More Proofs of Infants Church Membership and Right to Baptism, Chapter 7
CHAP. VII. Of Mr. Danvers's many other accuſations of me.
§. 1. IT was one of the old Characters of the Hereticks in the Apoſtles dayes, To ſpeak evil of the things that they underſtood not.
And that may well be their Character in which they contradict the three great conſtitutive parts of Chriſtianity, and all Religion, and true honeſty, viz. TRUTH, HUMILITY and LOVE, by Falſhood, Pride and Malignity, (called commonly Ʋncharitablneſs.)
§. 2. The Root of this is, when Reigning, an unſanctified heart in which theſe vices remain unmortified, covered from the owners knowledge, by a form of Godlineſs, and eſpecially a zeal for the wayes of ſome Party, more honoured in the perſons eyes for wiſdom, or piety than others: In others there is a great meaſure of the ſame vices mixed with true Grace, where an evil and a good cauſe are conjoyned as to ſome effects: They love God and his Truth, and they hate all that they think againſt him, they would promote piety in the world, and repreſs what they think againſt it; And being perſons whoſe wits and ſtudies were not ſuch, as exactneſs and largeneſs of knowledge do require, but yet lovers of knowledge, truth, and Scripture, they have more knowledge than prophane ſots, but little, alas, little, in compariſon of that which is neceſſary to a methodical, accurate underſtanding of the matters which frequently fall under controverſie; And ſo knowing but little they know not what they are ignorant of, nor what others know beyond them; And it being the common vice of mans underſtanding, to be haſty in judgeing before they hear or know one half that is neceſſary to a true and faithful judgement, and ſo to be confident before they underſtand, theſe men hereby are led to confidence in many an error: And an erring judgement firſt telleth them that Truth is falſhood, and falſhood truth, that Good is evil, and evil good, that Duty is ſin, and ſin is duty; and then a good cauſe and a bad, the Love of Truth and a perverſe and partial zeal concur, to put them on in the way of error. Ignorance and error ſet them on a wrong cauſe, and a mixt affection or zeal, partly good and partly evil ſpurreth them on. And in theſe the Error and Hereſie and conſequent ſins, are no more predominant than the cauſe; and God will have mercy on thoſe that in ignorance, with good meanings, oppoſe many truths, and do much evil.
§. 3. And the great means of nouriſhing this ſin in Churches is departing from Chriſts Church order, who hath appointed Teaching and Learning to be the ſetled way of getting knowledge; And therefore required all his diſciples to come to his Church, as little children to School, with teachable humble minds, to Learn, and not with proud wrangling minds to diſpute: If all our children ſhould ſpend their time at School in diſputing with the Teacher and ſetting their wits againſt his as in a conflict, what would they thus Learn?
§. 4. Therefore Paul ſaith, that the ſervant of the Lord muſt not ſtrive, and oft calleth men from perverſe diſputings, and ſtriving about words which ſubvert the hearers, and from ſuch contendings as edifie not but tend to more ungodlineſs, (though the faith may be contended for, and truth defended, when oppoſition maketh it truly neceſſary).
§. 5. When a man ſeeketh after knowledge as a Learner, he meeteth it with a willing mind; he cometh towards it with an appetite, and ſo is a capable receiver: But when a man cometh as a diſputant, he is ingaged already to one ſide, and if that be falſe he cometh out to fight againſt the truth, with a ſpirit of oppoſition, hating truth as error, and good as evil, and thinks it his duty and intereſt to deſtroy and ſhame it if he can, and therefore is unapt to think what may be ſaid for it, but ſtudyeth all that he can againſt it. And is this loathing, and oppoſition and fighting againſt truth the way to know it?
§. 6. Therefore that which hath undone the Churches peace is, that too many Teachers, being themſelves too forward to controverſies, have too haſtily drawn in their people into their quarrels, and caſt ſuch bones before them in books and pulpits inſtead of food, which break their teeth and ſet them together by the ears inſtead of nouriſhing them. And ſo one mans hearers are taught to diſpute for this ſort of Government, and anothers for that ſort; one mans for free-will and anothers againſt it; when perhaps neither they nor the maſter of the quarrel can tell you what it is? and ſo of an hundred more ſuch like. The honeſt hearers when they ſhould be digeſting the ancient Chriſtian doctrine, and learning to increaſe in Love to God and man, and to practiſe a holy and a heavenly life, and prepare for a comfortable death, and happy eternity by a Living faith and hope, are taught that if they be not zealots for this opinion or that, for Anabaptiſtry, for ſeparation, &c. if they pray by a book, or if they joyn with thoſe that hold ſuch things as they hear called by odious frightful names, they are not then right zealous Chriſtians, but corrupt or complyers or lukewarm; And thus each Church is made a miſerable Church-militant, and trained up to war againſt each other.
§. 7. And this Miniſters have done, partly to ſtrengthen themſelves by the conſent and number of their adherents, as the Captain muſt conquer by his Souldiers: When they can ſet a great number on hating their adverſaries, and backbiting them, and telling the hearers wherever they come, to make them ſeem odious, how erroneous and bad ſuch and ſuch men are, they think they have done much of their work? And while they think it is for Chriſt, they know not how notably they pleaſe and ſerve the Devil. But I muſt remember that I have ſpoken of this elſewhere, and ſo diſmiſs it.
§. 8. That Mr. Danvers and his imitaters ſpeak evil (confidently and vehemently) of the things they know not (yea very many ſuch) I am ſure. But from what principle or root, or how far that vice which produceth theſe fruits is mortified or unmortified as to all others, I am neither called nor willing to judge. I remember how Mr. Tho. Pierce once dealt with me: When my Religious neighbour could hardly be perſwaded to communicate with thoſe among them that were of his judgement, ſaying, they were men that would ſwear and lie, and lived ſcandalouſly, I thought it my duty (to keep up diſcipline and yet) to moderate their cenſures by telling them what ſins I thought might ſtand with ſome meaſure of ſincere piety, and Church-communion. And what doth he but hence take advantage to tell the world how looſe my doctrine was, and what ſinful perſons I thought had grace? So now if I ſhould ſay, that notwithſtanding theſe hard-faced falſhoods heaped together, and confidently obtruded on the ignorant, even about publick and viſible matter of fact, yet I hope the Au…hor feareth God truly in other reſpects, and erreth through Ignorance, paſſion, and temerity; I ſhould be told publickly ere long by one or other, that I think the moſt brazen-faced Lyars may be Saints: And if I deny ſuch mens Goodneſs, I look to be told that I am cenſorious and a reviler of godly men that differ from me. Therefore I am thankful to Chriſt that he not only excuſeth us from ſo hard a work as the Judging of the ſincerity of others, but calls us off, and ſaith, who art thou that judgeſt another mans ſervant? to his own maſter he ſtands or falls: But whoever cenſure me for it, I will ſay that my judgement ſtill inclineth to the hopeful and charitable part! For ſiding and error may draw good men into heinous ſins.
§. 9. That He and I do differ in Judgement and Practice, is not to be denyed: I thought our difference had been but in ſo ſmall and tolerable things (till I ſaw worſe in his writings) as ſhould neither abate Love or forbid Communion: And thinking ſo, I was the likelier to practiſe as I thought, and not to hate him and ſuch as he: But I perceive he takes the differences to be far greater, and my errors and ſins to be more heinous and intolerable, and therefore if he hate me (though I know not that ever he ſaw me or I him) it is no wonder, it being more agreeable to his judgement; And alſo if he would not tolerate me were it in his power.
§. 10. If he ſo greatly differ from me, and be in the right, certainly it is becauſe he is either a great deal wiſer and more knowing in theſe matters, or becauſe he is more conſcionable to avoid perverting temptations, and more Godly and fit for divine light. I deny not either: but from the bottom of my heart tell him, that I am ſo deeply conſcious of the darkneſs and ſmalneſs of my underſtanding, and my little goodneſs and very ill deſerts from God, that did he bring me any conſiderable evidence for his cauſe, my great ſuſpicion of my ſelf would prepare me to hear him: But it muſt not be ſuch ſtuff as he here obtrudeth on us. And I muſt tell him, though I acknowledge God to be a free Benefactor, and may give the Greateſt Knowledge to them that have leaſt laboured for it; yet while diligent ſearching is his commanded means, I ſhall doubt whether his eaſier and ſhorter ſearch hath attained to ſo much more than my harder and longer, till the fruit ſhall prove it.
§. 11. He tells us Ed. 2. p. 170. that I [cannot do my ſelf more right and my offended brethren, than to clear my ſelf in theſe particulars which are indeed ſo heinous, not only to every one of his Nonconforming brethren, but to moſt Proteſtants that hear them.]
Anſw. 1. Still ſuch untruths? Do you know what moſt Proteſtants think that hear them? and every one of my Nonconforming brethren? Why ſome of the wiſeſt of them that I know did read them over, and approved them before they were printed? Others (many and many) of the moſt judicious alſo of my acquaintance have ſince profeſſed their conſent: Nay more; I remember not one Miniſter that hath made me know by word or writing to me that he diſſenteth from any one of all theſe heinous things. I remember that once ſome objected what they heard others ſay (not as conſenting to the oppoſers) and acquieſced in my anſwers, or rather in the words of the book peruſed. So that if every one of my Nonconforming brethren be offended, and I known not of one, nor any one of them would ever vouchſafe a word or line to convince me, you cenſure them for woful diſſemblers or uncharitable. But I believe them of themſelves rather than you.
§. 12. He addeth, And I dare be bold to ſay, hath given more general offence, and loſt Mr. Baxter more amongſt his Friends *Not ſo much as Mr. Tombes is among the Anabaptiſts for writing for Pariſh Communion., than any thing he did in all his life.]
Anſw. 1. The offence which Chriſt dreadfully condemneth, which is ſcandalizing the weak or laying ſnares or ſtumbling-blocks before them, to tempt them to think ill of Chriſt, or Godlineſs, or to commit any ſin, I would avoid as carefully as I can, And to avoid it I have written that which offendeth you. But the offence which is but Diſpleaſing diſſenters, yea miſtaking men, I little regard on my own account. And your talk of my loſs (or being loſt) doth ſavour ſo rankly of a humane hypocritical temptation, as maketh me remember what Chriſt ſaid to Peter Math. 16.23. that would have had him ſave himſelf from ſuffering, though I will not ſpeak out ſuch unpleaſing words to you: But your words ſavour too much of the fleſh. O Sir, it is but a few moments more, and you and I ſhall be in a world, where the thoughts and words of mortals, of us, will be of ſmall importance to us! And themſelves are haſting to the day when all their thoughts periſh. O ceaſe from man whoſe breath is in his noſtrils: for wherein is he to be accounted of? Would you tempt me to look to the hypocrites reward? the approbation of man? O miſerable reward▪ Were not that book odious to you, I would refer you for my Reaſons to the two Chapters of Man-pleaſing and Pride: If Gods approbation ſeem not enough for us, why call we him our God?
But if I have loſt ſo much as you intimate, you would perſwade me that my ſervice is more than I take it to be? I have felt little comfort in any ſervice of God which coſt me nothing. But you ſhall not tempt me to over-value it ſo much; I find no loſs at all by it. What have I loſt Sir? Not one farthing or farthings-worth, that I am aware of! As I lived not on any man before, ſo I am never the poorer for that duty now. Is it mens praiſe or good thoughts of me? Not one friend to my remembrance in the City or Land hath once told me his diſſent, much leſs that I have loſt his good eſteem: (Only one young man that heard me Preach came for ſatisfaction about one of the particulars, who was ſatisfied as far as I could perceive, and I wiſht him but to read over all in my book (about that you object concerning the Crucifix) and I heard of him no more.) And if I am ſo much loſt with my friends, and no one of them in England tell me that he diſſenteth, and wherein, ſuch friends are not ſo valuable as to be any of my felicity! And do you call a man [loſt] that loſeth the thoughts or the breath of man? As it is their own duty or ſin, I regard all mens thoughts or words, and ſo would pleaſe all men for their good to edification: But as to my own comfort I can ſpare yours and theirs; and if you and a thouſand ſuch ſhould write a Cart-load of Calumnies as you have done, I think they would break but little of my ſleep. Set theſe arguments next before hypocrites that live on man: I live not on them.
But your words do mind me, how men that are embodyed in little parties, (far leſs than the Donatiſts or Novatians) are inclined to take their Cabin for all the Kingdom, and their Sect for the Church, and are affected with their praiſe or diſpraiſe almoſt as if they were all the world. You hear your folks it ſeems talk againſt me (with whom backbiting is a duty) and you ſeem to dream that it is all my friends. If God in Chriſt will be my friend, I can ſpare others.
And tell me Sir, for what prize or gain do you think I am loſt with all my friends? No man in his wits will voluntarily be loſt for nothing. Do you think it is to get other friends that I more value? Who be they? Is it the Papiſts? Enquire what I get by them. Is it the Dioceſan. party? What have I got by them but ſilencing and the loſs of all Miniſterial maintenance, theſe twelve years? And ask them whoſe writings have more offended them yours or mine.
If I am loſt, it hath …oſt me more years hard ſtudy to be loſt, and to be erroneous or a fool, than it hath done you to be ſome body and to be wiſe; And I tell you I never yet repented of Coſt or loſs for that Truth and duty, which you lament as heinous error and ſin. But naked truth, and the faithful endeavours of pleaſing God, in promoting that Love among Chriſts diſciples, and peace in his Churches which Church Tyrants and Sects have ſo many ages laboured (too ſucceſfully) to deſtroy, are ſweeter than to be forſaken either through the perſecution of one ſort or the Revilings of the other, or the loſs of all mens friendſhip upon earth.
And yet I will add, that though being long ago glutted with mens applauſe, as finding it a luſcious but unwholeſome thing, and having voluntarily caſt up much of it my ſelf, I yet perceive no want of friends, but take your words of them for meer ſlanders.
§. 13. Saith Mr. D. (Pref. ed. 1.) [He hath ſo much abounded (in contradictions) (none more that I know of;) being as you'l find, ſometime a great oppoſer, then a great defender of Epiſcopacy.]
Anſw. 1. Yet I know not that ever this man ſaw me (as I ſaid) or I him. 2. This falſhood did unhappily overſlip him, my writing being ſo full a confutation of it, that he can have nothing of ſenſe to ſay to cloak it. My judgement was for Epiſcopacy 1639. by Reading Biſhop Downame and ſome others: But in 1640. the oath called Et caetera calling us to ſwear never to conſent to the alteration of the preſent Government by A. Biſhops, Biſhops, Deans, Archdeacons, &c. forced me to ſtudy the whole cauſe to the bottom, ſince which time my judgement of Epiſcopacy never altered (which is 34 years ago) having ſetled in the Receptibility of one ſort of Epiſcopacy, and the deſirableneſs of another, and the diſlike of another ſort: All which I have fully publiſhed in my Diſpute of Church-Government 1658. when the Biſhops here were at the loweſt. Either this man knew me and my writings herein, or not. If not, what a man is this that dare talk thus confidently and falſly of what he knew not? If he did, then how much more flagitious is his practice, thus to tell the world an untruth ſo notorious to himſelf? He ſaith (as you may find) but never tells you where. Let him tell you where and when I ever defended that Epiſcopacy which I had oppoſed?
§. 14. [Mr. D. [Sometime for Nonconformity (in whoſe tents he hath ſeemed to ſhelter himſelf in the ſtorm, and with their Indulgence to come forth of his hole) and yet at length ſo highly to diſgrace the ſame.
Anſw. 1. Let him ſhew you if he can, where or when I have changed my judgement about Conformity, or expreſt a change ſince 1640? Not that I take it for a diſgrace to be mutable by growing wiſer: But neceſſity forced me ſo long ago to ſtudy thoſe controverſies ſo hard, as fixed me, and I never heard any thing ſince which conſiderably altered me therein: Which alſo being viſible in the foreſaid Diſpute of Liturgie, Ceremonies, &c. written 1658. leave no cloak for this mans calumnies. See there whether I ſaid not more for ſo much of Epiſcopacy, Liturgie and Ceremonies which I took to be lawful, than ever I have done ſince Biſhops returned?
2. But what doth he mean by [ſheltering my ſelf in a ſtorm in their tents]? I cannot imagine what, unleſs ſenſe and truth at once forſook him! When a ſtorm fell on the Nonconformiſts, were their tents a likely place for ſhelter? Had not the Conformiſts tents been likelier? Did the Nonconformiſts ſhelter me? From what, and how?
3. And what hole was it that I came out of, with their Indulgence? Are ſuch men as this the Vindicators of Gods Truth againſt the Chriſtian world, that pour out untruths at ſuch a rate, in deſpight of the moſt publick notoriety of fact? Do I need to tell the Reader (only for the ſake of youths and forreigners) that when the Nonconformiſts cauſe was at the bar, when ſpeaking had any room and hope, they ſet me in their forlorn, and engaged me (with my Conſcience and deſire to have prevented that which I foreſaw) in the tasks of writing and ſpeaking which would moſt exaſperate and offend the Biſhops; till I was I think the firſt among them that was forbidden to Preach. I continued after that in London a year, where I never had place or flock, but was a ſtranger: ſickneſs then forced me to remove into the Countrey. The Tents I was ſheltered in, were Gods protection in my own habitation; which if a hole I thought good enough for me. I Preacht to ſuch as would hear me, till, being near the Church door, and the people numerous, Clergie-envy cauſed me to be ſent to the common Gaol, among malefactors; As ſoon as I was out, another warrant was put into the Officers hands to apprehend me again, and ſend me to Newgate for ſix months; Upon which I removed my dwelling to the next Village out of the County: I refuſed none there that deſired to hear me, of my Neighbours. The writings which he revileth, ſhew that I lived not idle; And I think he could wiſh I had done leſs and ſpoken to fewer. I came not out of that hole of many months after the Indulgence was granted: I ſtayed on reaſons of Self-denyal, becauſe I would fore-ſtall no London Miniſters, nor hinder their Auditories, and therefore reſolved to ſtay till they were ſetled: I came on terms of far greater Self-denyal, to the great abatement of my health, (to ſay nothing of my greater coſt,) which now hath again forced me at preſent to retire. You ſee now at what rate theſe men inform the world, and how far they are to be believed.
As for his talk of [Diſgracing the Nonconformiſts] it's true in two ſenſes. 1. As he and I diſgrace Chriſtianity by being ſo ignorant and bad: 2. Or if he mean not My own Nonconformity but his, (even his Nonconformity to a great deal of truth and Chriſtian duty and common honeſty (by concatenated falſhoods), I have done my part (when conſtrained) to diſgrace it.
§. 15. [Sometime a friend to Calvin, and then a greater to Arminius] ſaith he.
Anſw. 1. Did he tell the Reader where by one (in any words) I contradict the other? 2. But ſee the miſery of a Sectarian ſpirit, that taketh it for a contradiction to be a friend to Calvin and Arminius both? He would as this inferreth, take it ill to be thought a friend to Anabaptiſts and Paedobaptiſts both, to Independents and Preſbyterians and Epiſcopal too. But that is to ſuch as I, the greateſt duty, which to him is a ſhameful contradiction: When I think none Chriſtians but Anabaptiſts, I will be a friend to no other as ſuch: Men of ſo little a Church, muſt have anſwerably little Love: Cenſoriouſneſs is a friend but unto few. 3. But by this your friendſhip ſeemeth narrower than I thought it: I thought it had extended to all the Anabaptiſts But they are divided into [Free-willers] and [Free-gracers] as they call them, that is, into Calviniſts and Arminians: and are you a friend but unto one part of them? 4. But indeed Sir, the Controverſies intended by you under theſe names, are not ſuch as a man of my poor meaſure can fix his judgement in every young, and promiſe that it ſhall never change, nor that I can take it for a ſhame to grow any wiſer in them, than heretofore, though perhaps your judgement changed not from your Childhood. And I hope (if what I have written may be publiſhed) to make it appear that ſuch as you that ſpeak evil of what you underſtand not, are the grievous enemies of the Churches of Chriſt, as to Truth, Holineſs, and Peace, by your militant noiſe about Calviniſm, and Arminianiſm,, ſtirring up contentions, and deſtroying Love, by making differences ſeem greater than they are; and laying the Churches Concord and Communion and mens ſalvation upon ſuch queſtions, as Whether the houſe ſhould be built of Wood or Timber? And is not this worthy of your zeal?
§. 16. He adds [Sometimes a great Defender of the Parliament and their Cauſe, and then none more to renounce them and betraytor them for their pains.]
Anſw. 1. Was there never but One Parliament and One Cauſe? Perhaps you mean that the Parliament called 1640 and the Rump (as called) and the Armies Little Parliament, and Oliver, and the Army Council and all the reſt of the Soveraigns were all One Parliament? Or that to ſwear to the firſt Parliament, or fight for them, and to ſhut out and impriſon them, and to diſſolve them, as Uſurpers, and to ſet up one choſen by—who knows whom—and to ſet up Oliver and his Son, and to pull him down again, and to ſet up the Rump again, and to pull them down and ſet up a Council of State, &c. were all one Cauſe; And that one day it was Treaſon not to be for one Soveraign, and another day not to be againſt that, and for another. Your Army did not betraytor them, when they forced out one part as Traytors firſt, and thruſt out the major part, after impriſoning and reproaching many worthy wiſe and religious men, and when they pulled down all the reſt at laſt? Had you or I more hand in theſe matters? Whether you know your ſelf I know not, but I am ſure you know not me, nor what you talk of.
§. 17. It followeth [Sometimes a great Oppoſer of Tradition, and anon a great defender thereof.]
Anſw. 1. If you take Tradition equivocally, you calumniate but by equivocation; but if [thereof] mean [the ſame Tradition] your falſhood hath not the cloak of an equivocation. Prove what you ſay by any words of mine? It is between twenty and thirty years I think ſince I largely opened my judgement of Tradition, in the Preface to the ſecond edition of my book called the Saints Reſt, which I never changed ſince. If you will deny that your Father delivered you the Bible (or any other) or that the Church hath uſed both Bible and Baptiſm from the Apoſtles dayes till now, Let the reproach of ſuch Tradition be your glory, if you will; It ſhall be none of mine. But do you write a book to prove the Tradition of Adult Baptiſm from Chriſts time to ours, and when you have done renounce and ſcorn it? See Reader, how he valueth his own work?
§. 18. He addeth [Sometimes a violent impugner of Popery, and yet at laſt who hath ſpoken more in favour of it?]
Anſw. Here again if by [Popery] and [it] you mean the ſame thing, You hold on the ſame courſe: Prove it true, and take the honour of once writing a true accuſation. I have not hid my judgement about Popery, having written about ſeven or eight books againſt it in above twenty years time, by which you may ſee in comparing them whether I changed my judgement. If you cannot, refuſe not to bluſh.
But I was and am a defender of that which is Popery and Antichriſtianity with you, the Church-memberſhip, Covenant-intereſt and Baptiſm of Infants, and it's like many more parcels of the Treaſures of Chriſt, which you zealouſly rob him off, and give to Antichriſt; As too many Sectaries do, the greateſt part (I doubt more than nine parts of ten) of his Kingdom or Church univerſal: And as Divines uſe to prove that carnal minds are enemies and haters of God, becauſe they confeſs, honour and worſhip him both in Name, and in reſpect of many of his Attributes and relations and works, yet in reſpect of others they are averſe to him; ſo I would be a monitor to you, and ſuch like Sectaries, to take heed of going much further, leſt before you know what you do, while you honour Chriſts name, and cry up ſome of his Grace, and doctrines, you ſhould really hate, oppugn and blaſpheme him, and take Chriſt himſelf for Antichriſt, and his Churches and ſervants for Antichriſtian. If you will take him for Antichriſt that taketh Infants into the viſible Church, I think it will prove to be Chriſt himſelf.
§. 19. Reader, How big a volume wouldſt thou have me write in anſwering ſuch ſtuff as this? Tears are fitter than Ink, for ſuch fearleſs, raſh, continued, viſible falſhoods, to be deliberately publiſhed to the world as truths, by one that calleth himſelf a man, and a Chriſtian, and ſeemeth zealous to new Chriſten moſt of the Chriſtian world. Unleſs I ſhould tire my ſelf and thee. I muſt ſtop, and ceaſe this noyſome work: Only one charge more which runs through much of his book, I will anſwer, becauſe it concerneth the cauſe it ſelf.
§. 20. He oft tells you that when I have called my book [Plain Scripture proof] I yet there and after contradict my ſelf, by ſaying that the controverſie is difficult] and by ſaying that in the ancient Churches men were left at liberty to Baptize their children when they would.
And 1. His very words prove that this is no contradiction: For theſe very words I will make plain to a boy of ten years old, and yet the world muſt know in print that he is not able to underſtand them, and that this is worthy the conſideration of his proſelytes. 2. My meaning I opened long ago, which he concealeth: The Proofs of Infants Church-memberſhip are Plain: the proof therefore of their right to Baptiſm is plain though not in the ſame degree? but there are objections of difficulty which may be brought againſt it, which every weak Chriſtian (nor Miniſter neither) cannot anſwer. And the hardeſt is that which is little taken notice of by themſelves, but I (impartially) opened in my Chriſtian Directory. And is it a contradiction to ſay that a doctrine that hath Plain Proof, may be aſſaulted by difficult ob…ections? And yet ſuch as a ſober Chriſtian ſhould not be changed by, unleſs on the ſame reaſons he will forſake all Chriſtianity, and his everlaſting hopes: For I take the doctrine of the Souls Immortality to be ſuch as may be Plainly proved: But truly I take it to be five degrees above the ability of this Writer, to anſwer ſolidly all that can be ſaid againſt it. I take it to be Plainly provable that the Scripture is certainly true: And yet I take it to be quite above this confident mans ability well to ſolve all the difficulties objected? were it but thoſe poor ones of Benedictus. Spinoſa in his late peſtilent Tractatus Theologico-Politicus. I think I have plain proof that God is not the Author of ſin, and man is not moved in it and all his acts as an engine by unavoidable neceſſitation: But I deſpair that ten years ſtudy more ſhould inable this Writer, clearly to ſolve the objections of Hobbes or Camero about it. In a word, though we have Plain proof that Chriſt is the Son of God, I ſhould be loth that the faith of this Nation ſhould lie upon the ſucceſs of a diſpute about it, between a crafty Infidel and this ſelf-conceited man.
§. 21. And why ſhould my impartiality in acknowledging the Churches liberty as to the time of Baptiſm, at firſt, be ſo unkindly received? I meant not, nor ſaid, that Chriſt had left it Indifferent and to their Liberty, but that they left one another at liberty herein: Becauſe 1. The firſt and great work was in ſetling the Churches by converting Jews and Gentiles to the faith: And the Adult who were the active members, were they that the Apoſtles had moſt to do with, (and therefore whoſe caſe is expreſly ſpoken of.)
2. Becauſe it was a known thing that the Infants of Church-members had ever been Church-members and were in poſſeſſion of that Relation when Chriſt and his Apoſtles ſet up Baptiſm.
3. And it was a granted caſe, that all Sanctified perſons devoted themſelves and all that they had to God; and every thing according to its capacity: And therefore their Infants according to their capacity, which God himſelf had before expounded.
4. And it was never the meaning of Chriſt to lay ſo much on the outward waſhing, as many Papiſts and Anabaptiſts do: But as the uncircumciſed Infants in the Wilderneſs were nevertheleſs Church-members and ſaved; ſo when Infants were in the Covenant of God by the Parents true and known conſent, their damnation was not to be feared, upon their dying unbaptized by ſurprize.
5. But yet obedience to God being neceſſary, many Parents haſtned their childrens Baptiſm, at two or three dayes old. Others ſtaid till the eighth day: others longer; and multitudes had children that were in ſeveral degrees entred on the uſe of reaſon, when the Parents were converted, and it remained doubtful whether they were (as to the Covenant) at their Parents choice or their own: And to this day there want not thoſe that think that Baptiſm was not inſtituted to be the ordinary initiating Sacrament of the children of Church-members, but only of Proſelytes; And that Chriſtians Infants took their places in the Church of courſe, but Proſelytes from without only were to be Baptized. Though this be an error, it is probable that there were ſome then, as well as now of that opinion. But nothing more occaſioned (as far as I can find) the delay of Baptiſm, than the fear of the danger of ſinning after it, eſpecially of apoſtaſie. All held that all ſin paſt was pardoned in Baptiſm. And Heb. 6. and 10. and other texts, and the common doctrine of the Church made them think it a very perillous thing to ſin wilfully after illumination and the acknowledgement of the truth. And therefore abundance delayed their own Baptiſm till age, and many were backward to Baptize their children, leſt childiſh folly and youthful luſts, and worldly temptations, ſhould draw them to trample upon the blood of the Covenant; And on ſuch accounts, all were not Baptized at one age. And divers that were Baptized at age upon their own converſion from Heatheniſm, were not ſuddenly ſo knowing, as to be acquainted with all the caſes about their childrens rights, but muſt have a conſiderable time to learn. For it was (be it ſpoken without offence to ſtricter men) a General and Narrow ſort of Knowledge which the Apoſtles and the Primitive Churches required in the adult as neceſſary to Baptiſm, yea when they had at laſt kept them long under Catechizing. For even in Auguſtines time, though all uſed the ſame words of Baptiſm, ſo few had a clear underſtanding of the very Baptiſmal form or words, that (writing (ubi ſupra) de bapt. contr. Donat.) he ſaith that as to the Meaning of thoſe words not only the Hereticks, ſed ipſi carnales parvuli Eccleſiae, ſi poſſent ſinguli diligenter interrogari, tot diverſitates opinionum fortaſſis, quot homines numerarentur: Animalis enim homo non percipit, &c. Annon tamen ideo non integrum ſacramentum accipiunt?
§. 22. There remaineth a Catalogue of my heynous errors which he hath put in the preface to his firſt edition, and in the end of the ſecond, and which he and ſuch as he have taught many honeſt weak people in London, both Anabaptiſts and Independents to talk frightfully and odiouſly of from one another behind my back. What ſhould I ſay to him and them? Shall I anſwer them that never ſpeak or write to me? Shall I take this mans accuſation for a confutation or conviction? Is ſo deadly an enemy of Antichriſt conceited of a ſelf-infallibility, or that I muſt take my faith or truſt from Mr. Danvers, though not from the Church, Pope, or General Council? If not, what did the man think that a recitation ſhould do with me? Did not I know what I had written till he told me?
§. 23. But it is others that he tells it to▪ Thoſe others will read my own words or, they will not? If they will, I will not be ſo cenſorious of them as to think that they need any more to his fruſtration: If they will not, muſt I write another book to tell them what I have written in the former? How ſhall I know that they will any more read the laſt than the firſt? If Satan have ſo much power over them, that he can make them err, and lie and ſlander and backbite as oft as a man profeſſing zeal for the truth, will be his inſtrument and meſſenger, it is not my writing more books that can ſave them. The end muſt tell them, whether I or they ſhall be the greater loſers by it.
§. 24. I have therefore but theſe two wayes now to take: 1. Whereas this man ſaith, that my doctrine ſeemeth heynous to every one of my Non-conforming brethren, and moſt Proteſtants, and that I have loſt my ſelf among my friends, I do demand as their duty and my right, the Means of my conviction and reduct…on from thoſe brethren (if any) whom he doth not belie: I profeſs my ſelf ready privately or publickly to give them an account of the reaſons of all my doctrine, and thankfully to retract whatever they ſhall manifeſt to be an error. And I challenge any of them to prove that ever▪ I refuſed to be accountable to them, or denyed a ſober anſwer to their reaſons, or refuſed to learn of any that would teach me, or to ſtudy as hard to know as they? or that ever partiality, faction or worldly intereſt, bribed me to deal falſly with my conſcience, and betray the truth. And if after this claim, they will be ſilent, I will take them for conſenters, or if by backbiting only any will ſtill notifie their diſſent, I will take them for ſuch as I take this writer, and in ſome reſpect worſe though not in all.
§. 25. II. My ſecond remedy is, I will go willingly to School to Mr. D. and having ſaid ſo much for the Learning, againſt the Diſputing way, I will become his hearer and reader, if he have any thing to teach me, that ſavoureth of Truth and Modeſty more than this noyſome fardel doth which he hath publiſhed. And to that end I will here give him a Catalogue of the contrary opinions to mine, which I deſire him ſolidly to prove. If he hold not the contrary doctrines, why doth he exclaim againſt mine, as heynous? If he do hold the contrary to what I have with due and clear diſtinction and explication opened, (and his Readers after the peruſing of all my own words together be of his mind) I then take theſe following to be their own opinions, and part of their Religion, which I deſire them to make good, and teach them me by ſufficient proof.