A Reply to a Pretended Christians Plea for the Church of Rome, Part 9

A Reply to a Pretended Christians Plea for the Church of Rome · Part 9

p. 122Of the Baptisme in the Church of Rome.

ALthough the former things against the Church of Rome, be ynough to disprove her baptisme, which is ordained of God onelyonly for his Church, and those in his covenant, out of which Rome is gone: yet because mine opposite urgeth some speciall reasons against mee, for the same; I will also briefly answer them.

About this poynt, he hath nine reasons; in his Christian plea, pag. 27...30.

1. The first, which is against the repeating of Baptisme againe: I grant him: neither doe I hold it needfull or lawfull to repeate again the baptisme received in false churches.

2. The second, being for the same purpose, I likewise grant. As also, that there is one baptisme, as there was one circumcision: which plea of his, I would have noted, because of his contrary reasoning afterward. Likewise his example from Israel, whose circumcision was not repeated; I hold very fit. But let the Reader observe, how the Scriptures by him brought to prove it, are 2. Chron. 30. chap. & Ezr. 6. 19. 20. 21. of which the first was before the captivity, the other after.

3. The third, that the covenant of grace is everlasting, is also true: but should have this addition, taught of the holy Ghost, To such as keep his covenant, & that remember his commandements to do them: Psal. 103. 17. 18. For, if we deny him, he also wil deny us, 2. Tim. 2. 12. That God hath regard to his covenant in Apostaticall churches and estate, is also true: but barely by him set down, without shewing how. That Moses teacheth us in Levit. 26. namely, that the Israelites for their apostasie and forsaking of God, ††v. 16—28.should be chastised; and if they would not amend, they should at last be **v. 33.scattred among the heathen, and ““v. 38.perish among them: and they that are left, ††v. 39. 40.if they confesse their iniquity, and the iniquity of their fathers; and if their **v. 41.uncircumcised hearts be humbled, &c. ““v. 42.then God will remember his covenant with Iakob, and ††v. 44.will not cast them away, nor abhorr them, to destroy them utterly, to breake his covenant with them; but **v. 45.will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors.

4. The fourth, of Christs dying once, and our being once p. 123baptised: I also grant.

5. The fift, that the Church of Rome was espoused to Christ, and had his baptisme in the Apostles dayes: is true. But where he addeth, that she hath ever since reteined it, with other grounds of Christian religion; there he goeth too farr. For many grounds of Christian religion she hath forsaken: as all that are not Papists will acknowledge. Wherefore he addeth a qualification, either for faith, or order, or both, in whole or in part. This is so large as will bring in, not onelyonly the heathens of old, but all the old condemned heretickes in the Apostles dayes and after, yea even the very Iewes and Turkes at this day. For in part they retein the grounds of Christian religion. It is a ground of Christian religion to beleeve that there is one God: and that the very Divils (as the Apostle sayth) doe beleeve, Iam. 2. 19. But not to goe so farr, as I grant him that the Papists in baptisme retein Christs ordinance in whole or in part; so he cannot deny, but also in the Lords Supper (now turned to an abominable idolatrous Masse,) they reteyn Christs ordinance in whole or in part; and so in other their abominations. The Pope himselfe, the great Antichrist, the son of perdition, reteyneth Christian religion in part. The image of God wherein he made man at the first, Gen. 1. 26. remaineth in all men still in part, as the Scriptures testifie, Gen. 9. 6. Iam. 3. 9. Wherefore if the reteyning of things in part, holdeth men still in the state of grace and salvation: who then shall be damned? What a wide gate is here opened into the kingdom of heaven, that if men reteyn Christian religion, either for faith or order, or both; in whole or in part, they remain still in the church and covenant of grace: which is quite contrary to the doctrine of Christ, and of his Apostles, Math. 7. 13. 14. 22. 23. 1. Cor. 6. 9. 10. Gal 5. 19. 20. 21.

6. His sixt reason, from the Iesuites profession made in their Rhemes Testament &c, I have before answered; it being in his second argument made for the church of Rome. And that which he addeth of their baptising with water in the name of the Father &c: is of no more weight to justifie their baptisme; then the like elements of bread and wine, and the words of Christs institution This is my body &c, are to justifie the Popish Masse to be the true supper of our Lord. Of which Mass, (to omitt that which many others have written of the abomination of it) Mr. Calvin **In his sermon against idolatry, on Psa. 16. 4.Ps 16:4sayth thus, The Mass …n itself is a ronouncing of the death of Jesus Christ, and a sacrilege forged by p. 124Satan, utterly to abolish the sacrament of the Supper.

7. His seventh reason, that Iewes and Pagans are turned to the popish Christian …aith; was also refured in answer to his second reason brought for the church of Rome. The conclusion, that there needeth no repeating of baptisme, as there was none of circumcision: is granted, and by me never denyed.

8. Likeweise his eight reason▪ that God hath his people in the Romish Babylon, Rev. 18. 4. under his covenant of grace; is before answered. But he should have proved (if he could) that Babylon itself (which is the church of Rome) is under the covenant of grace: that I deny, the holy Ghost shewing in Rev. 17. & 18. ch. that she is under wrath, and destruction. He sayth, the children of that church should plead with their mother (as the Prophets taught and dealt with Jsrael of old, Hos 2. 2. & 3. 1. & 4. 1. 2. 12. &c) that she take away her fornications out of her sight &c. It is true, so they should: but why doth this man diminish from the word of God? For the Prophets words are, Plead with your mother, plead; for she is not my wife, neyther am J her husband; let her therfore …ut away her whordomes &c, Hos. 2. 2. Thus doe I plead against this mother church of Rome; but my opposite blameth me, and pleadeth for her, she is the wife of Christ, and not divorced▪ as before we have heard. Baptisme (sayth he) is not of her adulteries, but of Christs ordinances. True, so is the Lords supper, so is excommunication, not of her adulteries; but of Christs ordinances; and we reteyn them from Christ. But that whorish church hath corrupted and adulterated all these and other ordinances of Christ, & turned them to abominable idolatries and lyes; for which we also plead against her: and her synfull abuse of these divine ordinances, shall nor justify, but the more condemne her.

9. To his ninth and last reason, if baptisme be renounced, then also the articles of …aith, the Scriptures and translations: likewise mariages dissolved, &c. I answer. Farr be it, that we should renounce any good thing whith the church of Rome abuseth▪ any more then Paul renounced the true God, whom the Athenians ignorantly worshiped: Ao…. 17. 23. Whatsoever is of divine▪ institution among Papists▪ Iewes, Turks or heathens, we renounce it not; but their profanation and abuse of holy things, we doe renounce. Neither can wee justifie their estate, or any holy thing in their sinfull abuse of it … though we put difference between the things▪ which in their ow… nature are good, and the persons which are evill, Thus men, ma… p. 125see how weak and without edge his reasons are to justifie the bap tisme in the church of Rome, to be in their use of it the true seale of Gods covenant of grace in Christ unto them.

Next this, he setteth himselfe to answer objections, ††Chr. plea pag. 30.The first wherof he maketh this. But **The An… baptists. … H. A. An… madv. p. 68-72. 71-75.the baptisme had in the Church of Rome, i… not true baptisme: but an idol, and lying signe; a detestable and cursed sacrament; a fiction and not true Christian baptisme; ““Mr. Cl.no better then when we wash our owne face with water dayly. &c.

Answ. That it is not true baptisme, I constantly affirme: so did Mr. Iohnson ††Apol. pag▪ 110.himselfe, whiles he stood in, and wrote for the truth. That the Papists have turned baptisme into an idoll: I have also formerly **Animad p. 68. 69. 7… ▪ 73.proved; and wil maintain, against his answers. That therefore it is detestable and cursed unto them, through their abuse of it, doth necessarily follow: for the sacrifice of the wicked is an abominatiō to the Lord, Pro. 15. 8. That it should be no better then the dayly washing of our face; is wrongfully imputed to us; and Mr. Cl. whom hee citeth in his margine, professeth to hold no such thing. For our dayly washing, is no religious action, nor sacrament at all; but baptisme by hereticks and apostates, is a religious action after their manner, and a false sacrament, therfore neither true, neither yet none at all; as our opposite with us once professed. Apolog. p. 110. Insted of proving it true baptisme, hee bringeth reasons to shew, that if it were an idol and lying signe, it ought to be renounced, and an other received. This he knoweth the Anabaptists doe practise: so it is no conviction of, them all. But he bendeth his force now against us, and leaveth them. Let us try what he sayth.

1. Because (sayth he) idols and lying signes and fictions are not of God, but of the Divil, who is a liar, and father thereof, Ioh. 8. 44. Rom. 3. 4.

Answ. I grant that which he sayth: but he concludeth not the question. Idols so farr as they are idols and lies; are wholly of the Divill, and so farr forth to be renounced. But some idols and lies, are made of Gods true ordinances, and of his good creatures; as Paul sayth of the Gentiles, that they changed the truth of God into a lye; and worshiped and served the creature, Rom. 1. 25. Here the Gentiles lie, is to be doen away, and their idolatry renounced: but the truth of God is to be reteined, and a holy use of the good creature may be had, which they abused. So wee have renounced the popish idolatry and lies which they have brought upon Gods sacraments; but the truth we reteyne.

p. 1262. An idol, or such a baptisme as is no more then a dayly washing of our faces, cannot be the signe and seale of Gods true and everlasting covenant, &c.

Answ. I grant it: and from his own words conclude against him; Baptisme in the Church of Rome is formerly proved to be an idoll: because they give to the creature and work of mans hands, that honour which is due unto Christ onelyonly. Therefore it cannot bee a signe and seale of Gods everlasting covenant; by his owne grant. As for us, we reteyne no idoll, but Gods truth onelyonly, as before I shewed.

3. The signe in a Sacrament is that which is outward and visible; which in baptisme is washing with water in the name of the Lord. Jf this be a fiction and lying signe, in the churches aforesayd, then is it not the Lords: and they there baptised have not then the outward visible signe, which the Lord ordained to be had of his people, and therefore are bound to get it unto them, where it may be had, Rom. 4. 11. & 6. 3. 4. Act. 10. 47. 48. &c.

Answ. 1. The first part of his reason is unperfectly set down: for washing with water is a signe of the washing away of sinns, by and in Gods institution onelyonly; by which institution it is to bee ministred to none but the faithfull and their seed, Act. 8. 36. 37. & 2. 38. 39. If it be not ministred according to this ordinance of God, it is not the signe of his grace in that abuse, though it be the thing which God in the right use hath appoynted for a signe. 2. Hee would deceive his reader, as if we held washing should be with any other creature then water, or in any other name then the Lords. These things wee know are in themselves the true ordinances of Christ; but by Antichrist turned to a lye, whiles hee falsly applyeth them to his adulterous synagogue, which Christ hath given to his Church onelyonly; and whiles hee idolatrously giveth that grace to the work of his sacrilegious priests, which is peculiar to Christ and his bloud. It is the true signe of the covenant of Christ which is by Antichrist turned to a lye: and if we should devise to our selves any other signe, we should be lyars like him: who hath devised, creame, spittle, and other like elements, synfully joyned with his baptisme.

4. That also is to be doen without delay, seeing the neglect of baptisme is sin, and no unbaptised may eat of the Lords Supper, &c.

Answ. It is true: and so we, if we had not been baptised with water, &c. would doe it without delay. But hee trifleth, insisting p. 127upon the outward element, which he knoweth we had: and leaveth the main thing, the relation to the covenant of grace, which we had not in that Antichristian synagogue.

5. Jf any reteine an idol baptisme, &c. and presume to come to the Lords table, they eat judgement to themselves.

Answ. We reteyne no idoll baptisme: but have put away the idoll, and the lye: and reteyne the truth onelyonly, as before is shewed. The same we answer to his sixt reason, which is but a repetition and inlargement of his former, as is his manner.

7. Neither can it be thought that repentance (which still they speak of) should ever make a lye to be a truth, and idol to be Gods ordinance, &c. For though repentance findeth mercy with God for a lye, yet a lye is a lye stil, and an idol-vanity. Zach. 10. 2. Ier. 10. 8. Ioh. 8. 44. & 14. 6. & 17. 17. with 2. Cor. 6. 14. 15. 16.

Answ. It is true, of such idols and lies as the Scriptures which he citeth speaketh of; but there are other idols and lies, which by men are made of God himselfe, and of his word and ordinances, which by Gods grace upon mens repentance and faith, are restored to the first truth. As, the Gentiles changed the truth of God into a lye, Rom. 1. 25. and changed the glory of the incorruptible God, into an image, Rom. 1. 23. and Israel changed God their glory, into the similitude of an Oxe, Psal. 106. 20. When they repented of their changing the truth into a lye, they reteyned the truth still, and kept that God whom before they ignorantly worshiped, and of whom they had made an idoll to themselves, Act. 17. 23. So for Gods ordinances; as, if the Israelites had made idols of Jachin and Boaz (the two sacramentall pillars in the Temple) 2. Chron. 3. 17. and had burnt incense to them, as they did to the brazen Serpent, 2. King. 18. 4. they should have repented of, and put away their idolatry, but have reteyned those pillars still, for such signes as God had ordeyned them. But such pillars and posts as Israel had invented of their own heads, and set them by the Lords posts, Ezek. 43. 8. no repentance could make them the Lords posts, but they must have been utterly taken away. So in Popish baptisme, water is the Lords ordinance, by them abused and turned to an idoll: salt, oyle, &c. are Antichrists ordinances set up also for idols; these latter we utterly reject, because they were never Gods ordinances in baptisme; the water we reteyne, having put away onelyonly the abuse and lye of Antichrist annexed thereto. If this bee not so, then the Iewes p. 128should not onelyonly have repented of and put away their lye, when they used those lying words, The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, &c. Ier. 7. 4. but they must have destroyed the Temple it selfe also. And whereas the Papists and other hereticks make lyes of the Scriptures, and of Christs holy words This is my body, make their idoll of Transubstantiation, and the like; they thould not onelyonly repent of their lies, and put away their idols; but also renounce Christs words, and put away the holy Scriptures; if this doctrine of our opposites be true.

8. Nor doe they in deed repent, who stil reteyne such baptisme, as themselves think to be an idol, &c. for true repentance bindeth us to cast away all idols, &c.

Answ. This is already answered: neither doe we reteyn such a baptisme as wee think to be an idol; but that ordinance of God which was an idol by Antichrists abuse, and is through the grace of God restored unto his former truth, that onelyonly doe wee reteyne, repenting of our former abuse thereof amongst them. God himselfe (as I have shewed) was made an idoll by the Gentiles; their repentance bound them to cast away their idolatry, but to reteyn God still.

Wheras they say, **Animadv. …g. 70.We have gotten the Lords baptisme by comming to the Lord in true faith and repentance, who ††Mat. 3. 11 … Cor. 12. …. Pet. 3. 21.Matt 3:11baptiseth us with the holy Ghost and with fire. As for the outward washing which we had, it need not be repeated, [as before is shewed: and we may as lawfully eat the Lords Supper, without a new washing, as the idolatrous Isralites turning to the Lord, might eat the Passover without a new cutting or circumcising. 2. Chron. 30. 1. 5. 11. 18.—25. Ezr. 6. 21.] And afterward say, ††Page 72.We have renounced that Romish baptisme, as an impure idol in their abuse, [standing up in the place of Christ and his precious blood, which it is not; pretending to give grace, and wash away sinns, which it doth not] &c. they doe but shift and contradict themselves, and deceive others, and still run into errours, more and more.

Answ. Great words as if he would beare down all before him. But let us heare his proofes.

For first (sayth he) speaking of the Lords baptisme, they speake of that which is inward: whereas our question, is of that which is outward.

Answ. A good beginning. The Apostle sayth, there is one Lord, one faith, one baptisme; Eph. 4. 5. Himselfe also a little before, **Chr. plea …ag. 27.sayd against the Anabaptists, There is one baptisme, as there was one circumcision. Now against us, he would have two baptismes, one outward, p. 129an other inward. Whereas, though there bee two actions, one outward, doen by men, the other inward, doen by Gods spirit: yet both are but one baptisme, one sacrament; as the outward body, and the inward soule, make not two men, but one man. A sacrament is a sacred order between the outward visible thing, and the spirituall invisible, which have a mutuall proportion and likenesse between them. The Apostle sayth, That is not circumcision which is outward in the flesh, but that which is of the heart, in the spirit, Rom. 2. 28. 29. If they have in Rome but the outward washing, without the inward: then have they not true baptisme, but a false deceitfull signe. Secondly, it is not true, that I spake but of the inward work onelyonly, for I spake also of the outward; which being had in Rome, need not be repeated: as I shewed by the example of the Israelites. Now which of us two shifteth, contradicteth, and deceiveth, I or he: let indifferent men say.

2. They spake (sayth he) of abuses in the ministration, and opinions of the Ministers thereof: whereas our question is of the thing it selfe, not of the abuse.

Answ. We speak of the thing it selfe (Baptisme) abused by the ministers and receivers; neither of which are in Gods covenant; and therefore can have no true signe or seale of his covenant unto them in that estate. Secondly, if it were not for abuses and opinions of men, God and his truth, and ordinances, could never bee changed into lies and idols, as the Apostle teacheth us they were, Rom. 1. 23. 25. The Athenians were idolaters against the true God; whom Paul preached, and whom they ignorantly worshiped, Act. 17. 23. If one would take them in hand to excuse them, & say, Our question is of the thing it selfe (the true God) and not of the Athenians abuses and opinions, were it not a worthy plea? yet such we have, for Antichristians baptisme.

3. Their assertion (sayth he) implieth that they had not the Lords baptisme, till they got it themselves by comming to the Lord in true faith and repentance, which is plain Anabaptistry, and covert Popery and Arminianisme: whereby they debase Gods grace, and exalt mans works. For it must be understood either of the inward or outward baptisme: if of the inward, besides that it toucheth not the question, it implieth Popery: if of the outward, it conteyneth Anabaptistry.

Answ. Deliver my soule, ô Lord, from lying lips, from the deceitful tongue: Psa. 120. 2. First he citeth as my words, till they had got it p. 130themselves by comming to the Lord: whereas the word themselves, is of his own addition. Secondly, hee wresteth them to such a meaning, as in his conscience he knew I never intended; namely, to debase Gods grace, and exalt mans worke, as doe the Papists and Arminians. As if I thought that we came or could come to the Lord of our selves, without being ††Iob. 6. 44.Job 6:44drawn of the Father; or, as if our comming to him were a meritorious work: which errours I abhorr. 3. Neither doe my words imply such a meaning; any more then our Saviours, when he sayd, Come unto me all yee that labour, &c. and J will give you rest: take my yoke upon you, &c. and yee shall finde rest to your soules: Math. 11. 28. 29. To conclude of that speech, Therefore they could come of themselves; or their comming should be a meritorious work, or the like: were an openinjury to our Lords words. His two baptismes inward and outward, is before shewed to bee but'an evasion: wee acknowledge but one baptisme, Eph. 4. 5. Neither if it be understood of the outward, doth it (as hee sayth) conteyn Anabaptistrie; for the Anabaptists doe not hold that they have the outward baptisme by faith and repentance, but doe repeat the outward vvork, and baptise againe; vvhichwhich I deny. So herein he hath done me double vvrong.

4. Jf they had died in infancie, they had not then had the Lords baptisme, nor had been baptised with the Holy Ghost: nor any other infants there baptised.

Answ. We and all, are by nature the children of vvrath, Eph. 2. 3. and being born in Antichrists church, we had not the visible covenant of promise, vvhichwhich is given onelyonly to Christs Church. Albeit God hath his elect in false Churches, as among the Gentiles of old, and in Israel after they vvere divorced from the Lord. Jer. 3. vvhom he can save vvithout baptisme, as he did vvithout circumcision. The same is answered to his fifth obiection, of the5 same persons come to yeares. And is further cleared in the* answer to his second argument for the Church of Rome; vvhere he alleaged the like things. And vvhere he sayth, Either we have no outward baptisme at all, confirming the covenant of God: or else we had it before we came under the Lords covenant, and in a church divorced from the Lord. I answer; Wee had the outward vvashing vvith vvater, as the Israelites had the outward cutting of the flesh, vvhen they were divorced from the Lord, Ier. 3. 8. vvhichwhich could not then confirme Gods covenant to us or them in such synfull estate. But as after, vvhen p. 131they repented, and turned to the Lord, they had their outward cutting sanctified unto them, for a signe of his covenant, and were admitted to eat of his Passover, Ezr. 6. 21. (vvhichwhich no uncircumcised might eat of, Exod. 12. 48.) so our vvashing hath been by like grace sanctified unto us, for a signe of his covenant; and vve may lawfully eat of the Lords Supper.

His 6. reason is of like na ure, touching the members of the6. Antichristian church, that they have not the Lords baptisme, being not come to the Lord in true faith and repentance, &c. This also is before spoken of in answering his reasons for that church. The Scripture sheweth them to bee departed from the faith of Christ, 2. Thes. 2. 1. Tim. 4. to bedead in syn, Rev. 20. to bee under the vvrath of God, Rev. 14. 9. 10. 11. Our opposite himself sayth of that church, She is a notorious harlot and idolatress: and of the Hierarchie (the ministers of that church, vvhichwhich have the same baptisme vvith the people, and doe administer baptisme to that people) he sayth, they are the Man of Syn, the son of perdition, 2. Thess. 2. the Beast. Rev. 13. concerning vvhom he could not endure that vve should aske his proofe that ever they were maried unto Christ. And are such a people and Hierarchy, remaining in that estate, come to the Lord in true faith and repentance? If they have brought themselves by their idolatries, heresies, and innumerable synns, into a woeful estate: vvhat are we, that we should justifie those vvhom God condemneth. Let false prophets preach peace unto them, wee must notwithstanding declare the judgements of the Lord, vvhose wrath is revealed from heaven, against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who deteyn the truth in unrighteousness, Rom. 1. 18.

7. Finally (sayth he) Wheras they say, the outward washing need not to be repeated, and yet say also, they have renounced the Romish Baptisme as an impure idol in their abuse; they use shifts, and contradict themselves. For if the outward baptisme be an Idol, why doe they reteyn it? Jf not, why have they renounced it?

Answ. I have formerly shewed, the shift and contradiction to be in himself; who pleaded against the Anabaptists, that there is but one baptisme, and now against us would have two. 2. I have also shewed, that Gods ordinance turned into an idol or lye; the lye, the idol, is to be renounced, the truth of the ordinance reteyned: so doe we.

That (sayth he) which they speak of their abuse, is a shift. Difference p. 132is to be put between a thing abused, and th'abuse therof. The scriptures are▪ the word of God, and not an impure idol to be renounced, though they be abused by the Papists and themselves &c.

Answ. when he hath nought ells to answer, he casteth reproches, and calleth my reason a shift. Would he have me so impious, as to call Baptisme, the Lords supper, or other divine ordinances, idols: unless for the syn and abuse of men, which turne them to idols, as the trueth of God, was turned into a lye by the Gentiles, Rom. 1. 25. And doe not I put that very difference which himself here putteth: how then is it a shift in me, more then in him. The scripture in it self is alwayes pure: yet popish heresies falsly gathered from the scriptures, are most impure; these we reject, but hold fast the scripture. Water in popish baptisme is Gods good creature, Antichrist hath turned it and the action with it, into an abominable idol, as if it gave grace, and washed away syn by the work doon of a sacrilegious priest. This abomination we reject: the creature of God, is of his grace sanctified unto us, and we reteyn it.

Now follow his **Chr. plea pag. 34.other reasons to prove it no idol, but true baptisme.

1. Because an Idol, &c. is an invention of man in the worship of God. wheras Baptisme in those churches, is of the holy things of God, a true signe of his covenant &c.

Answ. The first is granted him: the latter is denyed: and he but beggeth the question. For neyther doth the church continew in Rome which th'Apostles planted: neyther doth the true baptisme there continew, any more then the true Supper of our Lord, (turned by them into an abominable Mass,) or any more then the true ministery, which is changed by his own grant into a man of syn, a Beast, and the great Antichrist. Or, any more then the true Censure of excommunication, which they profane against such as forsake their idolatrous church.

2. Els those churches should not have a mixture of Gods ordinances with their own inventions, &c but should be utterly deprived of all and every one of Gods ordinances. But they have such a mixed estate: &c.

Answ. He concludeth nothing: but should conclude, therfore it is no idol to them in their abuse, but Christs true baptisme. This I deny. And first I answer, that all the heathens had before Christs coming a mixture of Gods ordinances with their own inventions: p. 133yet were they not therfore in the covenant of grace, neyther had they the true signes and seals therof. 2. as mens inventions are idols, so Gods ordinances may by men be turned into idols, as are the sacraments in Rome. For is not the wheaten God in their supper, an Idol? what mouth wil deny it? Mine opposite pressed with it, passeth it over alwayes, as if he could not see it. That thing alone, would have convinced this, and many other his reasons of like sort; if he durst have medled with it.

3. Jf their baptisme were an idol, then it should be syn in them to reteyn that baptisme still: &c.

Ans. How often shall we have repetitions of the same thing? He hath been answered: the idol ought to be put away, the ordinance of God, ought to be reteyned? If the Iewes had made an Idol of Iachin, 2 Chron. 3. 17. they should have repented of their idolatry, but let the pillar stand. And it is the great syn of the papists, that they keep their Masse, and their popish Christening, and doe not put them away as they are idols, and restore them to their ancient truth, as they were Christs ordinances.

Obj. When Israel fell into defiction, the Prophets that blamed their idolatries, did then also reprove them for not observing religiously such of the ordinances of God as were still remaining among them. Amos. 8. 5. with 2. 8. 11. 12. & 5. 4. 5. Ier. 17. 21.—27. with 2. 20.—28. & 7. c. Ezek. 20. 7. with v. 12. 13. So far were they from accounting Gods ordinances reteyned in apostasie, to be idols, and detestable things, &c.

Answ. So we blame the papists, and all hereticks, for not observing religiously Gods ordinances, whether reteyned among them, or omitted by them. Yet were not the prophets so farr from counting Gods ordinances abused by them, detestable things, as he would pretend. Jncense was Gods ordinance, yet in Esa. 1. 13. he sayth, Incense is an abomination unto me. Sacrifices were Gods ordinances, yet in Esa. 66. 3. he sayth, Hee that killeth an Oxe, is as if hee slew a man: hee that sacrificeth a Lamb, as if he cut off a doggs neck: hee that offreth an oblation, as if he offred Swines blood: he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an Jdol. For these and the like reprehensions, the prophets were counted blasphemers, and persecuted and killed by the Iewes: yet were there not halfe so many corruptions in their sacrifices, as are in baptisme and the Lords Supper now among the Antichristians: though mine opposite counteth me a blasphemer for speaking of them but as they are. And what would he say to p. 134the Passover, and all the sacrifices that apostate Israel offred; were they not detestable things through their abuse: When for offring them as they did, they were by Gods law to be cut off as murderers, and sacrificers to Divels, Lev. 17. 3. 4.—7. Deut. 32. 17. compared with 1. King. 12. 28—33. 2. Chron. 11. 15. & 13. 9. & 15. 3. And was that Passover now a true sacrament and signe of Christ unto them, and seale of the forgivenesse of their syns? If not, then neither was their circumcision: for Gods people have not one sacrament true and another false unto them in the same synfull estate.

4. Baptisme (sayth he) in the defection of Christian Churches, is as circumcision was in the Apostasie of Jsrael. But circumcision in that estate was not an idol or lying signe, &c. but the Lords ordinance, a true signe, had before their defection, and still continuedin their apostasie; as hath also come to pass in the Christian Church, concerning baptisme, Gen. 17. 7.—14. and Lev. 12. 2. 3. with 2. King. 13. 23. 2. Chron. 30. Ier. 9. 26. Ezek. 23. & 32. 24. 26. 29. 32. Also Mat. 28. 18. 19. Rom. 6. 3. 4. with 2. Thes. 2. 4. Rev. 11. 1. 2. 19.

Answ. As baptisme is answerable to circumcision, so is the Lords Supper to the Passover: all of them Gods ordinances in themselves but abused by the idolarrous Israelites, and by the Antichristians to their further judgement. Yet nothing so farr abused in Israel, as in the church of Rome. Did ever the Israelites beleeve the paschal lamb to be the very naturall body of Christ, and worship it for their maker? Or did they ever add so many abominations to circumcision, as Antichristians doe to baptisme? or did they beleeve that the circumcising by the worke doen, took away all their synns. If they had, then I would prove against all men, that they had turned Gods sacraments into abominable idols. If they did not, then he hath made no equall comparison. But take them as they were, I deny their facraments to have been true signes of forgivenesse of sinns unto them in that their estate. And where is his proof for this? Hee citeth many Scriptures, but not one that confirmeth this point in hand. It is true they had the outward cutting of their foreskin: and so had the Canaanites of Sichem, Gen. 34. 24. but God instituted the signe of circumcision, to be the seale of the righteousness of faith, Rom. 4. 11. Now one of the Scriptures which he bringeth for proof, sayth, All the house of Jsrael were uncircumcised in the heart, Ier. 9. 26. If they had true faith, p. 135their hearts had been therby purified, Act. 15. 9. and consequently circumcised. But they were not circumcised in heart by faith in Christ; therefore their circumcision could not seale up to them the righteousnes of faith; and so was to them a lying signe through their abuse of it. Paul sayth, If thou be a transgressor of the Law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision, Rom. 2. 25. They transgressed, and continued in transgression, though God called them to repentance by all his prophets, yet they beleeved not in the Lord their God; but rejected his statutes and his covenant that he made with their fathers, and his testimonies which he testified against them; and followed vanity and became vaine, &c. and left all the commandements of the Lord their God, and made them molten images, &c. that the Lord removed them out of his sight, 2. King. 17. 13.—18. and he gave them a bill of divorce, Jer. 3. 8. and yet they continued circumcision: which could not be to them in their idolatrous and unrepentant estate, a seale of the righteousnesse of saith, or forgivenesse of their synns, unlesse we will contradict all the Scriptures, Deut. 29. 18.—21. Mat. 3. 7.—10. 1. Cor. 6. 9. 10. Gal. 5. 16.—21. Rom. 8. 1—8. Rev. 22. 15.

5. The covenant of God (sayth he) is an everlasting covenant, which God continueth and respecteth even in the times of apostafie, yea and when he chastiseth the transgression thereof, &c. Otherweise the ground and continuance of Gods covenant and of the seale thereof, should depend on mans work and merit, and not frecly and wholly on Gods grace and merciemercy.

Answ. The first is ambiguous and deceitfull: Gods covenant is everlasting, and continued in times of apostasie; but unto whom? Not to the unrepentant or unbeleeving that are hardened in their sinns, as were the Israelites; but to them that repent, beleeve, and turne to the Lord; Levit. 26. 15.—40. 41. 42.—45. Deut. 29. 19. 20. Prev. 1. 23.—33. Ezek. 3. 18.—21. & 18. 10.—13. 21. 22. 23. 24. 26. 27. 28.

The second is untrue; for though God damneth unrepentant and unbeleeving synners (as in justice he needs must, because they are not in Christ,) yet doth not the covenant or seale depend on mans work or merit. For it is Gods work & grace through Christs merits onelyonly, that men doe repent, beleeve, and return unto him, Act. 11. 18. Eph. 2. 4. 5.—8. 9. And there is no covenant between God and man, but conditionall: for without faith and holines no man shall see the Lord, Mark. 16. 16. Heb. 12. 14. Rom. 11. 20. 21. 22. 23. Though these conditions even in men, are the worke of God in p. 136them, Heb. 8. 10. 12. Whosoever is born of God, overcommeth the world, synneth not; but keepeth himselfe, and the wicked one toucheth him not, 1. Ioh. 5. 4. 18. And they that teach otherweise, destroy the Gospel, and open a gap to all profanenesse and licentiousnesse.

Jf God (sayth he) break the covenant on his part, when men break it on theirs, then should there stil be a new entring into the covenant again between God and man: and a new baptisme dayly received againe, as the signe and seale thereof.

Answ. God alwayes breaketh not the covenant on his part, when men break it on theirs: but calleth them often back unto repentance, Psa. 89. 31—34. Exo. 32. & 33. chapters. But to some that are hardned, and wil not repent, he breaketh his covenant visibly, casting them out of his church, cutting them off, Rom. 11. 20. 22. giving them a bil of divorce, Jer. 3. 8. removeth the candlestick, Rev. 2. 5. Otherweise if a man comming from Iudaisme or paganisme to the Christian faith and Church, doe againe revolt from Christ to Iudaisme or paganisme, and for obstinacie in his sin is cut off by the power of Christ from his Church: he must still be reputed in the covenant of God visibly on Gods part: which is most untrue, seeing God on his part hath cut them off, and given them a bill of divorce. If any such returne, the covenant must be renewed, Hos. 2. 7. 19. 20. 2. Cor. 6. 17. 18. yet the seale of the covenant once given, is not to be repeated; as a Christian revolted to paganisme, and cut off from the Church; is not when hee returneth, baptised againe. Because though he was visibly cut off even of God, for his syn: yet by his returne, it appeareth that hee still belonged to his election of grace which was to man invisible, whiles he continued cut off. Yea though he received the seale after a false manner, when it was not due unto him: yet when hee turneth to the Lord it is not repeated. As the Israelites which were circumcised after they were divorced from God, Ier. 3. 8. had no new circumcision in the flesh, when they turned unto God, Ezr. 6. 21.

6. If such were the baptisme of the Church in Rome, &c. then should it be likewise in the East Churches, and in all Churches of the world, when they fall into sin, breaking the covenant. &c.

Answ. I deny the comparison. For Rome is revolted from Christ to Antichrist, and fallen from grace, (by the Apostles rule, Gal. 5. 4.) and is become dead in syn, Rev. 20. and is not the true p. 137Church of Christ, but a Man of syn, and whore of Babylon, 2. Thes. 2. Rev. 17. which things are before proved. Such is not the state of all Churches that syn and break the convenant: till for their hardnes and contempt of God, they be also cut off, as Rome is: which when they bee, then have they no true sacraments any longer among them.

7. If there, baptisme were indeed a lying signe and fiction, then would it follow that there should be no salvation for any members of those Churches, reteining the baptisme there received. For the signe hath reference to the covenant and thing signified, and so a lying signe must have respect to a lying covenant. And by a lying covenant there is no salvation to any, &c.

Answ. The covenant which the Church of Rome hath made with Antichrist, is a lying covenant; and hath lying signes to confirme it; and God hath sent them strong delusion to beleeve a lye, that they all might be damned, who beleeve not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousnes, 2. Thes. 2. 11. 12. Therefore by the covenant and seales of that Antichristian synagogue, wee cannot say, that any one by the promise of God shall be saved. But by the covenant of grace which God communicateth with his elect in that and other false churches, many are saved: but that is not the covenant of the church. Of which poynt, I have spoken before, in answer to his 2. Argument for the church of Rome. His reasons are the same, againe and againe repeated. Here further note, how by his argument, the popish Masse may bee justified, thus. If the Lords Supper or Masse in Rome, be an idol, a lying signe and fiction; then is there no salvation for the members of that Church, reteyning the Masse. For a lying signe must have respect to a lying covenant, and by a lying covenant there is no salvation to any. But the church of Rome (by mine opposites plea) is in the covenant of salvation, which is the true covenant; therefore it also hath the true signe and seale of that covenant in their Masse or Babylonish Supper. For our Lords Supper is the true signe and seale of the forgivenesse of synns, and covenant of grace, Mat. 26. 26. 28. Luk. 22. 19. 20. If hee yeeld not this, then hee must say, that they have two covenants, the one of life and salvation sealed to them by baptisme, the other of death and damnation, sealed unto them by the Masse or Supper. So they shall goe both to heaven and hell, by their double covenant.

8. Finally (sayth he) the baptisme of those Churches is from heaven, p. 138and not of men: and is derived unto us from the Apostles of Christ, through the loynes of the church of Rome, &c. Therefore is no idollor lying signe, but the true sacrament and ordinance of the Lord, Math. 21. 21. & 28. 18. 19. with Rom. 6. 3. 4. Heb. 7. 9. 10. 2. Chron. 30. ch.

Answ. I deny this his conclusion, it being but a begging of the question which he shoud have proved. It is not their baptisme which is from heaven: they are fallen from heaven, and become a Beast (or kingdom Ecclesiasticall) arisen out of the earth, Rev. 13. 11. they are gone out from the Apostolike Church, and become Antichrists, 1. Joh. 2. 18. 19. Mine opposite himself hath granted that the Pope and his Hierarchie are Antichrist, the Man of syn, the Beast; never maried to Christ. Again he sayth (in this his Chr. plea p. 3.) Jn baptisme the action is wholly enjoyned & layd upon the baptiser, and not upon the baptised. The baptizers in Rome, are the Priests, which be a part of the beast, and Man of syn: on them the whole action lyeth, as he sayth. Now is this baptisme from heaven? Did God ever bid Antichrist baptise? The whole action then of popish baptisme, lyeth upon them that are confessed by him, to be Antichrist: & yet this baptisme he wil have to be from heaven. 2. They were not in the loyns of the primitive Christian Church, either by nature or by grace; otherweise then all nations in Moses time, were in the loynes of the primitive Church in Noes time. 3. We have not our baptisme frō them, but from God, who hath delivered us from Antichrist, & given us to his son Christ; and hath so sanctified to us that baptising with water in his name, which they idolatrously and synfully abused; as wee need no other outward washing, but to be baptised by his spirit; as his dealing with such as had been circumcised in Israel, (after they were become a false church, and were divorced from him) and returned againe unto him, doth assure us; 2. Chron. 30. ch. Ezr. 6. 21. His reason may also as probably bee framed thus. The Lords Supper or Masse in the Church of Rome, is from heaven, not of men, Math. 26. Luk. 22. and is derived unto us from the Apostles of Christ, through the loynes of that Church, which have from that time reteyned and continued it to this day. Therefore it is not an idoll or lying signe; howsoever all protestants with one mouth call it justly, an idoll, an horrible idoll, an abomination, and the like. The Mininistery of the church of Rome, is from heaven, and not of men, Rom. 12. and is derived to us from the Apostles, through the p. 139loynes of that church, which have from that time continued it to this day. Therefore it is not the Man of Syn, the Beast, the Antichrist, as all protestants say, and as Mr. Iohnson himselfe hath pleaded in his last book, but the true ministery and ordinance of the Lord. The like may be sayd for their Excommunications, and all other divine ordinances which that church hath synfully profaned. Yea the very same plea, might all the heathens have made for their sactifices and divine ordinances, which from Noe and his sonns, through the loynes of their parents were derived unto them; as before I have manifested.

Whereas I **Animad… p. 68. 69.described the abominable manner of baptising in the Church of Rome, how heathen-like they profane Christs ordinance, mine opposite not being able to justifie their impiety, yet pleadeth his best, thus;

††Chr. plea p. 37.But will it therefore follow, that the baptisme there had is not Gods ordinance, but an idoll, a false and lying signe, &c.

Answ. It followeth that they in their Antichristian estate and abuse, have changed Gods ordinance into an idoll and lying signe, as the Gentiles of old, changed the truth of God into a lye, Rom. 1. 25. And have added also many lyes and lying signes of their own devising, as bad as did the heathens.

Or will it follow, because of their errours and corruptions, that the baptisme there had is to be renounced, and an other new one to be received?

Answ. Their lyes and lying signes, and changing of the truth into a lye, are all to bee renounced: but the ordinance of God which he hath restored to the former truth unto those that repent and beleeve in him, is not to be renounced, and a new received; and such is the outward washing with water in his name, 2 Chron. 30. Ezr. 6. 21.

Is every thing abused or misapplyed by men, straight way an idoll?

Answ. Every thing so abused as they doe baptisme and the Lords Supper, is straight way an idoll: for divine honour is given to the creature, and work of a wicked mans hand, Exod. 20. Yea let him be a witnes against himselfe: for afterward in pag. 246. hee sayth touching book-prayer; that it is an image and similitude of spirituall prayer, which yet it is not. And so these bookes and stinted prayers prescribed by man in the worship of God, come in deed to bee idols, supplying the place of the word and spirit of God, which ought not to be. Here the abuse of the book by his owne grant, maketh it in deed an idoll: for the p. 140book may lawfully be used and read of men for instruction, as wel as written Sermons, Homilies, &c.

Doe they that are baptised, bow downe to it and worship it?

Answ. Did the infants that were offred to Molech, (Levit. 20. ….) bow down and worship it? Or they that made their belly their God, Phil. 3. 19. did they bow down to their belly and worship it? Or, doe they that make the book an idol, as himselfe sayth; bow down and worship the book? How strangely doth hee plead: as if idols cannot be set up in, and worshipped with the heart. But they bow down & worship the bread in the Supper: will he grant that to be an idoll?

Jf that were doen unto it (sayth hee) as was unto the Sun among the Jewes; why might it not be stil notwithstanding Gods ordinance in it selfe: as the Sun was the true Sun, and Gods creature, even unto them, and in that their estate, whiles they made it an idol to themselves.

Answ. O fraud and guile in pleading for idolaters! Every creature of God is ††Gen. 1. 31.Gen 1:31good, every ordinance of God is holy in it selfe: who doubteth of it? If this distinction helpeth the popish sacraments, it helpeth the heathens idols of silver and gold, which are Gods good creatures in themselves. But it is a mere fallacie to reason as he doth from the Sun to Baptisme; from a creature which is an absolute substance, to a sacrament which is a relation of the covenant between God and men. No idolatry, unbeleef, or other wickednes can hinder the Sun from being Gods creature unto men in that their synfull estate. If it bee likeweise in the sacrament, then no idolatry, unbeleef, or other wickednes, can hinder baptisme and the Lords supper from being true signes and seales of Gods covenant of grace and forgivenesse of synns, unto Turks or Pagans, in their synfull estate, if they baptise with water in the name of the Lord, and eat the bread and wine in the Supper of our Lord. But he should have knowen that common received rule of all truly religious, that Nothing is in deed a sacrament, without the use ordeyned of God: as we are taught of the Apostle, This is not to eat the Lords Supper: 1. Cor. 11. 20. The water that flowed out of the rock, was the same creature of God to men that drunk of it, and to the beasts that drunk of it, Numb. 20. 11. but it was a sacrament to men onelyonly, using it for a confirmation of their faith, by a divine institution, 1. Cor. 10. 4. Further, by his reason, it is undenyable that the Pope himselfe (whom he acknowledgeth to be p. 141Antichrist) and all that partake with him in his Masse, notwithstanding all their idolatry and heresie thereabout, doe eat the true sacrament, signe and seale of the forgivenesse of their synns. And why then should hee deny the Pope to bee as good a Christian as himselfe: seing all they are blessed whose synns are forgiven them, Rom. 4. 6. 7.

Let it be observed, that they baptise onelyonly in the name of the Lord: and with acknowledgement of the Articles of the Christian saith, as in their form of baptisme may be seen.

Answ. And let it also bee observed, that they sacrifice their Masse (or celebrate their idolatrous supper) onelyonly in the name of the Lord; and with acknowledgement of the same Articles of Christian faith, even by the Pope himselfe. Why then hath hee pleaded against the Pope and his Hierarchy, that they, they onelyonly are the Man of syn, the son of perdition, the Beast, the Antichrist; and why wondred he so at me, when I called for proofe that Christ was maried to that Beast; seeing he hath the same baptisme, the same Lords Supper, the same beleef touching the Articles of faith, that the people of his church have. But their counterfeit profession of Christ is before discovered. And they that baptize (which are the Hierarchy) he confesseth to be the Man of syn, the Antichrist, they are none of the church (as we have heard) but ulcers, gangrenes, &c. what now have such to doe with the name of the Lord, or administration of the seales of his covenant. And compare with this, that which himself sayth in the 3. page of his book, that the action (of baptisme) is wholly enjoyned and layd upon the baptiser, and not upon the baptised. If this be so, where hath God layd the action of baptizing upon Antichrist, the Man of syn: and if God hath not layd it upon him, how can hee truely doe it in Gods name?

How will they prove (sayth he) that it is a lying signe unto them in their estate, seeing baptisme (as the other sacraments in Israel and under the Gospel) hath this in it to be a signe by the ordinance of God, not at the pleasure of man. And God is the God of truth, and appoynteth no lying signes, but true. Neither can mans iniquity make Gods signes to be lying signes. Synful therfore and erroneous it is so to think, if not also blasphemous so to speak.

Answ. And was it synfull and erroneous (thinketh he) in Paul, when he sayd, They changed the truth of God into a lye, Rom. 1. 25. For if mans iniquity cannot change Gods signes into lying signes: p. 142how should it change the truth of God into a lye? And how could Ieremie have proved unto the Iewes (if mine opposite had then lived to plead for them) that those were lying words, when they sayd The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, &c. Ier. 7. 4. for had they not in deed the Temple of the Lord, his true ordinance and signe, whereof they spake? The word of God is truth, Ioh. 17. 17. How then should mans iniquity, make Gods truth to be a lye unto themselues, though they pervert the word unto all manner false-doctrine, errour and heresie▪ Idols are lies, Esa. 44. 20. Ier. 16. 19. 20. How can the Pope make an idoll of the bread in the sacrament, though he fall downe and worship it, and beleeve it is his maker: seeing as it is bread, it is a true thing, and Gods good creature; as it is sacramentall bread, it is a true signe by the ordinance of God, who appoynteth no lying signes. Is it not blasphemous now, and would he not rend his clothes as did ††Math. 26. ….Matt 26Caiaphas, if he should heare one call the Popes sacrament of the altar, an idol, or a lying signe unto him in that estate? But to conclude, The sacraments are in deed signes by the ordinance of God, not at mans will: Gods ordinance maketh them signes of grace to the faithful receivers onelyonly, 1. Cor. 11. 20. 29. Rom. 2. 25 Act. 8. 36. 37. If infidels and Antichrists falsly challenge and usurp Gods signes, and abuse them to open idolatry, and their own perdition; they change the truth of Gods ordinance into a lye unto themselves; and whiles they vainly think to have forgivenesse of synns by them, they add syn unto syn, and receive their own damnation.

Whereas I had **Animadv. ag. 69.set downe two reasons to prove the Popish baptisme false, and a lying signe unto them: mine opposite passeth them over, as too heavy for him; and cometh to ††Chr. plea ag. 38.set downe differences between Gods ordinances and mens corruptions; Gods signes, and mens errours: Mariage, meates and drinks, and the abuses of these; the scriptures, and the errors gathered from them; the Sun, Moon and Starrs, as they are creatures, and as they are made idols and worshiped of men, &c. Wherein he laboureth to prove the thing which we hold; and doth most injuriously intimate against us, as if we thought the contrary. Should we be so wicked as to imagine the ordinances of God, or his creatures to be evill in themselves? Farr be it from us. Nay we say, that the papists for abusing the sacraments, and turning them to lyes and idols, shall have the greater judgement: not for abusing bread and p. 143wine and water as they are creatures onelyonly, but for abusing them as they are sacramentall signes ordeyned of Christ, which maketh their profanation more horrible, their damnation more just. But this is a practise of many, that plead for errour; to leave the arguments which doe convince them, and to propone new questions and reasons of their owne: that they may seeme to say something, by multitude of words.

So when I shewed ††Anima p. 69.the example of the idolatrous Israelites, that **2. Chro. Ezr. 6. 21Ezra 6:21repenting and forsaking their false Synagogues & lying signes in them usurped, they needed not a new outward cutting or circumcising, as is shewed at large in our former writings. Discovery, p. 116.—120. Apolog. p. 110.—113. He passeth over the reasons manifested in those books, as if he had never seen them: when as the one was most of it penned by himself. And now he pleadeth:

††Chr. p…e p. 39.Wheras they say, that circumcision was also a lying signe, and false sacrament to Jsrael in their defection, how doe they prove it? where doth the Scripture teach it? will they have us take it on their bare word, and beleeve that their saying are Oracles? &c.

Answ. He might have seen reasons in the books before cited, besides those that I have set down. But thus in seeking to wound us, he hath smitten through his own sides, as if himselfe when he wrote those things in our Apologie, would have had men beleeve his bare word, and that his sayings were Oracles. Whereas, if ever hee wrote soundly in his life, he did it in that Apologie, as all men of good judgement may perceive. Further now to answer him, I say, that I spake of their lying signes, which implyed their Passover and sacrifices, as well as their circumcision. And those being so profaned, as for them they were by Gods Law to bee cut off as murderers, Levit. 17. as sacrificers to Divils, not to God, Deut. 32. 17. 2. Chron. 11. 15. & 15. 3. were they then true signes unto them of Gods grace and fauour, and forgivenesse of their synns in Christ? The Scripture teacheth, they could not be partakers of the Lords table, and of the table of Divils, 1. Cor. 10 21. In particular, for their circumcision, I proved it thus, ††Anima… p. 68.True circumcision was the seale of the righteousness of saith, Rom. 4. 11. Jsrael in their apostasie were fallen from the faith Hos. 11. 12. they were without the true God, without Priest to teach, & without Law, 2. Chron. 15. 3. and how then could they have the true circumcision the seale of the righteousness of saith, and forgivenes of their sinns in that sinful estate. Thus I shewed Gods words (not mine own) for oracles.

p. 144He asketh, if we wil be wiser, and more righteous then God himself, who accounted them stil to be his people, under his covenant, and himselfe to be their God, and upon this ground called them to repentance, &c.

Answ. All this notwithstanding, whiles they continued unrepent and unbeleeving, and **2. King. 17 3. 14 15. 6.2 Kgs 17:32 Kgs 17:14hardned their necks against the Lord their God; &c. their circumcisim (by Pauls doctrine) was made uncircumcision, Rom. 2. 25. their sacrifices were an abomination to the Lord, Prov. 15. 8. And hee might have seen in the Scriptures, that though Israel were divorced from the Lord, Ier. 3. 8. and not his people; or wife, nor he her husband, Hos. 1. 9. & 2. 2. yet they are in respect of their former state, their continuall profession, and the future merciemercy towards them, called Gods people still, even till Christs time, Esai. 11. 11. 16. Amos. 9. 14. That he should not urge a phrase (as his manner is,) against the plain doctrines of the Scripture.

Obj. What wil they say to the circumcision of Judah in their apostasie, &c. was it also among them none of Gods ordinance, but an idol? &c.

Answ. It was Gods ordinance, though abused by the unworthy receivers, as before is shewed. But he from a false church, and Babylon, fl…eth to Sion the true Church corrupted; which is his perpetuall fallacie. If Iudah, or any Church in the world had doen with the sacraments as Rome hath doen, they had changed them into idols, contrary to the 2. commandement. But Iudah never did so with circumcision and the Passover; he sheweth no word of God to prove it.

Obj. Have the gates of hell more prevailed against the Christian Church since Christs coming, then they did or could against the Church of the Iewes before his coming in the flesh? Mat. 16. 18.

Answ. This old popish reason, hath been often answered by many Writers against the Antichristians: and is of no more force for Rome turned to Antichrist, then for Ephesus, Corinth, and other churches turned to Mahomet. For what priviledge (besides a popish dreame) had Rome above Ephesus? Should it, (because it crucified Christ, and is therefore cursed above all cities,) have prerogative above Ephesus, wherin was a church (in Pauls time) which was the ground and pillar of truth. 1. Tim. 1. 3. & 3. 15. yet is that church long since cut off: but Romes church must continue, for her good service to Divils and idols, Rev. 9. 20. and for worshiping the Beast, Rev. 13. He might have seen in Rev. 12. that the woman p. 145the Church perisheth not, though she be fled into the wildernesse, from the presence of the Serpent, and synagogue of Antichrist. His other repetitions again and again; are before answered.

Obj. The ordinances of God may in any churches become unprofitable to men by their own sinns, circumcision may be made uncircumcision to such as break the Law, &c. Rom. 2. 25. 26. so baptisme now. But shall we therefore say, that they are not in such churches, to such persons, the Lords ordinances, nor his true signes and sacraments, but idols and lying signes, &c. Was the Lords table in the Church of Corinth, a table of Divils; or the Lords Supper an idoll or lying signe, &c. to such as eat it unworthily? Was it not the Lords ordinance, and true sacrament, though sinfully abused by them? &c.

Ans. The Lords ordinances abide alwayes the same, and holy in themselves, howsoever abused by Christians, by Antichristians, by Iewes, Turks or Pagans, to their perdition. Neither is there a like degree of abuse in all; neither doth every abuse make a thing an idoll: but when the honour due to God alone, is given to a creature, then it is made an idoll: and so I have proved is doen in the church of Rome; to which proofs he answereth not. I instanced ††Animadv▪ p. 73. 74.the Lords Supper in Rome, whereof they have made an abominable idoll, worshiping a peece of bread as their maker. Mine opposite will never mention or meddle with this, but shunneth it as convinced in conscience. And from Antichrists church, runneth to the Christian Church in Corinth; and asketh if the Lords table there, were a table of Divils? I answer, No; not then in Corinth, but now in Rome, they have made it by their idolatrous Masse, a table of Divils: and as Moses sayd of Israel, they sacrificed to Divils, not to God. Deut. 32. 17. so say I of these Antichristians, their sacrifice of the altar is a sacrifice to Divils, not to God. This he should have disproved, if he could have doen it; and not to leave the persons and things whereof wee dispute, and run to others. So the Lords baptisme, they have turned into an idol▪ ascribing the gift of grace (which onelyonly is Gods) to water, words and works of men: that as the Gentiles turned the truth of God into a lye, Rom. 1. these **Rev. 11. 2.Rev 11:2Gentiles also have turned the truth of God, and of his sacraments into lyes. And as the Lords incense and sacrifices were an abomination to him, from the hands of wicked sinners. Esai. 1. 13. Prov. 15. 8. so the Lords sacraments are an abomination to him, from the hands of Antichristians. And as hee doth, so ought all his people to esteeme of them; and not to regard ††Ier. 7. 4. 8. 9. 10.Jer 7:4Jer 7:8Jer 7:9Jer 7:10lying words of p. 146such as cry nothing but the Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, the sacraments and ordinances of the Lord; to deceive Gods people, and to harden the synners in their wicked works.

Wheras I distinctly **Animadv. p. 72. &c.shewed the idolatry committed in Antichrists baptising of his subjects, partly by perverting the holy signes, as the Israelites did the brasen serpent, …. King. 1…. 4. partly by inventing signes of his owne, as crosses, exorcismes, &c. Mine opposite first † censureth the things I wrote to be notable shifts, errours, * Chr. plea pag. 42.contradictions, abuse of scriptures, vain distinctions, and odious assertions. Such grace hath flowed from his tongue and pen.

1. Observe (sayth he) a needless distinction of idols, nothing helping for the question in hand.

Answ. The distinction is true and needfull to discern the truth of the question, against his clamorous reproches, as if I called Gods ordinance in it self considered, an idoll.

2. Jf they mean (sayth he) that baptisme there had is an idol of both sorts, they doe the more increase their errour.

Answ. I doe so meane: yet is there no increase of errour: I heare his bold words, but no proof.

3. They speak of crosses, exorcismes, &c. whereas we speak of the baptisme it selfe.

Ans. So doe I: but of popish baptisme, mixed with Christs ordinances and Antichrists together. All parts of a thing put together, make the whole: and it is deceitfull dealing to dazel mens eyes with the whores golden cup, and to passe by the abominable ingredients, the fornications that are in it, when both are joyned together, Rev. 17. 4.

4. They speak of the abuse, our question is of the thing it selfe, notwithstanding their sinful abuse.

Ans. Our question is of popish baptisme, which cannot bee rightly handled without looking to their abuses: for how should we judge of the heathens worship and sacrifices, if wee looke not upon their abuses, as Paul doth in Rom. 1. The same I answer to his 5. exception, of their opinions and errours. Take away the errours of actions, and what fault can we finde with any?

6. If the Romish baptisme be a lye in the right hand of all that receive it: then of infants; then also in their own right hand that were baptised there. Not to speak of the Martyrs, &c.

Ans. There is no respect of persons with God. Bee they old or p. 147yong, better or worse: syn is syn in all. Though Gods grace in Christ, purgeth syn from his elect, which remaineth in the reprobates.

His 7. 8. and 9. exceptions, are vain; and repetitions of former things, without conviction. If Bellarmine or any speak truth, wee may speak it with them: so Paul speaketh with the heathen Poets, Tet. 1. 12. 13. Act. 17. 28.

10. Jf they mean the true sacraments in Christs Church, seale not up to Gods people, forgiveness of sinns, it is an errour: if they meane that they doe not themselves take away sinns, and conferr grace, they use shifts, and keep not to the poynt of the relation here spoken of, and as it is appoynted to bee by the Lord himself.

Answ. The first I grant him; and hee knew well it was not my meaning. The latter I have proved, that they being under Gods wrath, 2. Thess. 2. have no seale from God of forgivenesse of synns in that estate. And their doctrine of conferring grace by the work doen, is hereticall and idolatrous: which he not being able to gainsay, puts it away (as his manner is) with a shift.

11. From Gods sentence of condemnation touching Antichrist and his adhaerents, they reason to Gods baptisme never condemned by the Lord, but still continued in the Church and Temple of God, where Antichrist sitteth.

Ans. Of his own mouth let him be judged. Wee reason onelyonly of Antichrist and his adherents, the Whore of Babylon, or adulterous church, which hee sayth are condemned of God. How then doth God give them the signe and seale of grace & forgivenesse of synns? Gods baptisme wee condemne not, neither our Lords Supper: but Antichrists Christening and Masse, we deny to be Christs baptisme and supper. Hee still beggeth the question which he should prove. And let him take away Antichrist and his adhaerents; and the church of Rome, whereof we reason, wil be vanished as smoke, and come to nothing: as take away Christ and his adhaerents, so there will bee no Christian Church, nor sacraments to be found.

12. From the brasen serpent, which was but a temporary and extraordinary signe, the use whereof was ceased when it was thus perverted, &c. they reason to baptisme, which is an ordinary signe, whose use still continueth, and may never be taken away or destroyed, to the end of the world.

Ans. We reason not from the one to the other: but by the abuse p. 148of the one, we shew the abuse of the other. And what is this in him but a shift, to plead the temporarinesse of that signe? For if they had burnt incense to it in the wildernesse; or if they had burnt incense to the ††2. Chro. 3. 10. 17. & 4. 3. 4.2 Chr 3:102 Chr 3:172 Chr 4:32 Chr 4:4Cherubims, or brazen Bulls, or pillars which were continued signes, they had made idols of them nevertheless. Otherweise the wheaten god in the Popish supper is no idol: seeing the use of the Lords Supper continueth to the worlds end, as well as baptisme. And hitherto of the shifts as he calleth them; wherein how he hath shifted in sted of answering by the word of truth, the wise reader may see. Like these are his **Chr. plea pag. 44.catalogue of Errours.

1. That the baptisme had in the church of Rome is an idol, &c.

Ans. 1. This is proved by the 2. commandement, Exod. 20. whiles they ascribe divine honour to the creature. 2. It is proved also by his owne assertion, that bookes of prayer, read for prayer, are idols; as before I shewed from his words in his last book. 3. He sheweth not one word to prove it an errour in me: but sayth, Of which more hereafter. Thus vain tantologies are his arguments to oppose the truth which he calleth Errour.

2. That whereas idols are of two sorts, both the kinds are in Popish baptisme. Jf it be as the brazen serpent, that from an holy signe was perverted to an idol, it should presently be destroyed, as 2. King. 18. 4.

Answ. I deny his inference. If they had burnt incense to the Temple, should it have been destroyed. The brazen serpent was named but for an instance, to shew that holy signes may be made idols by wicked men. This doctrine hee being not able to convince; leaveth it, and would evade by the destroying of it. As if all idols must bee destroyed. The heathens made idols of the Sun, Moon, Starrs, Beasts, Fishes, Mountaines, Lakes, &c. Must all these therefore be destroyed? If men make an idol of their King, as did the Babylonians, Dan. 6. 7. must the King presently be destroyed? whoever heard of such divinity? That which hee addeth of the Popes crossings, exorcismes, &c. is before answered: for he sayth, Our question is of the baptisme it selfe; as if those were not a part of Popish baptisme. He would have wicked mens actions separated from all their synns, errours and wickednes in doing them. So in deed I could justifie all idolatry in the world: for take away the errour and syn of an action, and that which remaineth must needs be good.

3. They say not they have renounced the abuses and kept the baptisme it p. 149selfe, &c. but say they have renounced that Romish baptisme, as an impure idol in their abuse. If they have in deed so doen, then here again is notable errour and Anabaptistry. And now then what outward baptisme have they remaining to themselves?

Ans. Neither doth Solomon say, the abuse of the wickeds sacrifice is an abomination, and except the sacrifice as holy: but he sayth expresly, The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, Prov. 15. 8. He was answered before to his two baptismes outward and inward, that the Apostle (and elsewhere himselfe) maketh but one baptisme, Eph. 4. 5. And the outward part thereof we reteyne as now sanctified to us of God; as the outward cutting of the idolatrous Israelites was to them that repented, 2. Chron. 30. Ezr. 6. 21. which again he putteth off till afterwards.

4. Note also that the brazen Serpent was not in deed an idol: but an holy ordinance of God, which in time came to be idolatrously abused, &c.

Ans. He sayth all things, but proves nothing. It was in deed an idol, and an holy ordinance idolatrously abused also. These things stand well together. The Sun was in deed an idoll to them that worshiped it: and yet it was a good creature of God also idolatrously abused. The bread in the sacrament is in deed an idoll to Papists that worship it as their maker: yet is it also in it selfe, Gods ordinance idolatrously abused: so is popish baptisme. Hee might even as wel say, that Reubens fact in lying with his fathers concubine, was not in deed adultery; but an abuse of Gods ordinance of mariage, or a defiling of his fathers bed, Gen. 35. 22. & 49. 4.

5. Moreover, the brazen Serpent was but a temporary ordinance, &c.

Ans. This was the twelft of his shifts before: now hee repeateth and multiplieth it among his Errours. I refer the reader to my former answer.

6 That the Romish baptisme is an impure idol in their abuse, standing up in the place of Christ, and his precious blood, which it is not, pretending to give grace, &c. which it doth not. But the baptisme in the church of Rome is Gods ordinance, had and planted there by the Apostles, &c. These are the errours and abuses of men about it, not the nature of the baptisme it selfe. Otherweise all that have received it, ought to renounce it utterly, and to get an other outward baptisme, &c.

Answ. This also was before objected and answered: and it is a world to see how he wearieth his reader with repeating worthlesse reasons. Sacrificing among the heathens I have before proved was p. 150Gods ordinance. So was the Lords supper in the church of Rome in the Apostles time: so was excommunication; so was the Ministery of Bishops, &c. These have been continued in Rome with their baptisme: may we not say therefore the Masse is an idoll, or that the Bishop the Pope of Rome now is an idol and Antichrist? Of our getting an other baptisme (which is the usuall foot and base of his arguments) we have before spoken that which he could not take away.

Obj. Wil these men say, that we can without sin reteine any thing, and not utterly reject it, that standeth up in the place of Christs precious blood? &c.

Ans. We cannot indeed without syn reteyne it, while so it standeth: neither doe we so reteyn it; far be it from us. Neither might the Gentiles reteyn the lye, which they had made of the truth of God, Rom. 1. 25. But when the lye was doen away, and God restored to them his former trueth, that they were to reteyn. The idolatrous Israelites, if they had set up their own blood of circumcision in place of Christs blood; might not without syn have reteyned it whiles so it stood. Yet repenting of their idolatry, they might keep the outward signe without repeating it: even so we in this case.

Obj. Errors and abuses of men may hurt themselves: but cannot change the nature of Gods ordinance in it selfe.

Answ. Not in it selfe I grant, considered without their abuse: but togither with their abuse, Gods ordinance of sacrifice, incense, &c. is an abomination to him, Prov. 15. 8. Esa. 1. 13. So baptisme and the Supper now in Rom, are abominations to the Lord.

Obj. Mans unbeleefe cannot make the faith of God of none effect. God is true, though every man be a lyar, Rom. 3. 3. 4.

Ans. What may we think would he conclude from this Scripture? To cite a place, and leave it doubtfull what hee inferreth, is to deceive the reader. If he intend (according to the question in hand) that the sacraments are seales of grace and of salvation unto men, whether they beleeve or doe not beleeve: it is a notable errour overthrowing the Gospel; and establishing the popish herefie of grace ex opere operato, by the work doen. The Scriptures teach, touching Gods vvord and promise, that it profiteth not them that heare it, if it be not mixed vvith faith in them, Heb. 4. 2. if men beleeve not, they shall not be established, Esai. 7. 9. but shall be damned, Mark. 16. 16. they shall not see life, but the wrath of p. 151God abideth on them, Ioh. 3. 36. Neither is the faith of God, by mens unbeleef, made without effect. For his truth and faithfulnesse is confirmed as well in damning unrepentant & unbeleeving synners, as in saving those that repent and beleeve. When the righteous turneth from his righteousnes, and committeth iniquitie; he shall dye in his iniquity; and yet the way of the Lord is equall; as sayth the prophet; Ezek. 18. 24. 25. 26. Again, as all men naturally are lyars, and doe faile and break covenant on their part, by syn; which God never doeth: so if they continue in syn, and turne not to the Lord by repentance and faith, they all perish, Luk. 13. 3. 5. Rom. 8. 6.—10. 1. Cor. 6. 9. 10. Jude v. 5. But let men repent, and turn from their transgressions, so iniquity shall not be their ruine, Ezek. 18. 30. Otherweise it would follow, that after men are entred into covenant with God, & are baptized: though they fall frō Christ to Antichrist (as the church of Rome hath doen) though they fall to Mahomet (as many East churches have doen;) though they turne to be Iewes or pagans, and so dye, yet they shall be saved; for their unbeleef cannot make the faith of God of none effect. But so to expound this Scripture Rom. 3. were to turn judgement into wormwood, unto the destruction of mens soules. And if mine opposite would not gather some such thing from it; what will it help his plea for the baptisme of the church of Rome, which is the whore of Babylon, whom God hath devoted unto destruction, except they repent. Rev. 17. & 18. chap.

Obj. The Jewes in Christs time and before, holding justification by circumcision, & workes of the Law; set these up in the place of Christ & his precious blood, &c. Should we therfore say, that circumcision was then an impure idoll in their abuse? &c. Or should wee not rather learn to put difference between Gods ordinance in it selfe, and between mans abuse thereof, &c.

Ans. Whensoever Iew or Gentile, held justification by circumcision, sacrifice, or works of the Law: they made their sacraments, sacrifices, and workes idols, impure idols to themselves in their abuse. And it is admirable, that men teaching religion, should bee ignorant, that whatsoever creature or work of man is put in the place of God and Christ; it is therby made an idol: though Gods ordinances, and the workes of his Law in themselves are alwayes good; but turned to idols, are alwayes evill, and an abomination to the Lord, as is before proved. What mouth can deny, but the Papists are idolaters in praying to Saints and Angels? If idolaters, p. 152then they serve idols: if they serve idols in so praying; then the Saincts and Angels are idols to them in their synfull abuse. Yet who knoweth not that the Saincts and Angels in heaven, are blessed and holy, and not Idols in themselves. But this is mine opposites continual fallacie wherby he would deceive his reader; that because Baptisme and the Lords supper, are Gods holy ordinances in themselves; therfore the Papists that worship them as Gods, have not made them idols to themselves. And under this shelter of falshood he shrowdeth himself when he hath nought else to answer: repeting it I know not how often.

7. That the Romish baptisme is a lye "in the right hand of all that so …sa. 44. 20.receive it. Where the Prophet speaketh of idols, that by nature are no Gods &c. Jf the Romish baptisme were in the nature of it no baptisme &c, then should it without question be renounced as a very idol in deed. &c.

Answ. Belike then, he would have us take it for no lye, but for a truth, that popish baptisme giveth grace, and washeth away syn by the work doen. Neyther is it a lye, but truth, that bread in their Mass is very Christ really & properly, as he died on the cross. To apply Esa. 44. 20. against these things, is to hold an errour. Wel, let my errour continue with me: for I trust I shall alwayes hold that they are lyes in the right hand of all that so receive them. And as the prophet speaketh of thē that by nature were no Gods: so doe I. For neyther is water in Baptisme, not wine in the Masse, Christs blood naturally: neyther can they doe that which onelyonly Christs blood effecteth. And how ever there is difference between the idols of false Gods, and the idols of the true God; yet the scripture calleth them all Divils, Deut. 32. 17. 2 Chron. 11. 15. 1 Cor. 10. 20. so I call them all lyes. And where he sayth, if it were in the nature of it no baptisme; he might have knowen, that Gods true ordinance of baptisme, turned into a lye, maketh it a lying baptisme, and yet some baptisme it is, though not the true. Wherof the lye being put away, and the truth restored of God unto us; there need no other renunciation, as before I have proved. His other repetitions and questions of the same thing; need no further answer.

Obj. How wil he shew, that baptisme is so received as standing in the place of Christ &c. seing they are infants usually that receive it there &c.

Answ. Even as he wil shew against the Anabaptists, that baptisme is truly and rightly received in Christian churches: where they are infants usually that receive it. For as the covenant of p. 153Christ is to parents and their seed: so the covenant of Antichrist is to parents and their seed; even the covenant of destruction; that their babes be dashed against the Rock, Psal. 137. 9. Esa. 13. 16. The infants of Iewes, are Iewes; the infants of Turks are Turks; the infants of Christians are Christians: so the infants of Antichristians are Antichristians.

Obj. Considering also their profession of Christ, and baptising with water in the name of the Father Son and holy Ghost; and that this alone is in deed the baptisme of that church; the other things being but erroneous opinions, and synfull additions &c.

Answ. We have before considered that the profession of that church, is all one with the profession of the Pope, who eyther is not Antichrist, or else he denyeth both the Father and the Son, (as the Apostle sayth, 1 Joh. 3. 22.) how ever in word he confesseth both. 2. As they baptise with water in the name of the Father &c: so they consecrate their Supper or Mass with bread and wine, and the words of Christs institution, Mat. 26. why doth he not also affirme, that their Mass is no idol, no lye, in the hands and mouthes of them that receive it as their maker, and eat their God, more profanely then the heathens. 3. It is untrue that that alone (which he mentioneth) is in deed the baptisme of that church: in deed it ought to be, but so it is not. He might as well say, their praiers to God, are the onelyonly prayers of that church; for by divine institution so it should be; but it is knowen they pray also to innumerable creatures. 4. I grant the other things, are but erroneous opinions, and synfull additions: and he also must grant, that all the idolatrie of the heathens, condemned in Rom. 1. were but erroneous opinions and synfull additions; contrary to the covenant which God had made with them in Noes dayes, Gen. 9. 9. 10. 11. &c. Were it not for erroneous opinions, and synfull additions; all men now should be in that perfect estate wherin at first we were created. Eccles. 7. 29.

8. That the Romish baptisme is such, as the saying of the Apostle is verified in it, an idol is nothing in the world, 1 Cor. 8. 4. &c. Jf so, then the baptisme of that church, hath no relation to God, nor any divine institution, representation, or signification in it, &c. Then it ought of necessitie to be rejected &c.

Answ. If th'Apostles doctrine be true of idols, that they are nothing, 1 Cor. 8. 4. he ought not to kick against it, or me for alleging it. To his inference I answer, it hath no true relation unto Gods p. 154covenant (which is not with that Antichristian church,) but a false pretended relation it hath: as their other sacrament of the Mass or supper; where also there is a lying relation to Christs sacrifice, which they blasphemously renew, crucifying dayly the Lord of glorie. To his conclusion, he hath oft been answered: we reject the idol wholly; and reteyn onelyonly the truth, so farr as God by his word hath sanctified it unto us: without eyther grosse Anabaptistry, or notorious blasphemie, which with open mouth he chargeth us, & would fray the simple with.

9. That water (the material thing) in popish baptisme, is as the gold and silver (that is the matter) of the idols spoken of, Psal. 115. 4. wher as the use of water in baptisme is appointed by the Lord and stil to be reteyned, Ioh. 1. 33. &c. but the use of gold for idols, is forbidden, and utterly to be abandoned, Exod. 20. 23. Deut. 7. 25. 26. &c.

Answ. He corrupteth my words. I ††Animadv. pag. 72.sayd, An idol for the matter and workmanship is somthing (Psal. 115. 4.) but for the relation unto God, it is nothing. So Popish baptisme as touching the material thing is somwhat, the salt, water, oile, are Gods creatures: the outward action is the work of the hands of an idolatrous preist; and this work remayneth, as did the work of the idolaters circumcising in Jsrael. &c. This he maketh an errour in me▪ which all that have knowledge, wil easily see to be trueth. But the use of water in baptisme, (sayth he) is appointed by the Lord. True, unto the Christian church it is so: but the use of water in popish idol baptisme, or of bread and wine in the Popish mass, was never appointed by the Lord: this was the point he should have proved. As God sayd to the Iewes, bring no more vaine oblations, incense is an abomination unto me, Esa. 1. 13. so sayth he to the Antichristians, make no more vaine baptisings, the Masse is an abomination to me. Mine opposite sayth, the use of gold and silver for idols is forbidden: very wel; and is not the use of water, bread and wine for idols forbidden also? The use of gold to make the images of Cherubims was commanded, Exod. 25. 18. but if the Gentiles had made themselves golden Cherubims, they had been idols and syn to them, for God commanded them not. So water, bread and wine, are commanded the Christian church, in her sacraments: but to the Antichristian church God commandeth not these, til they repent & turne to Christ; then and not before may they use them for holy signes. Psalm. 50. 16. 17. Prov. 21. 27. & 9. 13. 17. 18. In this, his tenth errour or exception is also answered; which is about the very same p. 155thing: but that he delyteth in multiplication.

11 Touching the relation, (which is the mayn thing in a sacrament) that it should seale up unto them the forgivenes of synns, and (as they blasphemously say) quite take away synns, and conferr grace; so it is a vaine idol, and nothing. But the Sacraments in their relation are not onelyonly seals but signes also: Gen. 17. 11. Rom. 4. 11. &c. Now (by their assertion) the baptisme aforesayd sheweth nothing at all to the mind, and so is a vaine idol and nothing: and that which it sheweth to the eye, is but as the gold and silver of the heathens idols: which if it were true, then in deed there should be nothing of Gods ordinance▪ nothing of a true sacrament, &c. And can they then blame the Anabaptists? &c.

Answ. That there is no true relation in the popish baptisme, is sufficiently proved; the persons being Antichristians, out of the covenant, and without promise in that estate. That they have the true material things, of washing with water in the name of the Father &c, I have alwayes granted; though these materials are abused by them to idolatrie, as the Iewes abused their sheep and bullocks to abominable sacrifices. That of the gentiles silver and gold, is true also touching the matter, which is Gods good creature: further comparison I made not, though he corrupted my words.

Object. Whether think they that the baptisme received in the truest Churches, doe seal up to hypocrites the forgivenes of their synns? If they think not, whether they wil say, that the baptisme of those churches hath not the relation which is the mayn thing in a Sacrament. Jt is generally held that ††Act. 8. 13.Acts 8:13Simon Magus who was baptised by Philip, was an hypocrite, and that his baptisme did not seal up unto him the forgivenes of his synns: wil they therfore say, that the baptisme ministred by the Euangelists, had not the relation &c? Besides that thus the relation of the sacramentes should depend wholly upon man, and not upon the Lord or his ordinance at all.

Answ. To passe over his forme of writing, how he asketh questions, when he should prove or convince: I answer, his question is from the matter in hand, and so is deceitfull. We speak of the outward visible church of Christ and ordinances belonging therto; also of the visible Antichristian church and ordinances there abused. He leaveth this, and runneth to hypocrites, which men can not discerne; and whom therfore we must leave unto God, among other secrets, Deut. 29. 29. To reason from the one of th…se to the other, would bring all confusion; for hypocrites are lawfully admitted into the Church; as was Iudas, Simon Magus and many other: p. 156if upon this ground, open Antichristians, idolaters, unbeleevers, may be admitted also: then the church and the world, shal be one confused Babel. To his question I answer; baptisme in true Churches administred as th' Apostles and Euangelists did: …ealeth up to all, the forgivenes of their synns; unto the judgment of man; and they should greatly syn, and profane Gods ordinance, to baptise any other. Simon Magus when he was baptised, it is testified that he beleeved, Act. 8. 13. so by the ordinance of Christ, he was to be baptised, Mat. 28. 19. neyther knew they him to be an hypocrite when he was baptised, til afterward. Thus are we bound by the rule of love, to beleeve that all rightly baptised in the Christian church, have the seale of forgivenes of synns, and are buryed with Christ by baptisme, and that by one spirit, we are all baptised into one body, Rom. 6. 3. 4. 1 Cor. 12. 13. And so mine opposite beleeving the church of Rome to be Christs true church, and to have his true baptisme, was bound also to beleeve them all to be of one body and one spirit with himself, til they manifest to him the contrary: which seing they have not doen by all their idolatries, heresies & impieties; it is not to be thought that ever people which wil call themselves Christians, could doe it. As for us, we know the covenant of Christ is not with Antichrist, or his whoreish church; though therin God hath many elect: but we know that his covenant is with the true Christian church, and all the members of it, although therin be many hypocrites and reprobates; both which are manifested in time by their fruits. We walk by the rules reveiled to us of God: secret things are not for us to judge of, until they be manifested.

Where he concludeth, that thus the relation of the sacraments should depend wholly upon man, and not upon the Lord at all: it is a calumniation without all colour of proof. The relation is by mutual consent, the Lord offring his son Christ for salvation to all repentant beleeving synners: we by grace having obteyned faith, doe therby apprehend Christ for our saviour, as in the word, so in the sacraments.

His next demaund about our selves and our baptisme had in Rome; is a thing againe and agayn answered, without running into Anabaptistrie, whither he would so sayn drive us.

12. These men, erre not a litle, when they say that (popish) baptisme hath not the relation of a sacrament to them, but is a vaine idol and nothing, because p. 157they say of it, that it quite taketh away synns. Shall mens erroneous sayings and opinions make a nullity of Gods ordinances, signes and seales? Can not God be true, though they be lyars? &c.

Answ. Here is an other repetition of that which he forealleged in his 6. reason or errour; which I there refuted. Mens erroneous sayings, opinions, and doings, doe disanull to themselves all Gods promises, signes and seals: which are onelyonly conditionall, if men repent, beleeve and obey; which grace God giveth to all that are Christs. And if men beleeve not nor obey, and so be damned: their damnation impeacheth not Gods truth at all, but confirmeth it; for he hath sayd of such, that they shalbe damned. Mar. 16. 16. Joh. 3. 36.

Obj. Besides the relation in a sacrament, there is also to be regarded the commandment of God, who hath appointed it to be observed in the church. As Christ who was without syn &c, yet in obedience to the Law, was circumcised and baptised. &c. Therfore it should be syn in the church of Rome, if they should reject baptisme and not keep it. Which doth plainly evince, that it is not a vaine idol and nothing, (for then it were not syn but their dutie to cast it away; and not to keep it at all) but that it is the Lords ordinance &c.

Answ. The first is true, for without the word and commandment of God, it could be no seale of his covenant, or have any relation at all therto. The second is a deceytful reason, concluding from the holy commandment of God, to the unholy keeping of it in Rome. It should be syn in them to reject baptisme & the Lords supper professedly: it is syn in them, to keep them as they doe profanely. It were better for a man never to be baptised or eat the Lords supper all his life, then to communicate with the church of Rome in eyther of these, as they profane them: for we may not doe evil that good may come therof, Rom. 3. 8. So his plaine eviction that it is not a vaine idol in their abuse of it, is but a plaine fallacie: let him apply it to the other Sacrament, and it wil appear. Antichrist hath transformed the Lords supper, into an abominable massing sacrifice, and therin worshipeth a wafer cake for his maker and redemer: this he durst not deny to be a notorious idol. But his reason (if it be good) wil prove it no idol: thus. It should be syn in the church of Rome if they should reject the Lords supper and not keep it. Which doth plainly evince that the Lords supper in Rome (though changed by them into a wicked Mass) is not an idol, for then it were not syn, but their duty to reject it. The p. 158refutation herof is this; Rome and all nations syn, that doe not beleeve aright in Christ, and keep all his ordinances. The more that they openly renounce Christ or any of his ordinances, the more they shal adde unto their syn. Yet in that they keep them not aright▪ but have changed the truth of God **…m. 1. 25. …es. 2. 11.into a lye, and his holy ordinances into idols; they are also great synners, for which if God give them not repentance, they are under wrath and damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. Of this point, I have spoken ††16. &c.before, in answer to his 6. reason for the church of Rome.

His 13. and last errour, is but a repetition of former matters, about the brazen serpent, Gods ordinances and creatures considered in themselves &c, to which I have before answered; shewing that it helpeth the Papists no more to clear them of idolatry herein, then the heathens of old, who made idols of creatures and ordinances, which in their own nature and first institution, were good and holy. And hitherto of his errours wrongfully imputed unto us.

To these, by his figure of repetition and multiplication, he hath added from the former grounds, Contradictions, Abuse of scriptures, Uaine distinctions and Anabaptistical assertions: all which being but the same things turned and repeated, and by me before cleared; I count it needless labour to make the same answers againe, to his empty calumniations.