HI> 237. Thus,<NOTE PLACE="marg">D. <HI>Taylors</HI> full wit|ne&s;s again&s;t <HI>Origens</HI> Te&s;timony.</NOTE> <HI>viz. None of the reformed Churches can pretend this Argument for this opinion: Becau&s;e they who reject Tradition, when it is again&s;t them, mu&s;t not pretend it in the lea&s;t for them; but if
<PB N="18" REF="15"> the Topick be allowed to be good, yet how will it be verified? For &s;o far as can yet appear, it relies wholly upon the Te&s;timony of</HI> Origen, <HI>for from him</HI> Au&s;tin <HI>had it, a Per&s;on whom all other Ages have condemned of Errors, and who&s;e works have been judged &s;o &s;purious.</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>And that it was the opinion of the Primitive Church, That Infants ought not to be Baptized, is cleer, faith he, in the Canon of the Council of</HI> Ne|oce&s;aria, <HI>determining, that none ought to be Bap|tized without giving an account of their Faith, and de&s;iring the &s;ame.</HI> And agreeable hereto witne&s;&s;ing the rhe Doctor, &s;poke fully his own &s;ence herein, take that parallel pa&s;&s;age writ in one of his la&s;t pieces, in his <HI>Di&s;&s;wa&s;ive again&s;t Popery,</HI> writ 1667. <HI>viz. That there is a Traditi|on to Baptize Ynfants relies but upon Two Wit|ne&s;ses,</HI> Origen <HI>and</HI> Au&s;tin, <HI>and the latter having received it from the former, it relies wholly upon a &s;ingle Te&s;timony, which is but a pittiful Argument to prove a Tradition Apo&s;tolical, he is the fir&s;t that &s;poke it, but</HI> Tertullian <HI>that was before him &s;eems &s;peak again&s;t, which he would not have done, if it bad been a Tradition Apo&s;tolical, and that it was not &s;o, it is but too certain, if there be any Truth in the woriss of</HI> Lud. Vives, <HI>&s;aying, that anciently none were Baptized but Per&s;ons of riper Ages.</HI></P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>2. Cypri|ans</HI> Te&s;ti|mony fur|theo exa|mined.</NOTE>Then as to <HI>Cyprians Ep.</HI> to <HI>Fidus,</HI> (which is &s;o much lean'd upon, the other proving but a broken Reed) &s;uppo&s;ing there was &s;uch a Council; (which yet no Author can tell us when, and where held, and what therein de|termined) and that this Epi&s;tle was genuine, (again&s;t which I have much to &s;ay, <HI>Stephens, Daylle, Era&s;mus,</HI> and others proving how much
<PB N="19" REF="15"> his Works as well as <HI>Origens</HI> have been abu&s;ed, and things fathered upon him that were never his) yet the erronious grounds upon which Infants Bahti&s;m is a&s;&s;erted therein, takes away the <HI>Credit</HI> and <HI>Authority</HI> of the &s;aid Council, determining as one well &s;aith <HI>Childrens Bapti&s;m, by &s;uch Childi&s;h Rea&s;ons.</HI></P>
<P>But the matter of Fact &s;ay they is clear, which witne&s;&s;ed, that the Church had then &s;uch a <HI>practi&s;e,</HI> and which all our three Adver&s;aries much in&s;i&s;t upon,</P>
<P>As to matter of Fact in Antiquity, (if this &s;hould be granted, of which I &s;ee not much cau&s;e, for at be&s;t it was but advice, and that up|on erroneous grounds too, no Pre&s;ident as yet apparing in the Ca&s;e) it would &s;ignifie little to create a practi&s;e from it. For that Children were Baptized for <HI>health,</HI> and Church Walls were al&s;o &s;olemnly Baptized for dedication, and after that Bells <HI>&amp;c.</HI> cannot be denyed, &s;hall we therefore be warranted to do the like from tho&s;e Pre&s;idents? But in as much as here was no Example, or matter of Fact, nor any advice but upon corrupt and erroneous <HI>grounds,</HI> this can &s;ignifie nothing; the grounds of the ad|vice being rejected by the <HI>Paedobapti&s;ts,</HI> there|fore the advice it &s;elf as to matter of Fact is re|jected be them al&s;o; all that can be gathered from it, if true, is only that &s;uch a Cu&s;tom was creeping in. We know giving the <HI>Sacrament</HI> to Infants is &s;uppo&s;ed to be very <HI>ancient,</HI> and conti|nued very long in u&s;e 600 years, &s;aith <HI>Maldonat</HI> on <HI>Jo.</HI> 6. and that among&s;t the <HI>Greeks</HI> as well as <HI>Latins,</HI> a&s;&s;i&s;ted by <HI>Au&s;tin, Innocent,</HI> &amp; others, (if not by <HI>Cyprian</HI> al&s;o) &amp; that it was <HI>Apo&s;tolical,</HI> or foun|ded
<PB N="20" REF="16"> upon the Scriptures, but is not that rejected?</P>
<P><HI>But holy</HI> Cyprian, <HI>&s;aith Mr.</HI> Baxter, <HI>tells us, as</HI> p. 276. <HI>More Proofs,</HI> was <HI>an eminent worthy, a great Father and Pillar of the Church, and ought not to be &s;lighted.</HI> Yet by his leave Father <HI>Cy|prian</HI> was not Father <HI>Paul,</HI> nor any <HI>Apo&s;tle to us,</HI> nor doth he give us any warranty from the <HI>Word of God,</HI> and Chrl&s;ts Precept to ground &s;uch a practi&s;e upon, but the <HI>contrary,</HI> and that which <HI>Paedobapti&s;ts</HI> now a days reject, as very erroneous. And if he tells us, we &s;hould do any thing as Apo&s;tolical without a word, we mu&s;t give as little credit to him, as when he tells us, <HI>Chry&s;m</HI> is &s;o, (which the <HI>Magd.</HI> tell us he doth, <HI>Cent.</HI> 3. <HI>p.</HI> 82. out of <HI>Cyprian,</HI> l. 1. Ep. 12. though Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> denies the &s;ame) or as when he tells us of <HI>the nece&s;&s;ity of Exorci&s;ms, the Au|thority of</HI> Peters <HI>Chair, Alms to take away &s;in, that the Admini&s;trator gives the Spirit in the act of Bap|ti&s;m,</HI> of <HI>Rebaptization,</HI> by undoubted Councils confirmed, <HI>Perfu&s;ion of the Clinici, Diluting of Wine,</HI> or <HI>mingling Water with it</HI> in the Sacrament <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>I have been the larger upon the&s;e Two, <HI>Ori|gen</HI> and <HI>Cyprian,</HI> becau&s;e my Three Antagoni&s;ts, and others, do lay &s;o much &s;tre&s;s upon them, to prove their Antiquity from, but how little they &s;ignifie you now &s;ee.</P>
<P>Thus we have ended the point of Anti|quity; and which we &s;hall conclude with an Ap|peal to the Learned<NOTE PLACE="marg">An Appeal to the Learned.</NOTE> of all per&s;wa&s;ions, <HI>Whether there is not good cau&s;e to write Antiquity upon Believers, and Novelty upon Infants Bap|ti&s;m;</HI> Nothing more appearing for it for the Four fir&s;t <HI>Centuries,</HI> than has yet been brought forth by our oppo&s;ites, And &s;o much for the <HI>Antiquity of Believers Bapti&s;m.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="21" REF="16">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. III.</HI> Gives an&s;wer to Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> his Appeal in all the parts of it.</HEAD>
<P>THe better to help the <HI>Appellants (viz.</HI> the <HI>Bapti&s;ts</HI>) to give a righteous judgment in the matters brought to their Barr, by Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> in his Appeal: And for the &s;atisfaction of all men, I do hereby <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">oyn i&s;&s;ue with him in the candid examination thereof.</P>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="complaint">
<HEAD>Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> his Appeal to the Bapti&s;ts, as you find, con&s;i&s;ts of <HI>8</HI> Complaints, the which I di&s;tinctly an&s;wer as followeth.</HEAD>
<P N="1">1. His fir&s;t Complaint again&s;t me is,<NOTE PLACE="marg">1. <HI>Preva|rication.</HI></NOTE> <HI>For leaving out part of what my Authors &s;ay, to make the Sentence more for my purpo&s;e; and for which he gives &s;ix In&s;tances.</HI></P>
<P>In Reply whereto, I fir&s;t &s;ay in general,<NOTE PLACE="marg">An&s;wered. <HI>1.</HI> Gene|rally.</NOTE> That in the quoting of Authors we are obliged to give only what they &s;peak to the thing in hand, without unnece&s;&s;ary repetitions. And there|fore Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> in his own ca&s;e, when I blamed him <HI>p.</HI> 48. <HI>Reply,</HI> for leaving out part of that remarkable Sentence out of <HI>Nazianzen, viz.</HI> where he brings him to affirm, <HI>That a Child may be Baptized,</HI> leaving out the next words, <HI>&s;i aliquid periculi imminoat, if any thing of dan|ger happened.</HI> And in Excu&s;e thereof is plea&s;ed
<PB N="22" REF="17"> to make the following return <HI>Vind. p.</HI> 7. viz. <HI>That I do exclaim again&s;t him for Curtailing that Father. but</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>the Judicious Reader may under&s;tand, that he quarrels at me without cau&s;e; for my bu&s;ine&s;s was to prove, That Infant Bapti&s;m was owned in that Century as to matter of Fact, and not to di&s;cover the ground of it, or to enquire in what Ca&s;es it was done; and therefore he might have &s;pared his frivolous Charge about that matter.</HI></P>
<P>Which Rule of his own, however it may &s;erve to relieve him for leaving out that pa&s;&s;age, (which I doubt, and is not now my b<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;ine&s;s to di&s;pute) to be &s;ure it will ju&s;tine me in all the 6 Particulars charged upon me under this head. Yet this by the way, as to the rea&s;on of his omitting that pa&s;&s;age; <HI>becau&s;e,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>in the former words the matter of fact is to be made good, (viz.</HI> That Infant Bapti&s;m was own'd in this Century) <HI>is manife&s;t.</HI> But he knows the Que&s;tion is not, Whether an Infant might be Baptized; for at another time he can tell us, <HI>That e<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ery Bapti&s;m is not the Bapti&s;m intended, but only that which is done in Chri&s;ts way in obe|dience to his Rule.</HI> So that if a Child was Dipt, which it might be accidentally by chance, or occa&s;ionally upon &s;ome emergency, or Medi|cinally to cure Di&s;ea&s;es, (as &s;ome were in this Age) or &s;uper&s;titiou&s;ly to &s;ave its dying Soul, which was onely the fancy intended in this place, (and therefore &s;hould not have been omitted, for &s;poiling the &s;cope) it would &s;ig|nifie nothing, being no Bapti&s;m of Chri&s;ts ap|pointment, the matter of fact being only to be made out, when the nece&s;&s;ity of &s;uch a practi&s;e
<PB N="23" REF="17"> in obedience to Chri&s;ts Command in perform|ing a Go&s;pel Ordinance is proved. And which Mr. <HI>Baxter</HI> grants us, was not as yet to be pro|ved by any Church Record; and never till the <HI>Milevitan Council,</HI> &s;aith Dr. <HI>Taylor.</HI></P>
<P>In the next place, for your better &s;atisfaction,<NOTE PLACE="marg">2ly <HI>Parti|cularly.</HI></NOTE> I &s;hall &s;peak to each Particular: And,</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, as to the quotation out of <HI>Daille</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">1. <HI>About</HI> Dailles.</NOTE> <HI>l.</HI> 2. <HI>p</HI> 149. mentioned <HI>Treat. p.</HI> 62. My bu&s;ine&s;s was therein to di&s;cover, That the Ancients de|ferred Infants Bapti&s;m, therefore I gave the &s;everal In&s;tances from him of tho&s;e who had their Bapti&s;m de<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">erred till aged, <HI>viz. Ambro&s;e, Nazianzen, Bazil,</HI> &amp;c. who appear undeniably to have been the Children of Chri&s;tian Parents, and <HI>that it was,</HI> as he &s;aith, <HI>the opinion of &s;ome of the Fathers, That it is fit Infants Bapti&s;m &s;hould be deferred: And how comes it to pa&s;s, that there is not the lea&s;t tracing or footing of this Cu&s;tom in the Church of</HI> Rome. <HI>Nay, whence is it be&s;ides, that they will not &s;o much as endure the very men|tion of it, and would abhor the Man that &s;hould go about to practi&s;e it,</HI> (the Truth whereof we find al&s;o, and feel) <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>But &s;aith Mr. <HI>Wills, Daille</HI> mentions the de|ferring the Bapti&s;m of other people al&s;o, and why did I leave that out? For the Rea&s;on Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> gives, becau&s;e it was not &s;o much <HI>ad rem.</HI> Though if I had, it would have done him no &s;ervice, it <HI>Daille</HI> under&s;tood him&s;elf, who re|fers us to what he had before &s;poken about it, which we find in <HI>p.</HI> 72. where he tells us, <HI>That &s;ome were of opinion, That elder People &s;hould be deferred Bapti&s;m, as well as Infants, agreeing therein, &s;aith he, with the Anabapti&s;ts,</HI> (which in|deed
<PB N="24" REF="18"> is our Cu&s;tom, waiting for fruits meet for Repentance in the fir&s;t place, &s;o deferring elder as well as younger.</P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>2.</HI> The Ca|non of the Council of <HI>Con&s;tant.</HI></NOTE>And as to the Second, about the Canon of the Council of <HI>Con&s;tant.</HI> I find upon &s;earch, that though the 2d Chapter, referred to by the <HI>Magd.</HI> and Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> mentions no more then what follows, <HI>viz. Si parvulus aegrotans ad quemlibet Presbyterum Bapti&s;mi gratia de cu|ju&s;libet parochia allatus fuerit, ei Bapti&s;mi Sacra|mentum nullo modo denegetur; &s;iquis hoc munus petenti concedere detrectaverit, &amp; ille parvulus ab&s;&abque; Bapti&s;mi gratia mortuus fuerit noverit ille qui eum non Baptizavit pro ejus anima rationem redditurum.</HI> Yet the 7th. Chapter which nei|ther point to, expre&s;&s;es what Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> re|peats from the <HI>Magd.</HI> about it; and withall, it does now appear al&s;o, that that 7th. Chapter is one of the 9 <HI>Binius</HI> reckons to be &s;purious, in the&s;e words, <HI>Hi novem &s;equentes Canones fal&s;o ad&s;cribuntur &s;extae Synedo; &s;ed quia pij cum pri|mis e&s;&s;e videntur noluimus curio&s;um Lectorem eorum cognitione fraudare.</HI> Bin. Tom. 5. p. 361. And therefore upon the whole, though i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> be &s;uffi|cient to clear me, that the omitting the excep|tion in that place was not with an intention to deceive, having in my Book twice mentioned it; yet I acknowledge, it &s;hould have been expre&s;t, or rather the whole quotation omitted, and do now di&s;own it.</P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg">3. <HI>That out of</HI> Calvins In&s;titutes.</NOTE><HI>Thirdly,</HI> As to that pa&s;&s;age out of <HI>Calvins In&s;titutes,</HI> wherein I bring him <HI>p.</HI> 91. <HI>Treat.</HI> to confe&s;s, <HI>That it is no where expre&s;ly mentioned by the Evangeli&s;ts, that any one Child was by the Apo&s;tles hands Baptized;</HI> which he in<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">imates,
<PB N="25" REF="18"> was not <HI>Calvins</HI> &s;ence, but expre&s;t by him to have been the objection of Fools, the which Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> might blu&s;h to mention, when he knows <HI>Calvin</HI> him&s;elf to own it as the next words ex|pre&s;s, <HI>viz. Et &s;i enim id nominatim ab Evange|li&s;tis non narratur,</HI> i. e. <HI>For although it is not by the Evangeli&s;ts expre&s;ly mentioned:</HI> And is not that the making it his own? Concluding that their &s;olly only lay in not receiving it, equivalent with Scripture, in as much as Infants were not excluded by Scripture,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Guilty of what he accu&s;eth.</NOTE> and that whole Families are mentioned to be baptized: And therefore whether Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> did fairly in &s;topping his Tran&s;lation where he did (that it might appear to tho&s;e that under&s;tood not Latin to be &s;o gro&s;s as he would make it, and thereby render him&s;elf to be guilty of the very thing be fal&s;ly accu&s;eth me of, <HI>viz.</HI> To leave out part of the Author, that di&s;covers he &s;peaks quite other|wi&s;e than he is made to &s;peak, <HI>Rom.</HI> 2.1.) is &s;ub|mitted to his Con&s;cience, and the con&s;iderate Reader.</P>
<P><HI>Fourthly,</HI> As to what he complains to have been left out in <HI>Bellarmin,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">4ly. Bellar|mine, <HI>and</HI> 6. <HI>Dr.</HI> Field.</NOTE> viz. <HI>That Infants Bapti&s;m was to be deduced out of Scripture,</HI> p. 95. And that out of Dr. <HI>Field, That the grounds of it were taken out of Scripture,</HI> p. 155, 1. Ed. were al&s;o omitted from his own grounds afore&s;aid: Becau&s;e I there quoted both of them under the Head of Tradition, (they both with &s;o much po&s;itivene&s;s a&s;&s;erting Infants Bapti&s;m &s;o to be) yet you'l find, that when I &s;peak to that Head of <HI>Con&s;equences</HI> from Scripture, I quote them bo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">h, as Reply, <HI>p.</HI> 74.<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>La&s;tly,</HI> Dr. Owens.</NOTE></P>
<P>And <HI>la&s;tly,</HI> As to that of Dr. <HI>Owen,</HI> p. 175.
<PB N="26" REF="19"> which with <HI>E&s;tius, Ain&s;worth</HI> and <HI>Ames,</HI> I brought to prove the Seed of <HI>Abraham,</HI> Gen. 17.7. re&s;pected the Spiritual Seed only, <HI>viz.</HI> the Elect, who were to partake of the Spiritual Promi&s;es, (and not the Carnal Seed, as Paedo-bapti&s;ts generally take it,) which the D<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. doth &s;o fully and at large evince: And therefore that Clau&s;e he excepts again&s;t, was by his own Rule well enough left out, that &s;peaks to another thing. Though I confe&s;s, had I &s;uppos'd that the omitting it, would have been any injury to the Dr. or ju&s;t offence to any man, or any wrong to truth I &s;hould have mentioned it, and which I may well do without any preju|dice to the cau&s;e I maintain. For if I had been to prove that Circumci&s;ion, tha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> External Ad|mini&s;tration of the Covenant which the <HI>Jews</HI> had, belonged to their Carnal Seed, I &s;hould have mentioned that; but in as much as the other was the matter in hand, I know not that it was &s;o hainous to omit it, Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> in his own Ca&s;e being Judge. It is our belief that (as the Dr. &s;ays) <HI>the external Admini&s;tration of the Covenant, viz.</HI> Ci<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="MURP" EXTENT="1 letter">cumci&s;ion <HI>did be|long to</HI> Abraham, <HI>and his Carnal Seed</HI> (the Jews) under the legal Admini&s;tration; yet it follows not therefore, that Bapti&s;m belongs to his Carnal Seed under the Go&s;pel Di&s;pen&s;ation. And therefore the omitting that Phra&s;e, which is not at all di&s;puted betwixt us, could not be from any injurious de&s;ign. And therefore I con|ceive I de&s;erve not the &s;evere rebuke, he is plea&s;ed to give me for the &s;ame, <HI>viz. That I am therein guilty of much di&s;hone&s;ty,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">&lindx;</NOTE> <HI>and that it is &s;uch an unworthy carriage, that be never ob|&s;erved
<PB N="27" REF="19"> the like in any man.</HI> Though truly if I &s;hould have put it in, I know not what advan|tage Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> could make of it at another time, except he concludes, that the &s;ame <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="MURP" EXTENT="1 letter">ederal right to the Carnal Seed, is continued under the Go&s;pel, as it was under the Law, and gives the &s;ame right to claim the &s;ame priviledges now, as that did to the <HI>Jews</HI> before: If &s;o, &s;urely <HI>John Bapti&s;t</HI> did greatly mi&s;take him&s;elf, when he forbad them <HI>Bapti&s;m</HI> upon that con&s;i|deration, &amp; bids them not to &s;ay within them|&s;elves, that they were the Children of <HI>Abra|ham,</HI> for that mu&s;t not now &s;erve their turns, it being only Fruits meet for Repentance, that that mu&s;t qualifie them for the Bapti&s;m of Re|pentance, (and Go&s;pel-Ordinances and Privi|le<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ges) and not their old Carnal Priviledge to be <HI>Abrahams</HI> fle&s;h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="MURP" EXTENT="1 letter">y Seed, in which they mainly boa&s;ted, &amp; whereon <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">hey bol&s;te<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ed them&s;elves. And &s;utable he<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">eto doth Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> him&s;elf very excellently tell us in his 6. <HI>Exercit,</HI> on the <HI>Heb. p.</HI> 56 <HI>Tom.</HI> 1. viz.</P>
<P><HI>That the mi&s;apprehen&s;ion hereof was the main thing that confirmed the</HI> Jews <HI>in their ob&s;tinacy and unbelief, that being only a peculiar Priviledge to that fle&s;hly Seed, for the bringing forth of the Me&s;&s;iah into the World, and that when he was come, that Priviledge fell, and all Ordinances &s;ui|ted thereto, expired, and new Ordinances of Wor|&s;hip more &s;uitable to the Go&s;pel were appointed,</HI> &amp;c. That whole <HI>Exercitation</HI> being written with &s;o much <HI>Judgement</HI> and Spirituality, I would ear|ne&s;tly recommend it to Mr. <HI>Wills,</HI> and Mr. <HI>Whi&s;tons</HI> Con&s;iderations, and all other of their <HI>minds,</HI> who would, upon like mi&s;apprehe&s;ions,
<PB N="28" REF="20"> have Go&s;pel-Ordinances and Priviledges &s;till entailed upon the fle&s;hly Seed, upon that old federal right which was only Typical, as well ob&s;erved to us, and done away, (having done its bu&s;ine&s;s) when Chri&s;t came into the world, that greater Priviledges, and better Ordinances &s;uited to the Go&s;pel di&s;pen&s;ation might take place. Je&s;us Chri&s;t as the Dr. &s;o well tells us in his <HI>Cat. p.</HI> 106. <HI>Requiring Regeneration as an indi&s;pen&s;ible condition in a Member of his Church, a Subject of his Kingdom: For his Temple is now to be built of Living Stones,</HI> 1 Pet. 2.5. <HI>viz. Men &s;piritually, and &s;avingly quickned, from their Death in &s;in by the Holy Gho&s;t, (whereof they are partakers) made a meet Habitation for God,</HI> Eph. 2.21, 22. 1 Cor. 3.16. 2 Cor. 6.16. &amp; pag. 103. <HI>God hath appointed Saints to be the &s;eat and &s;ubject of all his Ordinances, having granted the right of them to them alone,</HI> 1 Tim. 3.15. But this by the By, which may not be un&s;ea&s;onable upon this occa&s;ion. Thus I have di&s;patch'd the fir&s;t Head, not doubting but I have given am|ple &s;atisfaction therein.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="complaint">
<HEAD><HI>II. His Second Complaint again&s;t me is,</HI> for adding to Authors<NOTE PLACE="marg">Adding to Authors.</NOTE> without the Di&s;tinction of a different Character, whereof he gives &s;even In&s;tances.</HEAD>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg">An&s;wered. <HI>1.</HI> Gene|rally.</NOTE>This is a Charge that I think may concern mo&s;t Writers, and 'tis confe&s;s'd, that many times it falls out, that through the inadver|tency of <HI>Writers,</HI> or carele&s;&s;ne&s;s of <HI>Printers,</HI> that <HI>Quotations</HI> out of Authors are not alwayes written in a different <HI>Character,</HI> whereby the
<PB N="29" REF="20"> Reader is at a lo&s;s many times, whether he reads his <HI>Author,</HI> or another Man that he refers to: And which is the fault, as Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> knows, of the <HI>Magdeburgs,</HI> of the <HI>Bazil</HI> Impre&s;&s;ion, and the fault of Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> his pre&s;ent Book, which I could abundantly evi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ence, if I would be Critical, and troub<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e the Reader with &s;uch Im|pertinencies. And wherein any &s;uch omi&s;&s;ion has been in any of my Writings, I can truly &s;ay they have not been wilful, but my trouble to find, and of which I &s;hall be more careful for the future, and &s;o will I hope my Corrector. But to be more particular to your 7 In&s;tances, <HI>viz.</HI></P>
<P>Tho&s;e Two added to the <HI>Magdeburgs</HI> are truly their own,<NOTE PLACE="marg">2. <HI>Parti|cularly.</HI></NOTE> though not &s;o immediately following in that Page. That other of <HI>Chry|&s;o&s;tom</HI> was purely my own and &s;hould have been di&s;tingui&s;hed. That which he calls my adding to <HI>Jerom,</HI> po&s;itively &s;aying they are none of his words, though I tell you, that he &s;aith it is, is Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> his grofs mi&s;take; for he will find they are his own words in his <HI>Annot.</HI> upon <HI>Mat.</HI> 28. <HI>Tom.</HI> 9. <HI>Edit. Paris, Anno</HI> 1546. viz. <HI>Non enim pote&s;t fieri ut corpus Bapti&s;mi recipiat Sacramentum, ni&s;i ante anima fidei &s;u&s;ceperit ve|ritatem,</HI> i. e. <HI>For it cannot be, that the Body &s;hould receive that Sacrament of Bapti&s;m, till the Soul hath before received the verity of Faith.</HI> That to <HI>Lydia</HI> is not an adding to the <HI>Scripture,</HI> but my own &s;en&s;e of the words, concluding, that only Believers in her Hou&s;hold were Baptized, of which I &s;peak at large in my <HI>Reply,</HI> p. 184. That to <HI>Beza's</HI> is ea&s;ily under&s;tood not to be his, by any ordinary Reader. And that to
<PB N="30" REF="21"> <HI>Ames</HI> very plainly. But what Injury done herein, and what the ob&s;tinacy calling for an Appeal, is left to all to judge.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="complaint">
<HEAD><NOTE PLACE="marg">Forgery.</NOTE><HI>III. The Third Complaint is,</HI> For making Au|thors affirm one thing, when they affirm the di|rectly contrary, yea, contradicting my &s;elf.</HEAD>
<P N="1"><NOTE PLACE="marg">An&s;wered. <HI>1.</HI> About <HI>E&s;tius.</HI></NOTE>1. The fir&s;t he mentions, is that of <HI>E&s;tius</HI> for <HI>Calvin,</HI> heretofore owned by me, which &s;a|vours nothing of Ingenuity, though in looking into my Book, I find I am not altogether &s;o tardy as I took my &s;elf to be; for whoever plea&s;es to look <HI>p.</HI> 176. in the end of that Quo|tation, will find, that I put <HI>E&s;tius Ann. Gen.</HI> 17.7. and by what mi&s;take <HI>Calvin</HI> came to be mentioned in the beginning of it, I know not, therefore how fair Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> was in that Cavil, and &s;ince, by his unmerciful inculcating the &s;ame, is left to the Reader.</P>
<P N="2"><NOTE PLACE="marg">2. <HI>Dr.</HI> Ha|mond <HI>on</HI> Joh. 13.10.</NOTE>2. The &s;econd is, for mi&s;taking, (as he &s;aith) a Quotation out of Dr. <HI>Hamond,</HI> quite contrary to what he affirms, with his remark upon it, <HI>viz. No wonder Mr. D mi&s;takes Latin Authors &s;o often, when he cannot rightly under|&s;tand tho&s;e that are in Engli&s;h.</HI> But what cau&s;e there is for the &s;ame, and that it ought rather to be turned upon him&s;elf, will appear by the following Paralel.</P>
<PB N="31" REF="21">
<P><TABLE>
<ROW>
<CELL><HI>Dan. Treat.</HI> p. <HI>194.</HI></CELL>
<CELL>Dr. <HI>Hamonds</HI> An. <HI>on</HI> Joh. <HI>13.10. printed for</HI> R. Roy&s;ton, <HI>1653</HI></CELL>
<CELL><HI>Mr.</HI> Wills <HI>&s;aith, that Dr.</HI> Ha|mond <HI>&s;aith,</HI></CELL>
</ROW>
<ROW>
<CELL>Dr. <HI>Hamond</HI> upon <HI>Joh. 13.10</HI> tells us, that <GAP DESC="foreign"> &s;igni|fies an Immer&s;i|on, or wa&s;hing the whole body, and which an|&s;wereth to the Hebrew word <GAP DESC="foreign"> u&s;ed for dipping in the Old Te&s;tament.</CELL>
<CELL>The <HI>Heb.</HI> had their <GAP DESC="foreign"> or <GAP DESC="foreign">, and their <GAP DESC="foreign"> the former, (<HI>viz.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">) wa&s;hing of the whole body, which they call <GAP DESC="foreign">, the other of the hands or feet, which they call <GAP DESC="foreign">, &s;an|ctifying.</CELL>
<CELL>The <HI>Heb.</HI> had their <GAP DESC="foreign">, and their <GAP DESC="foreign">, or <GAP DESC="foreign">, the for|mer (that is <GAP DESC="foreign">) the wa&s;h|ing of the whole body, which they call <GAP DESC="foreign">, the other two (that is <GAP DESC="foreign"> and <GAP DESC="foreign">) of the hands or feet.</CELL>
</ROW>
</TABLE></P>
<P>And then has the confidence to &s;ay, Mr. <HI>D. tells us, the Dr. &s;aith</HI> Bapti&s;mos <HI>&s;ignifies an Im|mer&s;ion, or wa&s;hing of the whole Body, and an&s;wers to the Hebrew word</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>whereas indeed he tells us, That</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>&s;ignifies the wa&s;hing of the whole Body, and an&s;wers to</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">.</P>
<P>Now that this was exactly agreeable to the Drs. Writings el&s;ewhere in the &s;aid Book, as well as the truth, the Reader is de&s;ired to peru&s;e him upon <HI>Mark</HI> 7.4. p. 172. where he &s;aith, <HI>That the word</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>(as it differs from</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>v.</HI> 3. <HI>which belongs to the hands or feet) &s;ignifies the wa&s;hing of the whole body. Thus 'tis &s;aid of Eupolis (which wrote the Tragedy called</HI> Baptae <HI>again&s;t</HI> Alcibiades) <HI>that being taken and thrown into the Sea</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>and &s;o the Bapti&s;ms of
<PB N="32" REF="22"> Cups,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>in the end of this Ver&s;e is putting into water all over, rincing them: Two words there are u&s;ed by the Hebrews for wa&s;hing.</HI> 1. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>the word u&s;ed for wa&s;hing hands and feet onely, the</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>here; And</HI> 2. <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>immer&s;ion of the whole body, to which</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>an&s;wers.</HI> And upon <HI>Mat.</HI> 3.1. p. 14. <HI>As the Jews call tho&s;e Lakes wherein they wa&s;h them&s;elves</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>&s;o in the Chri&s;tian Church the</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>or Ve&s;&s;el which contained the Bapti&s;mal Water is oft called</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>a &s;wimming or diving place.</HI>&mdash; And fur|ther, <HI>John in token of the re&s;olved change of the Jews, put them into the Water, and dipt them all over, and &s;o took them out again; And upon the &s;incerity of their change, promi&s;ed them re|mi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins.</HI> And now whether it be Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> or I that have abu&s;ed Mr. <HI>Hamond,</HI> is &s;ub|mitted to the unprejudiced Reader.</P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>3.</HI> About the Popes Name De|us <HI>dedit.</HI></NOTE>As to the Third I grant, <HI>Deus dedit</HI> appear|ing to me two words, and not the Name of a Man; I rendred it <HI>Deo dans,</HI> or Gods gift, not con&s;idering, as Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> ob&s;erves, that there had been a Pope of that Name, which &s;ince I find in the Catalogue of Popes, and therefore acknowledg it to be my error.</P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>4.</HI> Quotati|on out of <HI>VValden.</HI></NOTE>Fourthly, as to the Quotation out of <HI>Walden,</HI> I acknowledge Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> hath truly rectified to our advantage, which confirms more fully, that <HI>Wickliffe,</HI> and his followers, were again&s;t In|fants Bapti&s;m, in agreement with the <HI>Albegois,</HI> and <HI>Sylve&s;ter</HI> in <HI>Scotland,</HI> though different from <HI>Pelagius</HI> and <HI>Vicentius Victor,</HI> which was my mi&s;take, who (as it is &s;aid) held Infants Bapti&s;m, and thereby reproved him&s;elf for a&s;|&s;erting the quite contrary, <HI>viz. That</HI> Walden
<PB N="33" REF="22"> <HI>affirms, That</HI> Wickliffe <HI>held Infants Bapti&s;m,</HI> p. 45. of his <HI>Vind.</HI></P>
<P>The words of <HI>Walden</HI> relating to <HI>Wickliffe</HI> are, <HI>No&s;tri Wiclivi&s;tae Bapti&s;mum Eccle&s;ia&s;ticum inutile judicant parvulis,</HI> which <HI>[parvulis]</HI> Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> very unworthily leaves out, to in&s;inuate to his Reader, that they rejected all Bapti&s;m, whereas that term expre&s;ly limits it to little ones; nor can I &s;eriou&s;ly conjecture, but its rather <HI>a lap&s;us mentis</HI> then <HI>error Calami</HI> or <HI>Ty|pographi:</HI> Nor does he take notice of the rea|&s;on a&s;&s;igned there for their denying Infants Bapti&s;m, which is the very &s;ame Mr. <HI>Wills,</HI> and tho&s;e of his mind, produce for its practice, <HI>viz. &s;ufficienter eos aiunt e&s;se mundatos &amp; &s;anctos, quia de &s;anctis parentibus &amp; Chri&s;tianis na&s;cuntur,</HI> i. e. <HI>They deem them &s;ufficiently cleans'd and holy, becau&s;e they are born of Holy and Chri&s;tian Parents.</HI> And now whether Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> his Curtailing this Quotation, or my harmle&s;s and unnde&s;igned mi&s;take of a&s;&s;erting <HI>Wickliffe</HI> to agree with <HI>Pelagius</HI> be the more blameable, I humbly &s;ubmit to con&s;ideration.</P>
<P>The Fifth is no contradiction,<NOTE PLACE="marg">5. <HI>That of</HI> 1. Cor. 7.14</NOTE> which is only an Allu&s;ion to tho&s;e in <HI>Ezra's</HI> time that put a|way their &s;trange Wives, Similies not running of all four, as Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> would &s;tretch it.</P>
<P>The Sixth is no Contradiction,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>6.</HI> Quotati|on out of <HI>Frank.</HI></NOTE> for Infants Bapti&s;m might be univer&s;ally received, and yet in many places little e&s;teemed, has it not been &s;o heretofore here in <HI>England,</HI> as to that as well as other things I could mention? 1. Becau&s;e per&s;ons may little e&s;teem things they receive. 2. By univer&s;al, I explain my &s;elf to mean the Greek and Latin Churches, (which admitted
<PB N="34" REF="23"> of exception) <HI>viz.</HI> Tho&s;e that &s;ubmitted to the Pope, and tho&s;e that were under the Pa|triarchs.</P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>7.</HI> An A&s;|&s;ertion of my own.</NOTE>The Seventh is no Contradiction, which in the former Chapter I have &s;o fully cleared; there being Antiquity for Believers Bapti&s;m in the fir&s;t Centuries, but no Record for Infant Bap|ti&s;m, as Mr. <HI>Baxter</HI> grants, in the Church Hi|&s;tories. So that no primitive Antiquity for the &s;ame, though the Ancients in after Ages did a&s;&s;ert it.</P>
<P>So that what ezceptions he has made hi|therto, are but &s;lender, and not of that Mo|ment, nor &s;o per&s;i&s;ted in, as to de&s;erve an Appeal.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="complaint">
<HEAD><NOTE PLACE="marg">Fal&s;e Tran|&s;lation.</NOTE><HI>IV. He chargeth me with</HI> perverting the &s;ence of Authors by the fal&s;ene&s;s of Tran&s;lations, whereof he gives Nine In&s;tances.</HEAD>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><P>An&s;wered.</P>
<P N="1"><HI>1.</HI> Gene|rally.</P></NOTE>As to Tran&s;lations, I conceive there is a great liberty allowed, provided the &s;cope and inten|tion of the Author be well heeded; and there|fore &s;aith Mr. <HI>Mar&s;hal</HI> in his <HI>Defence,</HI> p. 16. <HI>Tran&s;lations are various, &s;ome affect in their Tran|&s;lations to follow their Author</HI> Kata poda, <HI>to have the very foot-&s;teps of the words they tran&s;late; other Tran&s;lations are Metaphra&s;tical, or by way of Pa|raphra&s;e they expound as they tran&s;late; thus &s;e|veral men have their &s;everal fancies though they adhere to to the Author which they tran&s;late, even when they keep not in all things to his words;</HI> Jerom <HI>gives In&s;tances in the Septuagint tran&s;lati|ons, who&s;e Te&s;timony I need not name to you.</HI> But to the particulars.</P>
<PB N="35" REF="23">
<P>As to the <HI>fir&s;t</HI> of <HI>Bullingers,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><P N="2">2. <HI>Particu|larly.</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. Bullin|gers.</P></NOTE> I did not tran&s;late it, but tran&s;cribed it word for word out of that Author, called, <HI>A very plain and well grounded Treati&s;e concerning Bapti&s;m.</HI> p. 14. mentioned by me p. 9. It is true, I confe&s;s, I &s;hould have expre&s;t it, or rather have &s;earch'd the original my &s;elf, and &s;o &s;hould Mr. <HI>Wills,</HI> when he &s;o mi&s;takenly quoted one from Dr. <HI>Holmes,</HI> and did neither, and another from the <HI>Magdeburgs</HI> about <HI>Era&s;mus.</HI></P>
<P>As to the Second, about <HI>Nazianzen,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">2. Nazian|zen.</NOTE> <HI>Bapti|zandos peccatae &s;ua confiteri &s;olitos,</HI> I own it &s;hould be rendred, <HI>The Baptized were wont to confe&s;s their &s;ins.</HI> Nor did I give it as a tran&s;lation, <HI>verbatim;</HI> but what I apprehended to be the con&s;equential &s;ence, which I deduce thus: [the <HI>Baptized</HI>] being an indefinite term, and equi|polent with an univer&s;al, is as much, as if all the Baptized did &s;o; and if all did confe&s;s their &s;ins, then none but &s;uch we<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e Baptized in the fir&s;t times, which is concurrent with the &s;ence of &s;o many Authors, &s;o po&s;itively affirming the &s;ame thing; and if that be not the mean|ing, I humbly conceive the expre&s;&s;ion (other|wi&s;e under&s;tood) may be &s;omewhat imperti|nent, it being owned of all hands, that the Adult in all Ages &s;o to do.</P>
<P>The Third is of <HI>Olympiodorus,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">3. <HI>Olympi|odorus.</HI></NOTE> a meer quibble, and catching at words; the word [Born] by the words going before, <HI>viz.</HI> Spiritual Li<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e, being ea&s;ily under&s;tood to be [born again] however the word [again] came to be omitted.</P>
<P>The Fourth of <HI>Albertus,</HI> is of like Import;<NOTE PLACE="marg">4. <HI>Albertus</HI></NOTE> for if Bapti&s;m cannot through the incapacity of the &s;ubject operate upon them, it may be truly
<PB N="36" REF="24"> &s;aid in a Paraphra&s;tical Tran&s;lation, That it is not proper to admit Infants thereto: For if it cannot operate in any other but the Adult, who are illuminated and called, who can draw Vir|tue from Chri&s;ts Death and Re&s;urrection, then Bapti&s;m not proper for other.</P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg">5. <HI>Albinus.</HI></NOTE>Neither is the Fifth from <HI>Albinus</HI> ill rendred or perverting the &s;ence if you take the &s;cope, and former words, which &s;peak the thing he ex|cepts again&s;t; and which Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> leaves out, a liberty being granted to paraphra&s;e, keeping to the &s;ence, though contracting the words.</P>
<P>The Sixth is no perverting or mi&s;-repre&s;en|ting the <HI>Magdeb.</HI> in &s;aying, They tell us, That in the latter end of the Fourth <HI>Cent.</HI> they Bap|tize Children, giving it from the te&s;timony of <HI>Athana&s;ius,</HI> who writ in the latter part of the 4th. <HI>Cent.</HI> That <HI>Contra Arianos</HI> being writ, as &s;aith <HI>Helvicus, Anno</HI> 360 But I have &s;ince made appear, that the <HI>Magdeb.</HI> tell us therein an un|truth; for that pretended account was from <HI>Athana&s;ius</HI>'s &s;uppo&s;ed Que&s;tions, which they them&s;elves afterwards confe&s;s to be &s;purious, as I have told Mr. <HI>Wills,</HI> and he confe&s;&s;eth to be true, and therefore wonder, that he &s;hould have the Confidence to put this under the notion of mi&s;-repre&s;entation, or mi&s;-tran&s;lation, it being neither. Had I given a tran&s;lation of the for|mer part of the &s;entence, re&s;pecting <HI>Origen</HI> and <HI>Cyprian</HI> (before refuted by me, and which I cencern'd not with my &s;elf, then) and not rende<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">'d [in <HI>Eccle&s;iijs Affricaenis</HI>] in the <HI>Affri|can</HI> Churches, there might be &s;ome ground of <HI>Cavil;</HI> but whereas I did not, I hope I may be excus'd. The words are, <HI>Hoc vero &s;eculo eun|dem</HI>
<PB N="37" REF="24">
[viz. Bapti&s;mum] <HI>dura&s;se ex</HI> Athana&s;io <HI>con&s;tat, quae&s;t.</HI> 124. i. e. <HI>It appears from</HI> Atha|na&s;ius 124. <HI>que&s;tion, that it</HI> (viz. Infant Bap|ti&s;m) <HI>was in this Age.</HI> So that what I &s;ay re&s;pects the time, and not whether all or part of the <HI>Affrican</HI> Churches. But if to &s;ay in the <HI>Affrican</HI> Churches they Baptized Children, plea&s;es Mr. <HI>Wills,</HI> I am contented it &s;hould be &s;o; and let him make the mo&s;t of it.</P>
<P>The 7th. concerning the <HI>Milevitan</HI> Decree,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>7.</HI> About the <HI>Milevi|tan</HI> Canon.</NOTE> <HI>viz.</HI> That fir&s;t part of the Canon, <HI>That all that affirm, that young Children receive Everla&s;ting life, albeit they be not by the Sacrament of Grace or Bapti&s;m renewed.</HI> I made it not, nor abu&s;ed that Council, nor mi&s;-tran&s;lated their words, for in the Ver&s;e before going, as the <HI>Magdeburgs</HI> expre&s;s it, <HI>p.</HI> 835. they repre&s;ent the crime of tho&s;e they cen&s;ure in the&s;e words, <HI>Non opitu|lari parvulis ad con&s;equendam vitam Aeternam Chri&s;tianae gratiae Sacramentum,</HI> viz. <HI>That the Sa|crament of Cri&s;tian Grace</HI> (or Bapti&s;m) <HI>profits not little Children to Everla&s;ting Life.</HI> The &s;ame al&s;o is expre&s;t by the whole Council to <HI>Innocentius,</HI> in their Synodical Epi&s;tle, <HI>p.</HI> 842. in the&s;e words, <HI>pueros qu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&abque; parvulos &s;i nullis innoventur, &amp; gratiae Sacramentis, habituros vitam Aeternam.</HI> The &s;ame is al&s;o in <HI>Innocents Decretal Letter,</HI> p. 845. <HI>which he reiurned to the Council</HI> in the&s;e words, <HI>Illud vero quod eos ve&s;tra fraternitas a&s;&s;erit praedicare, parvulos Aeternae Vitae praemijs, etiam &s;ine Bapti&s;|matis gratia, po&s;&s;e donari perfatuum e&s;t;</HI> And to meet with tho&s;e Hereticks, (as they counted them) was the decree I mentioned, made, and which is to be found in <HI>Regia Collect. Tom.</HI> 4. p. 559. immediately after the words recited
<PB N="38" REF="25"> by Mr. <HI>Wills ex Pervetu&s;to codices,</HI> out of a very ancient Copy, thus. <HI>Item placuit, ut &s;iquis dicit ideo dixi&s;&s;e Dominum, in domo patris mei man&s;iones multae &s;unt, ut intelligatur, quia in regno Caelorum erit aliquis medius, aut ullus alicubi lo|cus, ubi beate vivant parvuli, qui &s;ine Bapti&s;mo ex hac vita migrarunt, &s;ine quo in regno Caelorum quod e&s;t vita aeterna intrare non po&s;sunt Anathema &s;it;</HI> and which is the very thing I affirmed: and therefore I hope will ju&s;tifie me from this Charge, giving onely an Epitome, and not the whole of the Decree, out of the Decre|tals them&s;elves, not the <HI>Magdeburgs.</HI> 'Tis true, the Canon has not this <HI>Appendix</HI> to it, where recited by the <HI>Magdeburgs,</HI> nor in <HI>Reg. Collect.</HI> p. 362. though properly belonging to it; but where the <HI>Affrican</HI> Canons are <HI>collected, repeated,</HI> and <HI>confirmed</HI> under <HI>Caele&s;tinus</HI> Pope, and <HI>Theo|do&s;ius</HI> Emperor, <HI>Anno</HI> 424. it is annext. And then this 2d. Canon of the <HI>Milevitan Council,</HI> with this annexed, is made the 77th <HI>Affrican</HI> Canon. And I mu&s;t further inform the Reader, that the <HI>Mag'd.</HI> confounded the&s;e two <HI>Milevitan</HI> Councils to|gether, putting the latter, which was in the year 416, under the year 402. which was the fir&s;t <HI>Milevitan</HI> Council in <HI>Numidia</HI> in <HI>Affrica;</HI> and both held under <HI>Innocent</HI> Pope, and <HI>Theodo|&s;ius</HI> Emperor; which mi&s;take is taken notice of in <HI>Regia Collectione,</HI> with the grounds thereof. And in p. 541. you'l find the&s;e words begin|ning the Collection, <HI>Sequuntur Concilia Af|fricana &s;ub Innocentio habita:</HI> which includes the Canon I cite in p. 559. afore&s;aid.</P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>1.</HI> About P. <HI>Inno|cents</HI> Bla&s;|phemy.</NOTE>That the 8th. is no mi&s;-repre&s;entation, in &s;aying, That <HI>P. Innocentius attributed divine Ho|nour
<PB N="39" REF="25"> to the Popedom,</HI> will be ea&s;ily conceived, ina&s;much, as he &s;ingled out <HI>Peter,</HI> and attribu|ted Divine Honour to him, put confidence in him, and de&s;ired help from him in conjunction with God him&s;elf; and whether he did it as to Pope <HI>Peter,</HI> or St. <HI>Peter,</HI> is not much material, the former is probable. And therefore doth <HI>Fox</HI> 2 <HI>Vol. p.</HI> 1020. <HI>&amp;c.</HI> tell us in how many things the Popes bla&s;phemou&s;ly match them|&s;elves with God him&s;elf.</P>
<P>The 9th. out of <HI>Vo&s;&s;ius,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>9.</HI> Quota|tion out of <HI>Vo&s;&s;ius.</HI></NOTE> giving the Rea&s;ons from the Ancients, why they Baptized Men and Women naked, is a full and clear Tran&s;la|tion, as fully made good from tho&s;e particular in&s;tances given out of <HI>Vo&s;&s;ius</HI> from <HI>Cyril, Chry|&s;o&s;tom, Creten&s;is, An&s;elm, Ambro&s;e,</HI> &amp;c. his be|ing a mi&s;erable trifle in his Appeal to the Rea|der, whether the Rea&s;ons given, were not <HI>be|cau&s;e their naked Bodies were to be Baptized, and not the Cloaths,</HI> as I <HI>ignorantly</HI> (as he &s;aith) <HI>affirm,</HI> whereas I give tho&s;e Rea&s;ons, <HI>why they Bap|tized their naked Bodies, and not the Cloaths,</HI> viz. <HI>That they might be, as in the &s;tate of Innocency;</HI> and as in their <HI>fir&s;t Birth,</HI> and as they expect to be in <HI>Heaven,</HI> or as <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> was was <HI>nailed to the Cro&s;s.</HI> From the Ancients, which they expre&s;ly make out in <HI>p.</HI> 32.</P>
<P>Therefore it is left to the Reader to judge, where there is the lea&s;t mi&s;-repre&s;entation, or fal&s;e Tran&s;lation in all the&s;e Particulars, and what cau&s;e to make an Appeal for the &s;ame.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="5" TYPE="complaint">
<HEAD><HI>V.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Forgery.</NOTE> The Fifth thing he complains again&s;t me for is,</HI> For fathering upon Authors that which they indeed &s;ay not, at lea&s;t in the places, by me quo|ted; <HI>whereof he gives 8 In&s;tances.</HI></HEAD>
<PB N="40" REF="26">
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg">An&s;wered. <HI>1:</HI> Quota|tion out of <HI>Luther.</HI></NOTE>The fir&s;t as to a Quotation out of <HI>Luther de Sacrament. Tom.</HI> 3. <HI>fol.</HI> 168. I tran&s;cribed it out of the &s;ame Author before mentioned, <HI>the plain and well grounded Treati&s;e,</HI> p. 25. I have &s;ince examined that <HI>Tome,</HI> but cannot there find it; &s;uppo&s;ing, they either mi&s;quoted the <HI>Tome,</HI> or el&s;e quoted it out of another Edition, conclu|ding, &s;o large a Quotation was not fathered upon him, he &s;peaking much that Language in other places.</P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>2.</HI> Out of <HI>Bazil.</HI></NOTE>To the Second, as to the Quotation of <HI>Bazil, contra Eunom.</HI> who only &s;ay, That he &s;aith, <HI>lib.</HI> 3. <HI>That Bapti&s;m is the Seal of Faith.</HI> But he will find the re&s;t of the Sentence in that Book of <HI>Bazil</HI> they refer to, <HI>viz. lib.</HI> 3. <HI>p</HI> 84. <HI>Bapti&s;m is the Seal of Faith; but Faith, the Confe&s;&s;ion of the Deity: for fir&s;t he ought to believe, and after to be &s;ealed with Bapti&s;m.</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Nam cre|dere prius oportet ac po&s;tea Bap|ti&s;mate de|&s;ignari.</NOTE></P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg">3. Magdeb.</NOTE>To the Third, where he &s;aith, <HI>That the</HI> Mag|deburgs <HI>do not &s;ay, it was the univer&s;al practi&s;e to Baptize the Adult under the</HI> 4th. <HI>Cent. as I affirm they do.</HI> I &s;ay, That I have made it appear, they do by tho&s;e In&s;tances mentioned by them, from the &s;ayings of the Doctors, and the De|crees of Councils, that Decreed only for Adult Bapti&s;m; and for which, I refer you to the former Chapter for further proof, that I did not mi&s;-repre&s;ent them therein. If I &s;peak their &s;ence, though vary in words, and contract what they &s;ay at large, I do them no injury. But &s;o they do expre&s;s it.</P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg">4. Arno|bius.</NOTE>To the 4th, That I quote <HI>Arnobius,</HI> a &s;pu|rious Author, whil&s;t I blame him for &s;uch, and which I &s;ay, I take out of the <HI>Magd.</HI> whereas the <HI>Magdeburgs</HI> have it not.</P>
<PB N="41" REF="26">
<P>To which I &s;ay fir&s;t, I do not know, that <HI>Arnobius</HI> upon the <HI>P&s;alms,</HI> is a &s;purious Author, &s;hould I have quoted him out of <HI>Perkins,</HI> who (Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> &s;aith) tells us, it is &s;purious, as he did <HI>Athana&s;ius's</HI> que&s;tions out of the <HI>Magdeb.</HI> which they &s;aid was &s;o, I had been lyable to like Reproof. Neither 2dly. did I &s;ay, I took <HI>Ar|nobius</HI> out of the <HI>Magdeburgs;</HI> I &s;aid the <HI>Magd.</HI> did give &s;ome of tho&s;e that followed, not all, he being mentioned upon the 146. <HI>P&s;alm,</HI> and not from any Book or Page in the <HI>Magdeburgs.</HI></P>
<P>The Fifth,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>5.</HI> Out of <HI>Aquinus.</HI></NOTE> it is true, is a mi&s;take as placed by the Printer, but not intended, as ea&s;ily di&s;|cern'd by the Reader, being put down as an additional Proof out of <HI>Albertus,</HI> having In|&s;erted 3 before, the Printer putting <HI>Aquinus</HI> be|fore the la&s;t of them, and &s;o made that which I had put, <HI>viz.</HI> [And again] to belong to <HI>A|quinus,</HI> and not to <HI>Albertus.</HI> Which Venial mi&s;take he makes equivolent with that grand one of <HI>Bazil</HI> for <HI>Nazianzen,</HI> which he &s;o egregi|ou&s;ly abu&s;ed me for, and boa&s;ted what great acquaintance he had with Father <HI>Bazil,</HI> putting it down as a great remark 3 &s;everal times: This of mine being a proof for him, <HI>viz.</HI> to prove Infants Bapti&s;m; therefore it matters not much, whether from one or the other, they both &s;peaking the &s;ame thing, that of his, wholly again&s;t me.</P>
<P>As to the 6th. the <HI>Magd.</HI> tell us,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>6.</HI> Out of the <HI>Magd.</HI></NOTE> That Infants as well as the Adult, were Baptized; and in|&s;tance onely in a Queen then Baptized, whom <HI>Zonaras</HI> calls <HI>Ro&s;&s;orum Reginam.</HI> And that's all (I confe&s;s) that <HI>Zonaras</HI> is concern'd in it.</P>
<P>The 7th. is &s;uch another trifle. I &s;ay,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>7.</HI> Out of <HI>Vo&s;&s;ius.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Vo&s;&s;ius</HI>
<PB N="42" REF="27"> &s;aith, (for he was a Collector from Authors; and tho&s;e he quotes, we may in propriety of &s;peech attribute to him) That <HI>Nectarius</HI> was made Bi&s;hop of <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> before he was Baptized, he &s;ays, he was but appointed &s;o, the &s;tre&s;s of the proof lying, That he was a Believer at age before he was Baptized, there being no &s;uch great difference, betwixt being made and appointed Bi&s;hop in the Ca&s;e. And <HI>Beza</HI> there gives in&s;tances, not of ob&s;cure per|&s;ons, but of per&s;ons, as he &s;ays, that had the eyes of all upon them Baptized at Age, <HI>viz. Con&s;tantine, Nectarius,</HI> and <HI>Nazianzen.</HI></P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>8.</HI> One of Mr. B.</NOTE>The 8th. is much like his fellows, in a Quo|tation from Mr. <HI>Baxter,</HI> proving again&s;t the Popi&s;h Doctrine, <HI>ex opere operato,</HI> to work Grace by the deed done, I brought him to &s;ay, <HI>That Bapti&s;m of it &s;elf cannot give Grace or Regenera|tion, nor can work any &s;uch cau&s;e; for Water, he &s;aith, is not a &s;ubject either capable of receiving or conveying Grace to the Soul.</HI> But he &s;aith, I a|bu&s;e Mr. <HI>Baxters</HI> words, who &s;aith, <HI>That Bap|ti&s;m can be no &s;uch cau&s;e, whereby I do, as he &s;aith, attribute Non-&s;ence and Ab&s;urdity to him; and that there is neither Innocency nor Truth in &s;o af|fixing it. If to work no &s;uch cau&s;e,</HI> be &s;uch an error, it is a venial one, and I can &s;ay, not wilful; but certainly this Man would make no|table work with me, if he had matter to work upon. But what ju&s;t cau&s;e of Complaint or Appeal in all this, I profe&s;s &s;eriou&s;ly, I &s;ee not.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="6" TYPE="complaint">
<HEAD><NOTE PLACE="marg">Mi&s;placing Quotations</NOTE><HI>VI. The</HI> 6th <HI>is, for picking out of</HI> Authors here and there, and joyning them together, as if they were one intire Sentence, whereof he gives four In&s;tances.</HEAD>
<PB N="43" REF="27">
<P>To the 3 fir&s;t, <HI>viz.</HI> Mr. <HI>Baxter,</HI> Dr. <HI>Owen,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">An&s;wered.</NOTE> and Dr. <HI>Taylor,</HI> I &s;ay, I have put down nothing but their own, and what is congruous, one thing an&s;wering properly and naturally with another, which if it did not, we &s;hould, I pre|&s;ume, have heard of.</P>
<P>And for what relates to him&s;elf, which is the 4th. I have done him no wrong, the Pages men|tioned by me, <HI>viz.</HI> p. 36, 38, 101, 131, 132. I have particularly examined, and de&s;ire the Reader &s;o to do; and let him judge betwixt us, whether he doth not in tho&s;e Pages compared again and again &s;ay, <HI>That as there is no Scripture expre&s;ly commanding, &s;o neither is there any Scrip|ture excluding Infants from Bapti&s;m, nor any Scripture that &s;aith, there was no Infant Baptized,</HI> each Page I would have put down, but that I would not burden the Reader; which you find expre&s;t by me in my <HI>Reply,</HI> p. 63. and the &s;eve|ral Pages particularly expre&s;t, I refer to. And what good cau&s;e is given to complain of me in this, I &s;ee as little as the former.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="7" TYPE="complaint">
<HEAD><HI>VII. The</HI> 7th. <HI>is,</HI> for a&s;&s;erting notorious untruths,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Notorious untruths.</NOTE> giving In&s;tances of Eight.</HEAD>
<P>The fir&s;t for affirming,<NOTE PLACE="marg">1. <HI>An&s;wer|ed.</HI></NOTE> <HI>That Antiquity it &s;elf, &s;o much boa&s;ted of, is altogether for Believers, and not for Infants Bapti&s;m,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>1.</HI> About Antiquity for Infant Bapti&s;m.</NOTE> an A&s;&s;ertion, as he &s;aith, &s;o <HI>notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e,</HI> that I have <HI>confuted my &s;elf in owning the ancients a&s;serted it.</HI></P>
<P>This is already an&s;wered again and again, I hope to &s;atisfaction, <HI>viz. That primitive Antiquity is only for Believers, and not for In|fants Bapti&s;m; and the Ancients in latter, not
<PB N="44" REF="28"> former Centuries, onely for Infants Bapti&s;m.</HI></P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>2.</HI> About Chri&s;tning a Dead Child.</NOTE>The Second for &s;aying, <HI>That a Child that dyed unbaptized, was taken up and Chri&s;tned, putting in the Margent a dead Child Chri&s;tned; the Boy was not taken up and Baptized Dead; but after he came to life again, he was Baptized.</HI></P>
<P>In the fir&s;t place, I conceive there is no un|truth in my rendring the words, <HI>Is puerum &s;ine Bapti&s;mo mortuum re&s;u&s;citarit ex mortuis, &amp; tan|dem Baptizarit, That a Child that dyed unbap|tized, was taken up and Chri&s;tned;</HI> being not exclu&s;ive of the &s;ence Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> would have it bear. But 'tis the Margent that &s;aith <HI>[a dead Child Chri&s;tned]</HI> he mainly quarrels at, which indeed is wholly mine, and therefore my &s;ence or explanation of my own words, is to be re|ceived, which admits of a Two fold, or double Interpretation, <HI>viz.</HI> either that Child that was Dead, now Chri&s;tned, and &s;o not to be blamed in Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> own &s;ence: Or if I &s;hould intend the Child then dead when Chri&s;tned, I know no rea&s;on, but I may have my liberty of Conje|cture, as well as Mr. <HI>Wills:</HI> And the rather, be|cau&s;e, though <HI>re&s;u&s;citare</HI> be generally under|&s;tood, <HI>to rai&s;e to life,</HI> yet the phra&s;e here, may, without any &s;uch palpable ab&s;urdity, be un|der&s;tood, a taking up from among the Dead, or out of the Grave; e&s;pecially, becau&s;e &s;uch an Interpretation &s;o exactly agrees with their (then u&s;ual) practi&s;e to Baptize the Dead that dyed unbaptized; which certainly is more likely, and far more agreeable to truth, then that &s;uch a Miracle was wrought of rai|&s;ing to life. Be&s;ides, why may not the Dead be &s;ometimes u&s;ed for the Grave, as the Grave
<PB N="45" REF="28"> is often (Metonymically) u&s;ed for the Dead, and Death? as I could in&s;tance with great variety, had it been nece&s;&s;ary. So that this latter (&s;hould I per&s;i&s;t in it) is &s;o far from being blameable, that it is indeed very proba|ble; and therefore Reader, take it which way you will, no &s;uch notorious untruth as he talks of can hence be ju&s;tly chargeable upon me.</P>
<P>The third noto<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ious untruth he &s;aith I a&s;|&s;ert, is from the <HI>Magdeburgs,</HI> Cent: 13. <HI>p:</HI> 419. <HI>viz. That the</HI> Magd: <HI>do &s;ay,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>3</HI> About <HI>Gulielmus</HI> bla&s;phemy.</NOTE> <HI>that as to the form of Bapti&s;m,</HI> Gulielmus <HI>added to the Father. Son, and Holy Spirit, the Virgin</HI> Mary, <HI>viz. I baptize thee in the Name of the Omnipotent Fa|ther, Son, and Holy Spirit, and the Ble&s;&s;ed Virgin</HI> Mary; which &s;aith he, is another notorious un|truth; for the <HI>Magdeburgs</HI> &s;ay nothing of the Virgin <HI>Mary;</HI> but which of us &s;peak truth, let the Reader judge: The words of the <HI>Magde|burgs</HI> are the&s;e in the <HI>Cent:</HI> and <HI>p:</HI> above-&s;aid, <HI>viz: Male</HI> Gulielmus <HI>ad Formam Bapti&s;mi addidit</HI> Mariam,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 span"></NOTE> <HI>Baptizo te in Nomine Patris Omnipo|tentis, &amp; Filii &amp; Spiritus Sancti, &amp; Beatae</HI> Ma|riae <HI>Virginis.</HI> De Bapt: &amp; ejus part. c. 2. Magd. Cent: 13. c: 419. <HI>i: e.</HI> Gulielmus <HI>wickedly ad|ded</HI> Mary <HI>to the form of Bapti&s;m: I Baptize thee in the Name of the Omnipotent Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and the Ble&s;&s;ed</HI> Virgin Mary in his 2. <HI>ch:</HI> of Bapt. and its parts. Therefore if this be not daring temerity, I know not what is.</P>
<P>To the 4th. that the <HI>Donati&s;ts</HI> were again&s;t In|fant-Bapti&s;m,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>4</HI> About the <HI>Dona|ti&s;ts.</HI></NOTE> <HI>which,</HI> he &s;aith, <HI>is as true, as that a Dead Child was Baptized, and that Pope</HI> Inno|cent <HI>was the fir&s;t Inventor of Bapti&s;m, and Anti|quity altogether for Believers, and not for Infants Bapti&s;m.</HI></P>
<PB N="46" REF="29">
<P>What ground I had to affirm the <HI>Donati&s;ts</HI> were again&s;t Infants Bapti&s;m, I have given at large enough at lea&s;t, if not to make it good, yet to free me from a Forger. Whether the Child taken up was living or dead, when Baptized (what I writ being capable of being i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">terpre|ted either way) is left to better judgment; that I any where have &s;aid that Pope <HI>Innocent</HI> was the fir&s;t Invetor of Infants Bapti&s;m, is I pre|&s;ume Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> his Invention not to be ma<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e good from my writings. I do indeed &s;ay, <HI>p.</HI> 111. And this was that <HI>Innocent</HI> who was the fir&s;t great Patron and Impo&s;er of this Inven<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">i|on <HI>viz.</HI> In his Canon in the <HI>Milevitan</HI> Coun|cil; and &s;o &s;ai<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">h Dr. <HI>Taylor Grotius, Strabo,</HI> p. 107. as well as my &s;elf, that Infants Bapti&s;m was never determined, nor en<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">oyned nor im|po&s;ed till th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n. And whether Antiqui<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">y, <HI>viz.</HI> of the fir&s;t Centuries was not for Be ievers, and not for Infants Bapti&s;m; Let Mr. <HI>Baxter</HI> him&s;elf, wi h what hath been &s;aid, de<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ermine.</P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg">5 <HI>About</HI> Lanfrank.</NOTE>The 5th about <HI>Lanfranks</HI> Te&s;timony, one of my witne&s;&s;es to prove <HI>Berengarius</HI> denyed Infants Bapti&s;m, is, I fully acknowledg my mi|&s;take, which (a Per&s;on of quality) a worthy Friend of mine &s;everal moneths &s;ince help'd me to di&s;cover, in examining that Story of <HI>Berengarius</HI> with me out of the <HI>Magdeburgs,</HI> and who is my witne&s;s of my in<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ended re&s;olu|tion to rectifie the &s;ame, and which I conclu|ded to have done, though not di&s;covered by them. And the ground of that my mi&s;take was truly this&punc; I finding that in the Hypothe&s;is of the erroneous Dogm's charged upon <HI>Beren|garius;</HI> they gather up 5 or 6 Particulars, the
<PB N="47" REF="29"> fir&s;t 4 re&s;pecting Tran&s;ub&s;tantiation, the 5th. and 6th. Infants Bapti&s;m, and Marriage, then &s;uperficially ca&s;ting my Eye to the end of the Story, I found it &s;aid, <HI>ad quintum &amp; &s;extum op|ponit Doctrinam perpetuam &amp; con&s;en&s;ientem Ec|cle&s;iae Dei, To the</HI> 5<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">h. and 6th. <HI>he therein oppo&s;es the perpetual and agreeing Doctrine of the Church of God;</HI> Quoting <HI>Lanfrank</HI> of the Sacraments, and his Book <HI>de Scintill:</HI> concluding it did re|&s;pect tho&s;e 5 or 6 Particulars before mentioned, but afterwards examining it with the afore|&s;aid Friend, I found that tho&s;e 5 or 6 Particu|lars did not include tho&s;e fir&s;t mentioned, but were 6 other Particulars di&s;cour&s;ed about Tran&s;ub&s;tantiation, betwixt <HI>Lanfrank</HI> and him Yet this I mu&s;t remark by the way, that though I mi&s;took my &s;elf in this, yet the re&s;t of my Te&s;timonies to prove <HI>Berengarius</HI> did deny In|fants Bapti&s;m hold good, as you'l find before in <HI>p.</HI> 92. 2d. <HI>Rep. Guitmond</HI> being one of them, who a&s;&s;erts that he did affirm Bapti&s;m did not pro|fit little ones.</P>
<P N="7">7. As to the Canon of <HI>Illerdon</HI> in <HI>Spain,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">7 Illerdon <HI>Canon.</HI></NOTE> I quote it out of the <HI>Dutch</HI> Book of Martyrs, for which they Cite their Authorities at large, <HI>page</HI> 189. 1 <HI>Book.</HI> And if they have mi&s;taken it, let them be accountable for it, and me, no more than Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> de&s;ires to be, for quoting the <HI>Magdeburgs</HI> in their mi&s;take about <HI>Era&s;mus.</HI></P>
<P N="6">6. Among&s;t my notorious untruths he puts <HI>my calling Circumci&s;ion a legal Ordinance,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>6</HI> About Circumci|&s;in.</NOTE> <HI>when as he &s;aith, it was in&s;tituted</HI> 400 <HI>Years before the Law.</HI> VVhat then? &s;o were Sacrifices 2000 Years before it; were they not therefore le|gal al&s;o, being enjoyned by God as well as
<PB N="48" REF="30"> the other under the Law? and therefore 'tis &s;aid <HI>of Circumci&s;ion, though of the Fathers, yet it was given by</HI> Mo&s;es, <HI>John</HI> 7.22. and which was &s;o <HI>legal,</HI> that it bound to the keeping of the whole Law, <HI>Gal:</HI> 2.3. and &s;o <HI>typical</HI> and &s;ha|dowy, that it was to be done away when Chri&s;t came, <HI>Gal:</HI> 2.2. and of &s;uch <HI>great &s;tre&s;s</HI> that there was no entring into the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Church without it, &amp; whoever eat the Pa&s;&s;eo|ver uncircumci&s;ed mu&s;t be cut off: And that the Paedo-Bapti&s;ts Arguments from Circumci&s;i|on are begged, not proved: See my <HI>Rea&s;ons</HI> p: And how all my Arguments are begg'd or &s;tollen, is begging &s;till till proved, which will be be&s;t under&s;tood by his An&s;wers, to which the&s;e are referred.</P>
<P N="8"><NOTE PLACE="marg">Sericius, <HI>for</HI> Hinc|marus.</NOTE>8: The mi&s;take of the name <HI>Sericius</HI> for <HI>Hincmarus</HI> I own; but what Decrees were made by <HI>P: Sericius</HI> &s;o immediatly proceeding <HI>Inno|centius</HI> for Infants Bapti&s;m as Mr: <HI>Wills</HI> &s;uppo|&s;eth, I find not, when he produceth them I'll blot out <HI>Innocent,</HI> and put <HI>Sericius</HI> the fir&s;t Im|po&s;er of it.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="8" TYPE="complaint">
<HEAD><NOTE PLACE="marg">Strange Doctrines.</NOTE><HI>VIII.</HI> The la&s;t he charges is &s;trange Doctrines.</HEAD>
<P><HI>The fir&s;t for calling the National Church of the</HI> Jews,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><P>An&s;wered.</P>
<P N="1"><HI>1</HI> About the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Church.</P></NOTE> <HI>made up of the Carnal Seed, a Carnal Church, who had Carnal Ordinances, which</HI> he &s;aith is <HI>Bla&s;phemy to affirm.</HI> But that Bal&s;phe|my the Holy Spirit will acquit me of whil&s;t he calls their Ordinances of their Church by that Name, and what <HI>Salvo</HI> Mr: <HI>Wills</HI> gives for their Ordinances, will &s;erve for the Church al|&s;o, <HI>which is to be under&s;tood</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>Compara|tively;</HI> and &s;o &s;ay I to the more Spiritua
<PB N="49" REF="30"> Church and Ordinances in the New Te&s;tament.</P>
<P>But that Bapti&s;m doth as much Initiate the carnal &s;eed in the Go&s;pel-Church, as circumci|&s;ion under the Law, is I pre&s;ume Mr. <HI>Wills</HI> &s;trange Doctrine, God enjoyning the Infant-male or Carnal Seed to be circumci&s;ed; but &s;o hath he not that under the Go&s;pel they &s;hould be baptized: and touching which I refer you to Dr: <HI>Owen</HI> for better Information, as be|fore.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>Fal&s;e Doctrine,</HI> That <HI>I do with Dr.</HI> Taylor <HI>&s;ay, Infants have neither Habitual nor actuall Faith, nor are Di&s;ciples of Chri&s;t, and uncapable of Regeneration,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>2</HI> About Infants Faith and Regenera|tion.</NOTE> <HI>&s;o con&s;equently of Salvation.</HI></P>
<P>That they are uncapable of that Faith and Regeneration &s;poken by <HI>James</HI> 1.18. 1 <HI>Pet:</HI> 1.2, 3. <HI>John</HI> 1.12, 13. And as Dr: <HI>Owen</HI> has defi|ned Regeneration is all I &s;ay, <HI>viz.</HI> begotten by the <HI>Preaching, Hearing,</HI> and <HI>Receiving of the Word,</HI> renewed in knowledg, changed and <HI>Con|verted thereby,</HI> is all that I affirm, <HI>page</HI> 213. That they are capable of Salvation by Chri&s;ts purcha&s;e and the Application of his Blood and Spi it to them, who doubts it? I am &s;ure I ne|ver affirmed the cont<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ary.</P>
<P N="3">3. The next fal&s;e Doctrine is for <HI>affirming nothing to be a Seal of the New Covenant,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>3</HI> Bapti&s;m no &s;eal.</NOTE> <HI>but the Holy Spirit, a &s;trange Paradox!</HI> But when Mr. <HI>Wills,</HI> or any body el&s;e proves the contrary, I &s;hall be content to alter my judgment.</P>
<P N="4">4. <HI>That Infants are neither capable to perform Duties,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>4</HI> Infants capacity.</NOTE> <HI>nor enjoy Priviledges, viz.</HI> Church-privi|ledges, as I have &s;ufficiently explained my &s;elf <HI>page viz. Bapti&s;m, Lords Supper Hearing the Word, Church-watch, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P N="5"><PB N="50" REF="31"><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>5</HI> About Bapti&s;m.</NOTE>5. <HI>For owning Bapti&s;m to be the gate of Sa|craments,</HI> viz. <HI>ini &s;en&s;u &s;ano viz.</HI> The fir&s;t en|trance into the Church, where the Holy things in Chri&s;ts order and way are duly admini&s;tred, not in the Popi&s;h &s;en&s;e of Sacramen<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s.</P>
<P N="6"><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>6</HI> New Te&s;t. Church.</NOTE>6. <HI>That the New-Te&s;tament Church is by Chri&s;ts appointment to be a &s;eparated people, con&s;i&s;ting only of the Spiritual Seed of</HI> Abraham; but he &s;aith, <HI>Hypocrites</HI> and <HI>wicked per&s;ons are in it.</HI> But whe|ther will he call that Chri&s;ts, or the Devil<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> ap|pointment, who &s;ows the Tares? of which Point Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> has well &s;poke, to whom I re|fer him as before.</P>
<P N="7"><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>7</HI> About the Order of Bapti&s;m.</NOTE>7. <HI>That the My&s;tery &s;hould go before tht Sym|bol.</HI> Had Mr: <HI>Ws.</HI> repre&s;ented the quotation truly, the very peru&s;ing it would clear me from this charge; but he (very unworthily) leaves out the Parenthe&s;is which explicates the ex|pre&s;&s;ion, and without which the words &s;eem to import, a har&s;h Doctrine. The words a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="MURP" EXTENT="1 letter">e, <HI>If the My&s;tery goes not before the Symbol, (which it does when the Symbols are con&s;ig|nations of Grace, as the Sacraments are) [this Parenthe&s;is he lea<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">es out] yet it alwayes accompanies it, but never follows in order of time</HI> I do not deny but a man may be Baptized if he profe es Faith and repen|tance though not in truth, and in him the My|&s;tery goes not before the Symbol; but coming afterwards really to believe and repent, it may follow in order of time, but then the Symbol to him when Baptized was no con&s;ignation of Grace. And now let the world judge whether Mr: <HI>Ws.</HI> dealt hone&s;tly in skiping over tho&s;e words which were laid in on purpo&s;e to obvi|ate
<PB N="51" REF="31"> &s;uch a Cavil as he makes; it may be truly &s;ai<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> him, that if he cannot find a hole, he'll make one.</P>
<P N="8">8. <HI>No vi&s;ible Church-member before Conver&s;i|on:</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>8.</HI> About Church-Member|&s;hip</NOTE> I &s;ay none ought to be &s;o, and &s;o &s;aith Dr: <HI>Owen.</HI></P>
<P N="9">9. <HI>That I make a Believer and Dipping to be the right matter and form of Bapti&s;m,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>9.</HI> About the matter and form of Fapti&s;m.</NOTE> which I have proved again&s;t Mr: <HI>Blinman,</HI> and neither by Mr: <HI>Wills</HI> nor him yet an&s;wered.</P>
<P N="10">10 <HI>That nothing now but Fruits meet for Re|pentance,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>10.</HI> About receiving to Bapti&s;m.</NOTE> <HI>can give right to the bapti&s;m of Repen|tance, and nothing &s;hort of the Spirits birth can or|derly admit to Water-bapti&s;m, and Spiritual Ordi|nances, a Doct ine apparently fal&s;e, in&s;tancing in</HI> John, <HI>baptizing the</HI> Jews <HI>upon confe&s;&s;ion of &s;in and repentance, which was not Fruits, and the</HI> 3000 <HI>Baptized.</HI> Acts 2. And were they not prick'd at heart, and received the word gladly, and confe&s;t Chri&s;t to be the <HI>Me&s;&s;iah,</HI> whom they and were not tho&s;e Fruits meet for Repentance and amen ment of life? <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 TYPE="conclusion">
<HEAD>THE CONCLUSION</HEAD>
<P>THus I have given a <HI>Candid</HI> return to each Particular charged in this <HI>Appeal,</HI> publick|ly acknowledging what of Error or Mi&s;take I am convinced of, and ju&s;tifying my Innocency and Integrity in the re&s;t; for as yet I &s;ee cau&s;e to own no more (not accounting a few imma|terial over &s;ights which Ingenious men would &s;corn to dwell upon) than the mi&s;-naming two or three, <HI>viz. Aquinas</HI> for <HI>Albertus, Sericius</HI> for <HI>Hincmarus,</HI> not hitting the Pope <HI>Deus dedit's</HI> name, and not taking a Quotation out of
<PB N="52" REF="32"> <HI>Walden</HI> to &s;o good advantage as I ought, that of <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> 3 and 4 Book being left out, <HI>Lanfrank</HI> being before owned to Mr. <HI>Baxter.</HI></P>
<P>Concluding that as none of which can be &s;uppo&s;ed to be wilful, &s;o neither can there be any ob&s;tinacy in the Ca&s;e, having never heard of them before.</P>
<P>Therefore upon the whole, I joyn i&s;&s;ue with Mr. <HI>Wills,</HI> freely &s;ubmitting it to the Bar he has brought it; not doubting upon the due examination of his Complaint, and my defence, that if they find me guilty of the Crimes he lays to my Charge; but they will, as he de|&s;ires, di&s;charge duty to me as becomes them, to bring me to the acknowledgment of my evil, or to di&s;own me if ob&s;tinate, as a per&s;on un|worthy to be countenanced among&s;t them.</P>
<P>But if on the contrary Mr: <HI>Wills</HI> his Appeal appears to be faulty, and the Particulars there|of not true, then that his &s;aid Appeal &s;hall, as he de&s;ires, as unju&s;t, reflect the blame of the charge upon him&s;elf, according to the righte|ous Law of the Lord.</P>
<P>Deut: 19.16, 17, 18, 19. <HI>If a fal&s;e Witne&s;s ri&s;e up again&s;t any man, and te&s;tifie again&s;t him that which is wrong, then both the men before whom the Controver&s;ie is, &s;hall &s;tand before the Lord, and the Judges which &s;hall be in tho&s;e dayes. And the Judges &s;hall make diligent inqui&s;ition; and behold if the witne&s;s be a fal&s;e witne&s;s, and hath te&s;tified fal&s;ely again&s;t his Brother, then &s;hall ye do unto him as he had thought to have done unto his Brother: So &s;halt thou put the evil away from among&s;t you: And tho&s;e that remain &s;hall hear, and fear, and &s;hall henceforth commit no more any &s;uch evil among you.</HI></P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="4" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="49" REF="32">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. IV.</HI> An Appeal to M^r <HI>Will</HI>'s Con&s;cience.</HEAD>
<OPENER><SALUTE>Sir,</SALUTE></OPENER>
<P>I Having at your <HI>Groundle&s;s</HI> and injurious &s;um|mons, given this full <HI>Account</HI> of my &s;elf, in my ju&s;t <HI>vindication:</HI> And &s;o far as I am <HI>convinced</HI> made (as you charitably &s;ugge&s;t I would, <HI>Pref. App.</HI>) a <HI>Candid</HI> and publick acknowledgment of what of <HI>error</HI> or mi&s;take is made out again&s;t me by your &s;elf or others, may therefore with more freedom <HI>apply</HI> to your Con&s;cience herein, e&s;pe|cially &s;ince I offer you <HI>nothing,</HI> but what I con|ceive carries demon&s;tration with it, and back'd with <HI>Scripture evidence,</HI> for your better con&s;i|deration and conviction.</P>
<P>Therefore in the fir&s;t place, I de&s;ire you to con&s;ider, whether you are not notoriou&s;ly guilty of <HI>Back-biting,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>1.</HI> Reproach+full Back-biting.</NOTE> by taking up reproaches from others, and <HI>Tale-bearer</HI> like, &s;preading and pub|li&s;hing the <HI>&s;ame</HI> to the defaming your Neigh|bour, without enquiring into the Truth <HI>thereof</HI> from him&s;elf; nay, refu&s;ing all due <HI>information</HI> and <HI>&s;atisfaction,</HI> when friendly tendred to you.</P>
<P>For, have you not taken up the&s;e following things upon report and <HI>Hear-&s;ay</HI> from others, a|gain&s;t one that is a meer &s;tranger to you, &amp; pub|li&s;hed the &s;ame to my di&s;grace, to promote thereby your Cau&s;e, <HI>viz.</HI></P>
<P>Fir&s;t, That, as you have heard, <HI>I own not &s;o much Scholar&s;hip to compo&s;e &s;uch a Book, though my
<PB N="50" REF="33"> &s;olitary life has given me opportunity enough to &s;tudy,</HI> Pref. <HI>Inf. Bapt.</HI></P>
<P>Secondly, That <HI>I have only fixed my Name to the Book, that another chiefly has mo&s;t Rea&s;on to own himl&s;elf to be the Author of,</HI> Pref. <HI>Ibid.</HI></P>
<P>Thirdly, <HI>That, as you have heard, I have</HI> Ixion <HI>like, faln in love with my own &s;haddow, puft up with the Excellency of my own performance,</HI> Ibid.</P>
<P>Fourthly, That <HI>I am a very tenacious Per&s;on, as you have heard,</HI> Vind. P.</P>
<P>Fifthly, That <HI>I am fain to call in the Wits of our Party, to help me to deal with you,</HI> Pref. Vind.</P>
<P>Sixtly, That <HI>I am of a Self-conceited &s;corn|ful Genius, unbecoming a Chri&s;tian,</HI> Infants Bapt. a g. 86.</P>
<P>Seventhly, In&s;inuating that <HI>I am of &s;uch a (pugnatious or) fighting temper, that though my hands are tied behind me, yet will do it with Tongue and Pen,</HI> Pref. Inf. Bapt.</P>
<P>But, how agreeable &s;uch actings are with the following Scriptures, I leave you to judge.</P>
<P>Exod. 23.1. <HI>Thou &s;halt not receive a fal&s;e Re|port: Put not thy hand with the wicked to be an un|righteous Witne&s;s.</HI></P>
<P>Levit. 19.16. <HI>Thou &s;halt not go up and down as a Tale-bearer among thy people.</HI></P>
<P>P&s;al. 15.3. <HI>He that back-biteth not with his tongue, nor doth evil to his Neighbour, nor taketh up a reproach again&s;t his Neighbour.</HI></P>
<P>Prov. 18.8. <HI>The words of a Tale-bearer are as wounds, &amp;c.</HI> 20.10. <HI>Where no Tale-bearer is, the &s;trife cea&s;eth.</HI></P>
<P>Jer. 20.10. <HI>I have heard the defamation of many Report, &s;ay they, and we will report, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>And to the&s;e add the Golden Rule, &s;o highly
<PB N="51" REF="33"> infringed thereby, Math. 7.12. <HI>Therefore all things what&s;oever you would that Men &s;hould do unto you, do even &s;o unto them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.</HI> And would you be &s;o dealt with by me and others, ask your own heart? Pray, read Mr. <HI>B.</HI> Rules to this Point, in his <HI>Chri&s;tian Directory;</HI> &s;ome of which are given you in <HI>p.</HI> 158. 2. <HI>Re|ply.</HI> And among&s;t the re&s;t, this is one:</P>
<P><HI>If you know it not to be true, or there be no &s;uf|ficient evidence to prove it, you are guilty of lying and &s;laundering interpretatively, though it &s;hould prove true, becau&s;e it might have been a lye for ought you know.</HI></P>
<P>Secondly, are you not evidently guilty of <HI>Bitter Scoffing</HI> and <HI>Reviling</HI> both Per&s;on and Book, and notoriou&s;ly guilty of <HI>Railing.</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. As to <HI>Scoffing</HI> and jeering at my Per&s;on,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>2.</HI> Scoffing and Rail|ing.</NOTE> Have you not deridingly called me the <HI>Anti&s;i+gnanus,</HI> the <HI>Goliah,</HI> one that is <HI>Philantia nimis inflatus; viz. a proud conceited fellow,</HI> one guilty of notorious <HI>Plagiari&s;m</HI> or Thievery, and <HI>&s;hame|ful O&s;citancy</HI> or heedle&s;ne&s;s, all in the <HI>Preface of Inf. Bapt.</HI> And &s;coffingly to tell me, <HI>Bernar|dus non vidit omnia;</HI> That <HI>I am not &s;uch a &s;eer as taken to be,</HI> Inf. Bapt. p. 89. A <HI>Hagio-Ma&s;tix, a &s;ever La&s;her,</HI> Ibid. That I am a <HI>Zantippe,</HI> and a <HI>Momus,</HI> a <HI>meer Carper,</HI> Vind. Scoffingly reflect|ing upon the Exploits or <HI>Feats done in the daies of my Colonel&s;hip,</HI> Ibid. p. 93. That you have <HI>di&s;|covered my Mummery, and pluckt off the mask of my Vizard,</HI> Pref. Vind. and much more of this kind.</P>
<P N="2">2. As to my <HI>Book,</HI> That it is a pompous Piece, very fallacious and contradictious, heapt up with forgeries and prevarications, &s;welled with <HI>Se&s;|quipedalia
<PB N="52" REF="34"> verba; viz.</HI> Words of a foot and half long or ridiculous &s;tuff, <HI>p.</HI> 35. <HI>Inf. Bapt.</HI> The <HI>non-&s;uch,</HI> the Arguments therein <HI>con&s;i&s;ting only of Trite out-worn things that have been trampled up|on, and confuted again and again,</HI> Pref. Inf. Bapt.</P>
<P>And thirdly, Whether in a Railing reviling manner you have not called me, <HI>One po&s;&s;e&s;t with a maleveleant Spirit, and filled with envy,</HI> p. 11. Inf. Bapt. <HI>An unworthy Caviler,</HI> p. 13. Ibid. <HI>Of &s;o much di&s;ingenuity as to traduce the &s;ayings of worthy Men,</HI> p. Ibid. <HI>Impudent, &s;illy, ridiculous,</HI> p. 16. 2. part. Ibid. <HI>One that will not refu&s;e the mo&s;t &s;ordid and &s;hameful waies to promote my opinion,</HI> p. 57. Ibid. <HI>A daring Champion;</HI> and again, <HI>A da|ring Per&s;on indeed,</HI> p. 72. Ibid. That <HI>I di&s;cover the ebulition of a malicious Spirit,</HI> p. 106. Ibid. Reflect the <HI>Mun&s;ter Venarian Spirit upon me</HI> as one that <HI>is under Satanical delu&s;ion,</HI> p. 99. Ibid. One <HI>that prevaricates to free my &s;elf from prevarication,</HI> p. 2. Vind. That <HI>I have added contumacy to my mi&s;takes,</HI> Pref. Vind. And <HI>that never Writer did more prevaricate and &s;hewed more fal&s;hood then I have done,</HI> p. 34. Inf. Bapt.</P>
<P>But, how &s;uch language can &s;tand before the following Scriptures? is &s;ubmitted to your Con|&s;cience; <HI>viz.</HI></P>
<P>Eph. 4.31. <HI>Let all bitterne&s;s, and wrath, and anger and clamour, and evill &s;peaking be put away from you with all malice, and be kind one to an|other, tender hearted.</HI></P>
<P>Prov. 15.1. <HI>A &s;oft an&s;wer turneth away wrath, but grevious words &s;tir up anger.</HI></P>
<P>Tit. 3.2. <HI>Speak evil of no Man;</HI> Tim. 33. <HI>not a brawler;</HI> 1. Cor. 5 10. <HI>If any that is called a Brother be a railer, with &s;uch a one do not eat.</HI></P>
<PB N="53" REF="34">
<P>Matth. 3.22. <HI>Who&s;oever is angry with his Bro|ther without a cau&s;e, &s;hall be in danger of the Judg|ment; and who&s;oever &s;hall &s;ay unto his brother Ra|cha, &s;hall be in danger of the Council: but who&s;o|ever &s;hall &s;ay, Thou fool, &s;hall be in danger of Hell fire.</HI></P>
<P>Thirdly, I de&s;ire you to con&s;ider whether you are not evidently guilty of <HI>Fal&s;e accu&s;ation,</HI> and notorious fal&s;e <HI>&s;peaking.</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>3.</HI> Fal&s;e ac|cu&s;ation, and &s;peak|ing.</NOTE></P>
<P>Fir&s;t, in that general charge, <HI>That never Writer did more prevaricate, or was guilty of more fal&s;hood then my &s;elf</HI> (what! none of the <HI>Popi&s;h</HI> Legendaries?) whereas in both your Books you have not been able to make out any one that is &s;ignificant; for after you have done your utmo&s;t to make good &s;uch a thing, what doth it amount more then to di&s;cover the mi&s;taking of 2 or 3 Names, and not rendring that pa&s;&s;age in <HI>Walden,</HI> &s;o much to my advantage as it was, none of which can po&s;&s;ibly be judged willful mi&s;takes, nor be truly charged with <HI>forgery</HI> or <HI>prevarication,</HI> which mu&s;t needs therefore return upon you, according to the Rule <HI>Deut.</HI> 19.16, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>Secondly, in tho&s;e many particular fal&s;hoods you have &s;o po&s;itively charged upon me; <HI>viz.</HI> 1. That <HI>I mi&s;repre&s;ented Dr.</HI> Taylor, <HI>and dealt de|ceitfully in tho&s;e Quotations out of his liberty of Pro|phecy, as</HI> p. 35. Inf. Bapt. whereas the quite con|trary is manife&s;t, as p. 51, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> of my <HI>Reply.</HI></P>
<P>Secondly, That <HI>I produced Durandus, a per|&s;ecutor of Anabapti&s;ts, as a Witne&s;s for them,</HI> p. 143. Inf. Bapt. when it is mo&s;t manife&s;t I do the quite contrary, p. 242, <HI>Treaty.</HI></P>
<P>Thirdly, that I do bring <HI>Jerom,</HI> to &s;ay <HI>&s;uch words upon the</HI> 28. <HI>Matth.; whereas you &s;ay, they
<PB N="54" REF="35"> are words of my own adding,</HI> and <HI>none of Jeroms; and yet I tell you he &s;aith it,</HI> p. 166. Vind. whereas I have made good to you they are <HI>verbatim Jeroms</HI> own words upon that place.</P>
<P>Fourthly, That <HI>I produce Gulielmus</HI> from <HI>the Magdeburgs,</HI> for <HI>&s;aying the Virgin Mary &s;hould be added to the words of Bapti&s;m;</HI> which you <HI>&s;ay is a notorious untruth,</HI> and <HI>that the Magdeburgs &s;ay no|thing of the Virgin Mary,</HI> p. 185 Vind. And which I have expre&s;ly proved, and made good to a tittle as before.</P>
<P>Fifthly, you accu&s;e me for abu&s;ing Dr. <HI>Hamond</HI> in that Quotation, on the 13. of <HI>John</HI> 10, <HI>making him &s;peak quite otherwi&s;e then he doth;</HI> Satyricaliy deriding <HI>me for the &s;ame,</HI> p. 171. of your <HI>Vind.</HI> whereas I have made good to you that I did the Doctor no injury, but quoted his words truly and faithfully.</P>
<P>Sixthly, You accu&s;e me, for &s;aying, that the <HI>Magdeburgs</HI> &s;ay, that <HI>the Apo&s;tles only Baptized the adult or aged,</HI> Ch. 7. p. 2. <HI>Inf. Bapt.</HI> which you &s;ay is fal&s;e; whereas I &s;aid no &s;uch thing, as p. 31. of <HI>Reply</HI> is demon&s;trated: and though I called for &s;atisfaction again and again, yet you in your <HI>Preface</HI> to your Appeal ju&s;tified, your &s;elf and &s;everly reprove me for a <HI>tenacious and unrea&s;o|nable Per&s;on,</HI> for not falling under your charge, what an <HI>evidence it is of my ob&s;tinacy;</HI> whereas my words were only the&s;e, <HI>That the Magdeburgs tell us, that they find the adult or aged were only Baptized; viz.</HI> in the Scripture In&s;tances and Ex|amples that they produce: And yet there you have the confidence to <HI>tell me it is alone, nay makes more again&s;t me;</HI> To which I &s;ay let it make for or again&s;t me, that is nothing to the fal&s;hood
<PB N="55" REF="35"> you fathred upon me, I &s;ay, none of the&s;e words, neither doth it make at all again&s;t me; for they may find Scripture In&s;tances only for the adult, and yet believe, as you grant, they did Baptize others then the adult, being two different things; but you tell me the word <HI>[they find only &s;uch]</HI> implyed their certainty of the a&s;&s;ertion, which they were &s;o far from believing that they tell us, it appeared from the Apo&s;tles Writings, that they did not exclude Infants from Bapti&s;m; and at another time, <HI>p.</HI> 53. <HI>Vind.</HI> you tell me they &s;ay that <HI>Origen</HI> and <HI>Cyprian</HI> tell us, that Infants were Baptized in the Apo&s;tles daies; but what then do either of tho&s;e In&s;tances produce any Scripture Example for the Baptizing of an In|fant or any other, but the adult; which &s;erves only to evince that had I &s;aid, what you would have me &s;ay I had not &s;o fairly repre&s;ented them; <HI>viz.</HI> that they did only Baptize the adult, they believing with you, though upon as little ground, that Baptized the Infants al&s;o. But in as much as I &s;aid they &s;aid they found (<HI>viz.</HI> in tho&s;e Scri|pture In&s;tances) Examples only for the one, and not for the other; I faithfully and truly repre&s;en|ted them, and you did injuriou&s;ly and untruly repre&s;ent me, and for which in&s;tead of giving me &s;atisfaction, you &s;till ju&s;tify your &s;elf; and for your better conviction read what I have further &s;aid hereof before.</P>
<P>Seventhly, For your fal&s;e and injurious charg|ing me for producing <HI>Munz'r</HI> and <HI>John of Leyden fro my Witne&s;&s;es, to prove again&s;t Infants Bapti&s;m,</HI> &s;coffingly telling me, that <HI>you will quietly permit me to enjoy the comfort and honour of &s;uch Witne&s;&s;es,</HI> p. 154. Vind. whereas I produce them not as any
<PB N="56" REF="36"> of my Witne&s;&s;es, but reflect upon their &s;tory, as I tell you <HI>p.</HI> 145. <HI>Reply:</HI> Fir&s;t, to <HI>&s;hew the unrea|&s;onablene&s;s of charging the Innocent with the crimes of &s;uch as are guilty.</HI> And &s;econdly, to <HI>Examine that matter of fact, and how proved, upon which &s;o much obliquity hath been ca&s;t upon the Anaba|pti&s;ts, and there way ever &s;ince;</HI> and both of which I conceive was fairly and mode&s;tly done by me in that 4. Chapter.</P>
<P>Eightly, You &s;coffingly tell me, that <HI>my in|vention will not &s;erve me, to &s;ay any thing again&s;t one of the Walden&s;es Confe&s;&s;ions for Infants Bapti&s;m,</HI> viz. <HI>that of Angrogue An.</HI> 1535. viz. As <HI>we pro|mi&s;ed when we were Baptized, being little ones,</HI> p. 121. <HI>which is a notorious fal&s;hood, for I ex|pre&s;ly &s;peak to it,</HI> Treaty p. 310.: And which af|terwards he is fain to confe&s;s, <HI>p.</HI> 122. <HI>Vind.</HI> &s;ay|ing, that Mr. <HI>D.</HI> tells us <HI>p.</HI> 313, that <HI>the&s;e words being Baptized when little ones were foy&s;ted into the Article,</HI> which I al&s;o there make good.</P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>4.</HI> Slander|ing For|reign Ana|bapti&s;ts.</NOTE>Secondly, You &s;o fal&s;ly and &s;landerou&s;ly ac|cu&s;ing the <HI>Anabapti&s;ts,</HI> both forreign and do|me&s;tick, that you might the better bring con|tempt upon them, and their cau&s;e, <HI>viz.</HI></P>
<P>Fir&s;t, as to the Forreign <HI>Anabapti&s;ts,</HI> you charge tho&s;e fir&s;t Commotions, in <HI>Swevia,</HI> and <HI>Mun&s;ter,</HI> to be <HI>Anabapti&s;tical,</HI> p. 102, <HI>&amp;c</HI> of you Inf. Bapt. the quite contrary upon due Exami|nation is <HI>manife&s;ted,</HI> p. 146 of my Reply, and now unan&s;wered by you.</P>
<P>Secondly, That the <HI>Anabapti&s;ts., who were burnt, drowned and &s;tarved in Switzerland,</HI> was for <HI>perjury, di&s;obedience, and &s;edition;</HI> and not for <HI>Anabapti&s;try, p.</HI> 79. <HI>Inf. Bapt.</HI> the contrary whereto is fully manife&s;ted from the Decrees
<PB N="65" REF="36"> them&s;elves, which are word for word given you, and by what <HI>Ga&s;tius</HI> and <HI>Hornberk</HI> &s;ay in confir|mation thereof; <HI>viz.</HI> for their judgement of <HI>Re|baptization,</HI> as appears p. 152 of Rep. and Treat. p. 260. where the Edicts them&s;elves are ex|pre&s;&s;ed.</P>
<P>Thirdly, For charging tho&s;e in <HI>Germany to be &s;o univer&s;ally wicked and immoral,</HI> p. 200. whereas the contrary was made good to you from <HI>Bezas</HI> words, <HI>viz.</HI> That <HI>many of the Anabapti&s;ts are good Men, Servants of God, Martyrs of Chri&s;t;</HI> and our mo&s;t dear <HI>Bn.</HI> in his Ep. to the Gallo-Belgick Churches at <HI>Embden,</HI> as Repl. p. 151. Be&s;ides the account of many 1000 of them that as Faith|ful Martyrs &s;ealed the truth with their Blood, as Treat. 256, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> appears to you.</P>
<P>Fourthly, That <HI>their principles were heretical and bla&s;phemous,</HI> p. 94. <HI>&amp;c.</HI> whereas from their confe&s;&s;ions of Faith them&s;elves, it is manife&s;t they held the &s;ame with the <HI>Walden&s;es,</HI> as ap|pears p. 154. Rep.</P>
<P>Fifthly, That the <HI>Mini&s;ts,</HI> tho&s;e <HI>Holland Ana|bapti&s;ts were for re&s;i&s;tance</HI> of <HI>in affinity with the Mun&s;ter &s;atanical delu&s;ion,</HI> which put <HI>them upon &s;uch exorbitances,</HI> p. 99. whereas the quite contrary is &s;aid of them, and known to be their con&s;tant practi&s;e, refu&s;ing to bear Armes, or to carry &s;o much as a Gun in their Ships, as p. 147, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>Secondly, as to our <HI>Engli&s;h Anabapti&s;ts,</HI> have you not in like manner powred reproach upon them, by your notorious fal&s;e accu&s;ations, <HI>viz.</HI></P>
<P>Fir&s;t, You &s;tick not to &s;ay,<NOTE PLACE="marg">2. <HI>Slan|dring</HI> En|gli&s;h <HI>Ana|bapti&s;ts.</HI></NOTE> <HI>that tho&s;e who are inclinable to their way, are now grown &s;o politick as not to profe&s;s their Faith till warm weather;</HI> &s;cof|fingly
<PB N="66" REF="37"> telling us, <HI>that many la&s;t Summer were dipped in our parts, and in all likelyhood we may hear of many more this Summer,</HI> Preface to Infants Bapt.</P>
<P>The fal&s;hood and &s;lander whereof is refuted by known experience.</P>
<P>Secondly, neither are you a&s;hamed to lay <HI>bla&s;phemy</HI> and <HI>immorality to the charge of diver&s;e Anabapti&s;ts in our own Nation,</HI> p. 95. imply|ing, as I told you in my Reply p. 151. that the re&s;t <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ore with them, otherwi&s;e, why is it men|tioned, as I told you, challinging you to pro|duce one Man of tho&s;e divers Per&s;ons that is truly to be charged with your due proofs for the &s;ame; or el&s;e to be e&s;teemed as truly you ought to be a fal&s;e accu&s;er of the Brethren, which notwith|&s;tanding you have neither done in your la&s;t <HI>Book,</HI> nor taken &s;hame for your &s;in and folly therein.</P>
<P>Thirdly, and that above all you have not been affrayed to charge the Principle of <HI>Anaba|pti&s;try</HI> it &s;elf, <HI>viz. To be of a dangerous nature:</HI> Your words are the&s;e, That <HI>you may &s;afely affirm that is a Doctrine to be &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">cted fal&s;e, which is u&s;ually attended with gro&s;s mi&s;carriages in the Pro|fe&s;&s;ors of it;</HI> for that <HI>be&s;peaks it ominous and like a &s;piritual Judgement of God upon it:</HI> And, <HI>I heartily wi&s;h,</HI> &s;ay you, <HI>there were no ground to &s;ay that of &s;uch a nature is the Doctrine of Bapti|zing grown Per&s;ons, in oppo&s;ition to that of the Inft. Seed of Believers, for not to in&s;i&s;t upon.</HI> The <HI>horrid errors and wicked lives of tho&s;e in Germany, and bla&s;phemies and immoralities of diver&s;e in our own Nation.</HI> [that being taken for granted, it &s;eems to be undoubted proof in confirmation hereof] And <HI>that as &s;ome Men hold it (viz.</HI> that
<PB N="67" REF="37"> Bapti&s;m is a boundary of Communion) <HI>is of &s;uch a di&s;quieting tendancy, that it is not fit for any age or &s;tate of the Church.</HI> And as <HI>&s;oon as Men be|come Bapti&s;ts</HI> (as they call them&s;elves, affecting as you &s;ay that name) <HI>they fall off from Godly Mini&s;ters,</HI> &amp;c as <HI>an effect (as you reflect) of igno|rance and pride,</HI> and to the <HI>&s;candal and &s;hame of Chri&s;tian Religion,</HI> p. 94, 95. And in your Pre|face you tell us with Mr. <HI>Sydnham,</HI> that <HI>the opinion of</HI> Antipaedobapti&s;m <HI>hath been alwaies ominous, and of a wonderful &s;trange influence, to di&s;troy &V;nity and Peace among&s;t Chri&s;tians, ac|companied al&s;o with the mo&s;t retinue of errors, &s;ince the fir&s;t Embrio of it was brought forth, whether by a &s;ecret judgement of God, or from the natural and &s;ecret connexion with other Principles of darkne&s;s, will not with Mr.</HI> Sydnnham <HI>determine</HI> (oh won|derful Charity!) <HI>only God hath &s;hewed &s;ame black Characters of it in exery Nation, where it hath pre|vailed.</HI></P>
<P>And, <HI>Men of this opinion &s;o inflexible, that never any of them was heard to change his opinion, unle&s;s to &s;ome wor&s;e error,</HI> (and how can that well be, if this be true that you have affirmed?) But, what can be &s;poken more venanous, more fal&s;e, and repugnant to truth and common ho|ne&s;ty, and more &s;avouring of a malicious mind, is left to your Con&s;cience to determine; En|treating you &s;eriou&s;ly to con&s;ider how &s;uch deal|ing can &s;tand before the&s;e following <HI>Scriptures.</HI></P>
<P>Exod. 20 16. <HI>Thou &s;halt not bear fal&s;e witne&s;s again&s;t thy Neighbour.</HI></P>
<P>23 1. <HI>Thou &s;halt not receive a fal&s;e report, put not thy hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witne&s;s.</HI></P>
<PB N="68" REF="38">
<P>It being one of the things the Lord hates and abominates, as viz. Prov. 6.19. <HI>A fal&s;e wit|ne&s;s that &s;peaketh lies, and him that &s;oweth di&s;|cord among&s;t Brethren.</HI></P>
<P>Prov. 15.18. <HI>He that beareth fal&s;e witne&s;s a|gain&s;t his Neighbour is a maul, and a &s;word, and and a &s;harp Arrow.</HI></P>
<P>Prov. 19.9. <HI>A fal&s;e witne&s;s &s;hall not be unpu|ni&s;hed, and he that &s;peaketh lies &s;hall not e&s;cape.</HI></P>
<P>Deut. 19, 16, 18. <HI>If a fal&s;e witne&s;s ri&s;e up again&s;t any man to te&s;tify again&s;t him that which is wrong&mdash; the Judges &s;hall make diligent &s;earch; and behold, if the witne&s;s be a fal&s;e witne&s;s, and hath te&s;tified fal&s;ly again&s;t his Brother, then &s;hall you do unto him as he had thought to have done unto his Brother: &s;o &s;halt thou put the evil away from among you:</HI> Which I &s;hall conclude with that &s;erious word, Dr. <HI>Stubs</HI> &s;peaks to Mr. <HI>B.</HI> upon like occa&s;ion, and which I de&s;ire you to lay to heart: <Q>If he be a &s;lan|derer, who wrongs his Neighbours credit, ei|ther by unju&s;t rai&s;ing, or upholding an evil re|port again&s;t him, &s;urely you have cau&s;e to lay your hand upon your heart, and to toke &s;hame to you &s;elf. And if this be the mark of tho&s;e that &s;hall dwell in the Lords Tabernacle, that they are &s;uch that neither rai&s;e nor take up a reproach again&s;t their Neighbour, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 15, 3.</Q> <HI>What will become of You</HI> [Mr. Wills] <HI>and where, &amp; with whom mu&s;t you dwell to Eternity, if God do not humble you, for your &s;landerous and lying Tongue and Pen?</HI></P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. Preva|rication.</NOTE>Fourthly, are you not truly found guilty of <HI>Prevarication,</HI> in many particulars, the thing you &s;o notoriou&s;ly and fal&s;ly charge upon me, which is according to your own definition, p.
<PB N="69" REF="38"> 7. Vind. <HI>To coneeal what ought to have been de|clared on purpo&s;e to deceive:</HI> And of which I &s;hall give you a few of many In&s;tances that might be produced, <HI>viz.</HI></P>
<P>Fir&s;t, Is it not manife&s;t, as I have undeny|ably proved (and in your own word by Mathe|matical Demon&s;tration) that you <HI>left out &s;o many of the mo&s;t con&s;iderable pa&s;&s;ages of the Walden&s;ian Confe&s;&s;ions,</HI> as p. 45. 2 part Inf. Bapt. and for which you have given no &s;atisfaction, though you was &s;o earne&s;tly called upon by my &s;elf, as well as Mr. <HI>Tombes</HI> for the &s;ame.</P>
<P>Secondly, by leaving out <HI>part of that Con|fe&s;&s;ion you took out of Bi&s;hop &V;&s;her,</HI> p. 119. Vind. which <HI>Hoveden</HI> calls the <HI>Walden&s;es,</HI> I the <HI>Popi&s;h Inqui&s;itors,</HI> you only taking part of it, which declares for <HI>Infant Bapti&s;m to &s;ave them;</HI> and yet you can tell us at another time, that the <HI>Wal|den&s;es</HI> affirmed that it <HI>profited them not for &s;al|vation.</HI> That the better to hide the cheat can now tell us in their excu&s;e, that <HI>this was a dark time</HI> 500 <HI>years &s;ince; but in the mean time conceal that other part,</HI> which be&s;peaks it wholly <HI>Popi&s;h; viz.</HI> for the <HI>Ma&s;s, Popi&s;h-Prie&s;thood, Real pre&s;ence, Penance, &amp;c.</HI> which <HI>&V;&s;her</HI> is &s;o faithful to give, and which I have at large di&s;|covered to Mr. <HI>B.</HI> your Partner, in that evil; p. 84. 2 Reply.</P>
<P>Thirdly, by repeating every &s;yllable of that <HI>Qu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tati<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n</HI> p. 169. Vind. called <HI>Calvins;</HI> yet lea|ving out <HI>the la&s;t Clau&s;e E&s;tius</HI> Annot. on <HI>Gen.</HI> 17.7. which you know is there, as Treaty p. 176. Vind. And yet &s;o often upraid me for not calling it <HI>E&s;tius</HI>'s; not only in your fir&s;t Book, but 3 times, and very unmercifully too in your la&s;t.</P>
<PB N="70" REF="39">
<P>Fourthly, by <HI>Concealing</HI> &s;o much of the <HI>Tran|&s;lation of that out of Calvins In&s;titu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">es,</HI> that you might the better <HI>deceive</HI> your <HI>Engli&s;h Reader,</HI> and make him believe it was the Objection <HI>of Fools,</HI> and not owned by <HI>Calvin him&s;elf,</HI> which his next words, as I have demon&s;trated and you very well knew, doth.</P>
<P>Fifthly, by that injurious dealing with me in that Quotation of mine from <HI>Spanhaemius,</HI> and <HI>O&s;iander</HI> p. 326. of my Treat you only take no|tice of what <HI>Spanhaemius</HI> &s;peaks to part leave out what I &s;ay <HI>O&s;rander &s;aith</HI> to the re&s;t, and reprove me <HI>for my mi&s;take,</HI> p. 104. <HI>Iuf. Bapt.</HI> and though I called upon you in my <HI>Reply<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="MURP" EXTENT="1 letter">, for &s;atisfaction, Pref. and p.</HI> 148. yet you return ne not one &s;yl|lable in your la&s;t.</P>
<P>Sixthly, by that injurious leaving out what you in your fir&s;t p. quot from <HI>my</HI> 20. <HI>p.</HI> of Reply, which &s;peaks it to be quite an other thing then you make it to be, and thereupon charge me with <HI>prevarication,</HI> if not <HI>madne&s;s and contradiction,</HI> which was an ill beginning that you &s;hould &s;o &s;tumble at the threfhold; as though I quoted <HI>Au&s;tin,</HI> and tho&s;e Antients downwards to prove that the practi&s;e of <HI>Inf. Bapt.</HI> was not in tho&s;e <HI>Centuries,</HI> when I &s;ay the quite <HI>contrary,</HI> and tell you expre&s;ly that I quote them only for their &s;ayings, which <HI>&s;peak &s;o fully for Adult Bapti&s;m only,</HI> contrary to their expre&s;s practi&s;e. And then by affirming again and again that I contradict my &s;elf in owning the Antients were for Infants Bapti&s;m, and denying there was <HI>Antiquity for it:</HI> whereas the foregoing words in my 19. <HI>p.</HI> enu|merates them from <HI>Au&s;tin,</HI> and not the Antients of the former Centuries, whom I claim for <HI>Be|leivers Bapt.</HI> only.</P>
<PB N="71" REF="39">
<P>Seventhly, by the like injurious <HI>dealing with me,</HI> p. 57. Vind. taking part of a &s;aying of mine in <HI>Treat. p.</HI> 101. and leaving out the next follow|ing words in <HI>p.</HI> 102. rendring me thereby ridi|culous, and then call me at your plea&s;ure, when I am &s;o wholly innocent in the matter; <HI>viz. I ju&s;tify my &s;elf in my Reply p.</HI> 36. from <HI>that fal&s;hood you charge upon me, &s;uppo&s;ing me to &s;ay, that dipping was changed into Sprinkling the</HI> 3. <HI>Centurie,</HI> when I only &s;ay that <HI>the Magdeb. do tell us, that many corruptions about Bapt. was creeping in among&s;t the re&s;t I mentioned</HI> (as I &s;aw cau&s;e) that of <HI>Cyprians</HI> Letter to <HI>Magnus</HI> about <HI>Sprinkling, for dipping.</HI> But withall do &s;ay, they tell us they do not find any one per&s;on was then <HI>Baptized</HI> with any of their corrupt Ceremonies, having indeed, as they &s;oy, no <HI>authentik proof of the Baptizing of any one per&s;on;</HI> whereby I &s;ay it may be <HI>conjectured their corruptions were then more in the notion then pra|cti&s;e, which afterwards came all of them to be in u&s;e.</HI></P>
<P>You are plea&s;ed to repeat my former words about their <HI>beginning to alter the forme from dip|pin to &s;pinkling,</HI> and leave out all my latter words both what I &s;o fully &s;peak in the Treat. and my Rep. al&s;o. And then as p. 51. <HI>I &s;uppo&s;e,</HI> Reader, <HI>thou ha&s;t &s;eldom met with the like ridiculous contra|diction in any Author&mdash; So that he is the Man that hath cau&s;e to be a&s;hamed, and is found very un|faithfull in &s;peaking forwards and backwards at his plea&s;ure; yea, that which is manife&s;tly fal&s;e, and then denying in the &s;ame breath, &s;o adding one &s;al&s;e|hood to another.</HI></P>
<P>And therefore whil&s;t you judge me &s;o worthy of reproof for <HI>prevarication</HI> (though not at all
<PB N="72" REF="40"> proved <HI>by you</HI>) and you your &s;elf &s;o guilty thereof, as &s;o fully evidenced, doth not this following Scri|pture concern you?</P>
<P>Rom. 2.1.23. <HI>Therefore thou art inexcu&s;able, O Man, who&s;oever thou art that judge&s;t, for wherein thou judge&s;t thou condemne&s;t thy &s;elf, for thou that judge&s;t doth the &s;ame thing.</HI></P>
<P>But, <HI>we are &s;ure the judgement of God is accord|ing to truth again&s;t them, which commit &s;uch things. And thinke&s;t thou this, O Man, that judges them, which do &s;uch things and doth the &s;ame, that thou &s;halt e&s;cape the judgement of God,</HI></P>
<P>Ver&s;e 21. <HI>Thou therefore which teache&s;t another, teache&s;t thou not thy &s;elf, thou that preache&s;t, a Man &s;hould not &s;teal, do&s;t thou &s;teal.</HI> So thou that teache&s;t a Man &s;hould not prevaricate, why art thou guilty of &s;o much prevarication, and &s;o &s;elf judged and condemned therein?</P>
<P>And fifthly, is it not evident that you are hanou&s;ly guilty of <HI>Forgery;</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">5. <HI>Forge|ry.</HI></NOTE> <HI>viz.</HI> pretending Au|thors &s;ay <HI>&s;o</HI> and <HI>&s;o,</HI> when they &s;ay no &s;uch thing, or the quite <HI>contrary.</HI></P>
<P>Of which I &s;hall give you few In&s;tances.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, do not you affirm <HI>p.</HI> 45. <HI>Vind. that Wal|den &s;heweth from Wickliffs works that he was for Infants Bapti&s;m;</HI> whereas he abundantly &s;aith the quite contrary, and your own Pen is con|&s;trained at another time to acknowledge, as <HI>p.</HI> 125, 172. <HI>Vind.</HI></P>
<P>Secondly, do not you po&s;itively <HI>affirme, tha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Au&s;tin &s;aith in bis third Book</HI> De Anima, <HI>c.</HI> 13. that <HI>Vincentius Victor his opinion was that Infants that dyed Baptized went immediately to Heaven;</HI> where|as there is no &s;uch thing &s;aid, either in that or any other Chapter that I can find.</P>
<PB N="73" REF="40">
<P>Thirdly, do not you &s;ay that <HI>Rainerius in the Catalogue of the Walden&s;ian errours brings not one word of their denying Inf. Bapt.</HI> as p. 67. <HI>Inf. Bapt.</HI> whereas he expre&s;ly &s;aith in that Catalogue, that <HI>they affirmed Inf. Bapt.</HI> was nothing worth, and that <HI>Go&s;&s;ips that undertook for them knew not what they did; for which &s;ee Rep.</HI> p. 125.131.</P>
<P>Fourthly, do now affirme that Dr. <HI>Taylor in his Book called Con&s;ideration of the Practi&s;e of the Church,</HI> and Dr. <HI>Hamond in his Letter of Re&s;olu|tions, had given an&s;wer to tho&s;e Arguments produ|ced by me, out of his Liberty of Prophecy again&s;t Infants Bapti&s;m,</HI> as p. 36, 37, 98 of your <HI>Infants Bapti&s;m;</HI> whereas in p. 53, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> of my <HI>Reply,</HI> it is fully made out from both their words, that they do confirme tho&s;e Arguments to be good that are therein brought again&s;t the principle Ar|guments, the <HI>Paedobapti&s;ts</HI> bring for that their pract<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;e.</P>
<P>Fifthly, do not <HI>you prodvce</HI> Ba&s;il, <HI>to be an E|minent wotne&s;s for Infants Bapti&s;m in the fourth Century, as p.</HI> 136. Whereas there is never <HI>&s;uch a word to be found in any of Ba&s;ils writings that doth yet appear.</HI></P>
<P>Sixthly, you do po&s;itively affirme from the acquaintance you had with Father <HI>Ba&s;il</HI> that he in his third Book Contr. <HI>&V;nomiam</HI> in the very next lines after tho&s;e words <HI>I had repeated of that quotation, declared him&s;elf to be for Infants Ba|pti&s;m.</HI> And for <HI>my omitting the &s;ame, call upon the Reader to have a ca<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e henceforwards how they tru t my quotations f<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">r the palpable abu&s;e done to that Father, and for a fallacy and fal&s;hood upon the Reader,</HI> p. 13. Inf. Bapt. And again in his Pre|face, charging me <HI>for curtailing and leaving out
<PB N="74" REF="41"> part of that Sentence of Ba&s;ils.</HI> About which I got a Friend fir&s;t to write to you, to know where to find it: to which you replyed, that<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">You char|ged me not for mi&s;quo|ting, but for par|tially quo|ting and mi&s;apply- it, but could not direct to the page.</NOTE> for which manife&s;t injury done to <HI>Ba&s;il</HI> and <HI>me,</HI> al&s;o in that your &s;evere <HI>Reflection,</HI> I called for &s;ati&s;|faction, as p. 48. <HI>Reply.</HI> But all that I can get yet from you is this, that you mi&s;to<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">k only a name <HI>Ba&s;il</HI> for <HI>Naziazen,</HI> p. 61. <HI>Vind.</HI> Equilizing my mi&s;take of <HI>Albertus</HI> for <HI>Aquinus with it,</HI> p. 183.</P>
<P>Which I cannot take for due pay: Fir&s;t, be|cau&s;e it was not a bare &s;lip in ha&s;te, but a thing ju&s;tified by you in coold blood when I gave you time to <HI>deliberate upon it,</HI> by &s;ending &s;o civily <HI>to you that</HI> you might have an opportunity to rectify it, or clear your &s;elf.</P>
<P>Secondly, by your extenuating it, as though it was ju&s;t <HI>like my mi&s;taking, Albertus</HI> for <HI>Aqui|quinas,</HI> which I can by no means admit for that was a <HI>quotation</HI> for you to prove for Infant Bapt. which cannot demon&s;trate any <HI>wilfulne&s;s in me;</HI> nor that I could have any end in the mi&s;take, nor was it improved to <HI>your prejudice;</HI> whereas that of yours was a great <HI>proof again&s;t me,</HI> highly boa&s;ted of by you to di&s;cover your reading and acquain|tance with that <HI>Father,</HI> and improved much to my di&s;grace, and often and very &s;everly incul|cated upon me. Therefore I do expect from you more fuller &s;atisfaction therein, and your due humiliation <HI>for &s;uch a notorious mi&s;carriage.</HI></P>
<P>As well for your vainglorious boa&s;t as your tram|pling <HI>&s;o upon me.</HI></P>
<P>Seventhly, in like manner was your dea|ling about what you own to be your mi&s;take, only of a Century <HI>re&s;pectiong Peter Bruis p.</HI> 53. <HI>Inf. Bapt.</HI> out of <HI>O&s;iander,</HI> which was not only &s;o, but
<PB N="75" REF="41"> the &s;ever la&s;hes you gave <HI>me about it; viz.</HI> That <HI>you &s;ee by this that when Men are ingaged in a Cau&s;e, and wedded <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o an opinion, they will not re|fu&s;e the mo&s;t &s;ordid and &s;hamefull waies to promote it fall in with &s;landerous Papi&s;ts, and take up what they &s;ay to defend their opinions, witne&s;s my Anta|goni&s;t.</HI> And at this rate you go on cha&s;ti&s;ing of me, and all upon your own gro&s;s <HI>forgery and mi|&s;take:</HI> For which Sir, I expect your <HI>repentance,</HI> you did not mi&s;take a Century only, but <HI>Chri&s;tianity, Civility,</HI> and <HI>Common Hone&s;ty</HI> al&s;o; and you did not only <HI>abu&s;e me,</HI> but <HI>O&s;iander Cluniacen&s;is, Peter Bruis,</HI> and yet have you the confidence to tell me <HI>p.</HI> 131. that you could retort upon me, that I belyed <HI>Calvin,</HI> I belyed <HI>the Truth,</HI> and by that <HI>forgery,</HI> I would <HI>cover,</HI> and <HI>hide,</HI> and <HI>abu&s;e</HI> the World with a <HI>cheat,</HI> and <HI>much more, my own Con&s;cience,</HI> by that piece of <HI>folly and fal&s;hood.</HI></P>
<P>Whereas is now manife&s;tly appears that I did put <HI>E&s;tius</HI> his name to the Quotation; and there|fore there could be neither cheat, abu&s;ing of the World, forgery, nor fal&s;hood in the matter; which doth but heighten your crime, and makes more work <HI>for Repentance,</HI> which I al&s;o duly call far from you.</P>
<P>And therefore to further, the &s;ame de&s;ire you to read and con&s;ider the following Scriptures.</P>
<P>Lev. 19.11. <HI>Ye &s;hall not lie one to another.</HI></P>
<P>Prov. 14.5. <HI>A faithful witne&s;s will not lie, but a fal&s;e witne&s;s uttereth lies.</HI></P>
<P>Eph. 4.25. <HI>Wherefore puting away lying &s;peak every Man truth with his Neighbour.</HI></P>
<P>Col. 39. <HI>Lye not one to another.</HI></P>
<P>P&s;alm. 119.69. <HI>The proud hath forged lyes.</HI></P>
<P>Jer. 9, 3. <HI>They bend their tongues like bows for lies, but are not valiant for the truth.</HI></P>
<PB N="67" REF="42">
<P>With the Scriptures before mentioned, Rom. 2.1, 2, 3, 21. <HI>Becau&s;e you have proclamed me &s;uch a forger, and judged me for the &s;ame, but has yet made no proof thereof.</HI></P>
<P>And &s;ixthly, are not you guilty of <HI>Mi&s;tran&s;la|tion,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">6. <HI>Mi&s;tran|&s;lation.</HI></NOTE> and <HI>Mi&s;rendring Authors.</HI> For <HI>In&s;tance;</HI></P>
<P>Fir&s;t, That notorious pa&s;&s;age about the <HI>Mini&s;ts,</HI> which you tran&s;late quite contrary to <HI>Truth; viz.</HI> that <HI>they were for Re&s;i&s;tance in the Mun&s;ter way, and for di&s;troying the wicked by force of Armes, in or|der to the &s;etting up the Kingdom of Chri&s;t,</HI> p. 99. of Inf. Bapt. when the quite contrary is there &s;aid and the con&s;tant knowledge of their princi|ples and practi&s;e evinceth.</P>
<P>Secondly, for Mi&s;rendring that pa&s;&s;age out of <HI>Calvins In&s;titutes,</HI> before accounted for in the appeal to be the objection of fools, when <HI>Calvin</HI> owns the &s;ame to be his Judgement.</P>
<P>Thirdly, for Mi&s;rendring a pa&s;&s;age out of <HI>Au&s;tins</HI> 3. <HI>B. de Anima,</HI> fathring that upon <HI>Vin|centius Victor,</HI> that is not there &s;aid of him.</P>
<P><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ourthly, for tran&s;lating <GAP DESC="foreign">, to &s;ignify only an Infant without under&s;tanding, p. 11. <HI>Inf. Bapt.</HI> when the contrary is true, as appears 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3, 4. <HI>Thou ha&s;t known the holy Scriptures a Child, there is the &s;ame word.</HI></P>
<P>La&s;tly, whether your &s;olemn Appeal to the <HI>Searcher of hearts,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">7. <HI>Hypo|cri&s;y.</HI></NOTE> that you have no malignity to my Per&s;on, having ground to hope I am a Godly Man; and in your Preface to <HI>Vind. that you love me as a Brother though erring, and had much rather convince then &s;hame me, can be well reconciled to &s;incerity, and not rather &s;peaking lyes in hypocri&s;y:</HI> when it is con&s;idered, Fir&s;t, how you have declined all fair Brotherly waies
<PB N="77" REF="42"> of receiving &s;atisfaction, choo&s;ing rather in this publick manner to <HI>reproach</HI> and <HI>&s;lander me</HI> upon hear-&s;ay: 2. Jeer and <HI>Scoff at me:</HI> 3. to <HI>Raile</HI> upon and <HI>Revile me</HI> in that unchri&s;tian manner you have done, &s;peaking &s;o much <HI>evil of me fal&s;ly:</HI> 4. proclaiming me with your <HI>A&s;&s;ociates</HI> in the <HI>Gazette</HI> and in the <HI>Catalogues</HI> (where you know I cannot follow you for my vindication) 5. And at la&s;t &s;o groundle&s;ly, di&s;orderly, not to &s;ay maliciou&s;ly, to Appeal to the <HI>Bapti&s;t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"></HI> again&s;t me, as a per&s;on that has added contumacy to my mi&s;takes and evils.</P>
<P>All which is recommended to your Con&s;cience in the &s;ight of God, (and all that are con&s;ci|enciou&s;ly concerned with you) leaving it to your choice, which of your promi&s;es you will keep, whether that in the conclu&s;ion of your fir&s;t <HI>Pref. Vind. To an&s;wer me by &s;ilence, becau&s;e you will not gape again&s;t an Oven:</HI> Or that in the end of your la&s;t <HI>Preface,</HI> viz. <HI>That if I can make it appear that you have wronged me herein, as you can truly &s;ay you did it not willingly: So you faithfully promi&s;e to make me publick &s;atisfaction, by acknowledging your mi&s;takes.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
<BACK>
<DIV1 TYPE="errata">
<PB REF="43">
<HEAD>ERRATA.</HEAD>
<P>PAg. 8. l. ult. r. <HI>enjoyned,</HI> p. 10. l. 28. r. <HI>Rhenanus,</HI> p. 14. l. 32. r. <HI>obloquy,</HI> p. 18. l. 13. dele <HI>rhe,</HI> and the <HI>Comma</HI> at Doctor, l. 23. r. <HI>to</HI> &s;peak, l. 26. r. <HI>words,</HI> p. 19. l. 28. r. <HI>by</HI> them, p, 21, l, 15, dele <HI>that,</HI> p. 35. l. 27 r. <HI>ought</HI> &s;o to do, p. 38 l. 1. r. <HI>codice,</HI> p. 41. l. 16 &amp; 19. r. <HI>Aquinas,</HI> p, 51, l, 19, r, <HI>philautia,</HI> p. 52. l. 8, r, <HI>malevo|lent,</HI> l, 17, r. <HI>Mun&s;ter and,</HI> p, 55, l, 21, r, <HI>that</HI> they, l, 32, r, <HI>for,</HI> p. 65. l. 23. dele <HI>of,</HI> p, 67, l, 19, r, <HI>every,</HI> l, 25, r, <HI>venemous,</HI> p, 70, l, 12, r, <HI>O&s;iander,</HI> p. 73. l. 8. for <HI>do now</HI> r. do not you, l. 27. r. <HI>Eunomium.</HI> p, 74, l, 8, r, <HI>Nazianzen, equalizing,</HI> l, 9, and 18, r, <HI>Aquinas.</HI></P>
<P>I de&s;ire the Reader, where I mention to Mr. <HI>Will's</HI> (in p, 2, <HI>Pref.</HI> and p. 51, &amp; 53,) the mi&s;takes I own, not to under&s;tand it exclu&s;ive of tho&s;e few &s;light and im|material ones not mentioned there, as that of the Canon of <HI>Con&s;tant,</HI> which I my &s;elf found to be &s;purious, that of <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tom's</HI> not being in a different Character, my tran&s;lating the pa&s;&s;age of <HI>Nazianzen,</HI> metaphra&s;tically, putting <HI>Zonaras</HI> for the <HI>Magdeburgs;</HI> that of Mr. <HI>Bax|ters, work,</HI> for <HI>be</HI> no &s;uch cau&s;e.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="postscript">
<PB REF="43">
<HEAD>A POSTSCRIPT by <HI>H. D.</HI></HEAD>
<P>FOR the Readers better and more full &s;atisfaction (after the great cry again&s;t me for <HI>Forgery</HI> and <HI>prevarication</HI> by my <HI>Antagoni&s;ts</HI>) I have here gi|ven you together, this brief account of all the mi&s;takes of moment that I have met with from any hand. And which the Reader is de&s;ired to correct in the <HI>Treati&s;e</HI> as he meets with them; which are as followeth, <HI>viz.</HI></P>
<LIST>
<ITEM><HI>1.</HI> Of my own or Friends di&s;covery, <HI>p. 55, 56. for Ea&s;tern r. We&s;tern, p. 139. for</HI> Era&s;mus <HI>r.</HI> Beza, <HI>p. 124. dele what is produced from</HI> Lanafrank <HI>about</HI> Beringarius, <HI>and p. 68. and 115. and Index, dele the Canon of the Coun|cil of</HI> Con&s;tant. <HI>as &s;purious.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>2. Of Mr.</HI> Baxters <HI>finding out, p. 223. for 3 &amp; 4 book again&s;t the</HI> Donati&s;ts <HI>r. 4 book, p. 286. 294. for</HI> Cochleus <HI>r.</HI> Walden.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>3. Of Mr.</HI> Wills's, <HI>p. 75. for</HI> Aquinas <HI>r.</HI> Alber|tus, <HI>p. 116. dele</HI> Deodans, <HI>and for</HI> Hincmarus <HI>r.</HI> Sericius, <HI>p. 117. r.</HI> Magdeburgs <HI>for</HI> Zonaras, <HI>p. 155. for</HI> work no &s;uch cau&s;e <HI>r.</HI> be no &s;uch cau&s;e, <HI>p. 287. dele</HI> Pelagius <HI>and</HI> Vincentius Victor.</ITEM>
</LIST>
<P>The&s;e being all the errors of any weight I have yet met with from any: The judicious Reader will be more able to di&s;cern;</P>
<P N="1"><PB REF="44"><HI>1.</HI> Whether here be any <HI>Forgery</HI> or <HI>Prevaricati|on,</HI> or any wilful <HI>abu&s;e,</HI> or <HI>mi&s;leading</HI> the Reader, (as with &s;o much virulence &s;ugge&s;ted) or any other over-&s;ight or mi&s;takes, then &s;uch as u&s;ually attend other writings; and therefore whether all the cla|mour and out-cry of my Antagoni&s;ts, di&s;covers not more of <HI>malice</HI> then <HI>matter,</HI> and is the re&s;ult rather of <HI>prejudice</HI> and <HI>pa&s;&s;ion,</HI> then a <HI>zeal</HI> for the candid inve&s;tigation of truth.<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">To lead from the main que|&s;tion to things not to the pur|po&s;e, and make a hea+vy &s;tir a|bout them, is the right Method of Cavillers; and which my Oppo|&s;ites take with me in this con|trover&s;ie.</NOTE></P>
<P N="2"><HI>2.</HI> Whether &s;ince the Exceptions appear to be &s;o <HI>in&s;ignificant</HI> and <HI>immaterial</HI> to the great point contended about, and no weightyer objections made good after &s;o &s;evere a &s;crutiny, and troubling the World with the du&s;t and pudder made about them, the Que&s;tion in debate be not fully given up, viz. <HI>That it is now clearly manife&s;t, that there is no Primitive Antiquity for Infants Bapti&s;m, nor no Record to make it appear that it was practi|ced as Chri&s;ts Ordinance for the fir&s;t 300 years;</HI> The truth whereof having not only been evinced by unan&s;wered Arguments and Demon&s;tration; but from their own Pens, being con&s;trained at la&s;t to acknowledge, <HI>That except in ca&s;e of danger of Death, there is no Record in the Hi&s;tory of the Church for the nece&s;&s;ity thereof in tho&s;e fir&s;t times.</HI></P>
<P>Therefore the Reader is de&s;ired to take notice what <HI>ground</HI> we get herein, and how far this <HI>con|&s;ideration</HI> tends to ju&s;tifie our practice, <HI>viz.</HI></P>
<P N="1"><HI>1.</HI> That the Baptizing of Believers, after pro|fe&s;&s;ion of Faith, is not only evidenced by expre&s;s precept and example from the Scripture; (the true and only way whereby Chri&s;ts Ordinances are e&s;ta|bli&s;ht to Prote&s;tants) but by the univer&s;al con&s;ent of all Ages; our very <HI>Enemies</HI> being <HI>Judges.</HI></P>
<P N="2"><PB REF="44"><HI>2.</HI> That the Baptizing of Infants is neither to be made good by any <HI>expre&s;s precept</HI> or <HI>practice</HI> from Scripture; nor as an <HI>Apo&s;tolical Tradition</HI> for the&s;e fir&s;t and pure&s;t times; as our Adver&s;aries al&s;o acknowledge; though they would in&s;inuate as if they could con&s;equentially deduce it; whereas no natural nor un-forc'd con&s;equence can be inferr'd in its favour from Scripture or primitive Antiquity, but ab&s;urd and illogical <HI>non-&s;equiturs,</HI> proving nothing &s;o much as the weakne&s;s of the cau&s;e they endeavour to &s;upport.</P>
<P>So that it nece&s;&s;arily and undeniably follows, That though <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> and &s;ome <HI>Prote&s;tants</HI> may plead <HI>Antiquity</HI> &s;ince the 5th. <HI>Century,</HI> and no higher (the <HI>Milevitan</HI> Synod that fir&s;t impo&s;ed it, being in the year <HI>416.</HI>) for the nece&s;&s;ity of Bap|tizing of Children to <HI>take away Original &s;in, re|generate</HI> and <HI>&s;ave their Souls,</HI> with the Conco|mitants of <HI>Chry&s;m, Exorci&s;m, Go&s;&s;ips,</HI> &amp;c. Yet the <HI>Prote&s;tants</HI> with whom we have to do <HI>(owning this to be a poy&s;onous Antichri&s;tian Doctrine)</HI> cannot pretend higher for their Chri&s;t|ning Children upon the account of <HI>foederal</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Which no|vel Argu|ment of foe|deral right is excel|lently refu|ted by Mr. <HI>Ed. Hut|chin&s;on.</HI></NOTE> right then the 15th. or 16th. Century. And that there|fore (they rejecting the grounds of the Ancients) their Infants Bapti&s;m upon this new <HI>Medium</HI> is a very <HI>novelty.</HI> So that I hope we &s;hall hear no more of Antiquity for Infants Bapti&s;m of any &s;ort.</P>
<P>And 3ly, that it yet undeniably appears, that a famous Witne&s;s has been born for <HI>Believers</HI> and again&s;t <HI>Infants Bapti&s;m</HI> in the &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Ages &s;ince Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>And as a further ratification of the truth of the&s;e things pleaded for betwixt us in this conte&s;t, it may not be unnece&s;&s;ary to mind the Reader the &s;en&s;e
<PB REF="45"> that &s;ome <HI>&s;tanders</HI> by have given by their <HI>&s;uffrages,</HI> both as to the <HI>manner</HI> and <HI>matter</HI> pleaded for, which you have exemplified in the learned and ju|d<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="MURP" EXTENT="4 letters">us di&s;qui&s;itions of Mr. <HI>Hutchin&s;on</HI> in his late <HI>Reflections</HI> and <HI>Animadver&s;ions</HI> upon Mr. <HI>Bax|ter,</HI> Mr. <HI>Wills,</HI> and <HI>Whi&s;ton's</HI> Writings. The Letter of Mr. <HI>T. B.</HI> to Mr. <HI>Wills,</HI> the Epi&s;tle of Mr. <HI>Tho. DeLaune</HI> before Mr. <HI>Hutchin&s;on's;</HI> all of them &s;o great &s;trangers to me, that I neither ever &s;aw any of their <HI>Faces,</HI> or &s;o much as heard of their <HI>names</HI> that I know of, before their &s;aid <HI>works.</HI></P>
<P>And to which I may pre&s;ume to add a Let<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">er &s;ent to me upon this occa&s;ion, <HI>by a per&s;on of Qua|lity,</HI> a &s;earcher into this Controver&s;ie, and one of known <HI>worth, ability,</HI> and <HI>moderation;</HI> which you may take as followeth.</P>
<LETTER LANG="eng">
<OPENER><SALUTE>SIR,</SALUTE></OPENER>
<P>As to Mr. <HI>Baxters</HI> Piece (which &s;o &s;oon as I heard of, I forthwith &s;ent for) I have cur&s;orily run over, e&s;pecially that part thereof, which more immediately concerns your &s;elf, and am &s;orry to &s;ee &s;o much <HI>Rancor</HI> and <HI>Ma|lice</HI> in the writings of one who hath had &s;o great a Name for <HI>Religion</HI> and <HI>Piety:</HI> But whi|ther will not <HI>Pride, Pa&s;&s;ion,</HI> and an <HI>Over-weening Opinion</HI> of a mans &s;elf carry tho&s;e who are over come by them?</P>
<P>When I fir&s;t read your <HI>Treati&s;e of Bapti&s;m,</HI> I hoped it would have occa&s;ioned a <HI>&s;erious</HI> and <HI>full Di&s;qui&s;ition</HI> of that point; but whether through the <HI>unhappy</HI> temper of your <HI>Opponents,</HI> or what el&s;e I know not, I have been hitherto <HI>di&s;appoin|ted</HI> in my <HI>expectation,</HI> meeting in their writings
<PB REF="45"> with more of <HI>heat, pa&s;&s;ion,</HI> and <HI>per&s;onal reflections,</HI> then of <HI>Rea&s;on</HI> or a <HI>&s;ober Inqui&s;ition</HI> after Truth.</P>
<P>I am not &s;o well vers'd in <HI>Antiquity,</HI> as to &s;ay when <HI>Infant Bapti&s;m</HI> fir&s;t came in u&s;e among&s;t <HI>Chri&s;tians;</HI> but admire a matter of <HI>fact</HI> only, as that is, &s;hould be &s;o difficult to be determi|ned: But if it were not in all, or at lea&s;t the <HI>fir&s;t</HI> and <HI>pure&s;t</HI> Ages of <HI>Chri&s;tianity,</HI> (as &s;ome learned <HI>Paedobapti&s;ts</HI> &s;eem to grant it was not) it cannot be &s;aid to be of <HI>Apo&s;tolical Tradition;</HI> the be&s;t plea, if true, I have yet heard for it; and therefore I could wi&s;h that Point had been <HI>&s;oberly</HI> and <HI>calmly</HI> debated. I mu&s;t confe&s;s, I know not of any <HI>difference</HI> among&s;t <HI>Profe&s;sors</HI> of more <HI>unhappy</HI> and <HI>pernicious</HI> Con&s;equence than this of <HI>Bapti&s;m,</HI> in regard of that <HI>&s;epara|tion</HI> and <HI>Divi&s;ion</HI> it cau&s;es among&s;t <HI>Learned,</HI> &s;in|cere, and truly Pious Chri&s;tians; for &s;uch I no ways doubt but there are of both per&s;wa&s;ions. But 'tis matter of greate&s;t trouble and &s;orrow to me, to &s;ee with what <HI>uncharitable</HI> and <HI>un|chri&s;tian Spirits</HI> &s;ome men manage this Contro|ver&s;ie, even to the reproach and &s;candal of Re|ligion, and this too in a day, when our com|mon &s;ufferings ought in prudence, if not for Piety-&s;ake to unite us; at lea&s;t in <HI>Brotherly</HI> love, and a Chri&s;tian Walking together &s;o far as we have <HI>attained,</HI> and in other things to a Patient waiting for the <HI>Revelation</HI> of the mind of God, to them that differ; who in his good timewill, I doubt not, <HI>&V;nite</HI> our <HI>Affections, Heal</HI> our <HI>Breaches,</HI> and make us <HI>all</HI> but <HI>one Sheep-fold,</HI> under the great Shepherd of the Sheep <HI>Chri&s;t Je&s;us,</HI> to who&s;e guidance and protection I mo&s;t heartily recommend you, and for the pre|&s;ent remain, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<PB REF="46">
<P><HI>And la&s;tly, I hope the</HI> Bapti&s;ts <HI>an&s;wer to Mr.</HI> Wills <HI>his</HI> Appeal <HI>again&s;t me, will have no &s;mall tendency to i&s;sue this Controver&s;ie, who&s;e diligent &s;earch (by tho&s;e learned Men they appointed there|to) into the Authors quoted by me, and excepted again&s;t by him, will be a &s;ufficient vindication (I doubt not) of my</HI> integrity <HI>in my</HI> Quotations, <HI>as well as the truth a&s;&s;erted thereby; and a due Reproof to Mr.</HI> Wills <HI>for his great</HI> Temerity, <HI>be|ing him&s;elf &s;o eminently found guilty by them in &s;o many things he &s;o injuriou&s;ly charges upon me, in&s;omuch that they (as he de&s;ires,</HI> in ca&s;e my in|nocency appears to them) <HI>as you &s;ee, have thought ju&s;t to acquit me, and reflect the blame of the Charge upon him&s;elf: All which is again &s;ub|mitted to his Con&s;cience, the Impartial Readers, and the ble&s;&s;ing of the Almighty. By</HI></P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED>H. D.</SIGNED></CLOSER>
</LETTER>
</DIV1>
</BACK>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
