Second Reply to Baxter, Postscript
POST-SCRIPT. Some short Reflections upon Mr. Baxters Book, called More-Proofs, by John Tombes. B.D.
TO what Mr. B. hath done in his Preface to Mr. Wills his book, and his Christian Directory, in my Just Reply is answer made; Besides those writings there is lately published his mock-titled virulent book More Proofs of Infants Churchmembership. The dispute at Bewdly, Jan. 1649. how insolently, injuriously, unbrotherly and unchristianly it was managed and published by him, my Antidote Praecursor, and other writings shew: Infants rights and benefits conferred by the baptismal Covenant of grace are a meer Chimaera: I challenge him to set down distinctly his theses concerning the grace he means, the covenant of grace, what and whose it is, how it is baptismal, what are the rights and benefits conferred to infants by it, using words in their proper sense and genuine notions, and then without questions, exclamations, flirts, suppositions unproved, set down his Scriptures, and form his arguments syllogistically, as that eminently learned man mentioned in my Epistle before my Felo de se required, and then I doubt not but learned and accurate disputants will see his folly, and finde his arguings frivolous; however superficiall Schollars though godly, zealous preachers, and well affected Christians addicted to Mr. B. by reason of his preaching do esteem his opinion and writings about this point. That I printed Mr. B's letters without his consent, was most just, who printed most injuriously my answers in the Dispute at Bewdly, before I had revised them, though I sought it, and it was promised me, and had in print falsely blazed it abroad, that he had driven me to grosse absurdities in the dispute, which in his peaefestinantis morator, he passed over, when my Praecursor had acquitted them from absurdity: and his printing my Animadversions on his Aphorisms of Justification, justify my printing his letters without his consent rightly, they being written vponupon mature consideration; and it being by me intimated, that it was necessary I should know his meaning, when I examined his argument. But how ill he hath dealt with me may appear, 1. In his leaving out all these sections, 33. 34. 35. 49. 50. 51. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. of the third part of my Review, in which that which Mr. B. brings for his pretended infants visible Church-member-ship in the Church, Christian distinct from the Jewish, and their admission into it by vertue of Gods covenant, or law of nature, or parents, proparents, or owners act of dedication, is fully examined 2. In his putting sect. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. before 52. which did syllogistically prove infants no visible Church-members. 3. In his leaving out many considerable passages in my answer to his letters, especially sect. 63. about his 10. caluminatory questions, imputing my answers to passion, and his reply needless, which I count necessary either to bring me to repentance or himself for his uncharitableness towards me, who have not met with a man more uncharitable in his speeches of me, and more pertinacious therein. 4. In mistaking mine and his own words; which are sometimes non-sense, and sometimes cross to himself elswhere. 5. In not giving answer to what he should, but putting it off with a scoff, and yet burdening or encumbring the dispute with many unnecessary questions, which is not answered, yet being his part to prove, he should have shewed his law and ordinance of infants visible Church-menber-ship unrepealed, so as that they belonged to every Church of God, according to its constitution, Jewish or Christian, by Gods appointment: whereas he brings nothing but dictates, and his own perswasion, imagins the Christian Church as if it were by nature, the kingdom of Christ having infants as other kingdomes; whereas Christs Church was framed as a School by preaching, not as a Nation by birth or cohabitation, so manifestly contrary to all the ways of Christ, and his Apostles, and their relations: that I admire any that reads the New Testament, should not perceive the delusion with which he deceives himself and others. 6. As for his answers to my arguments, sect. 52. they are so slight and insufficient, that were it not my book is so big, and in the hands of so few, and so few either preachers or others are acquainted with University exercise of disputing, and Logick terms, I should judge it unnecessary to write any thing, to shew their insufficiency. If readers of Mr. B. would compare my writings with his, and examine both without prejudice and partiality. And I mervail that Mr. Baxter should be so confident of his opinion, when he talks of the Covenant of God to the faithfull and their seed, which was not made with all Abrahams seed, Rom. 9.8. Gal. 3.16. that he should imagine parents relation, consent, or dedication should make an infant a visible Christian Church-member, without any visible note either of parents or children, whereas he himself often in his writings makes the profession of faith to be that which makes a visible Church-member; and there is no mark or sign of a visible Christian Church-member in a believers infant more then in an infidels, that he should imagine that a parents dedication should intitile to Baptism, which is only by institution, and is the only rule by which it is to be administred, that he should call that profession which is thus made a baptismal vow of the infant obliging it as his vow, that he should so continue to contradict himself as my Felo de se shews, and other writings, and yet never reconcile the passages, nor recant his palpable grosse false assertions of infants Church-member-ship and Baptism, that he should upon such vain pretences of want of time, of his greater business put off the examining of this great point of Christianity as it is reckoned, Heb. 6.2. and censure others for their earnestness about it, though by solemn Covenant engaged to endeavour reformation in worship according to Gods word; I am bold to tell him that his way of yielding so much as he doth to Papists and others, that erre, his making disputes in many points but Logomachies, his motions to peace with losse of truth, are such as are likely to make more breaches, and inconsistent with that sincerity, tenderness of conscience, love of truth, and zeal for Christ, which should be in all that are called by his name. And sith Baptism is a most solemn ordinance, equal, if not of more importance then the Lords supper, to shew so much care for its right administration, and so little for the other, is a signe of hypocrisy, and makes liable to Gods judgment as well as the irregular administration of the Lords supper, 1 Cor. 11.30. And I say, his quarrelling with me or Mr. Danvers about my Edition of my Felo de se, and mention of it, as it is vain, it having been just to shew his errour, and to warn others of adhering to him in that point, so it is a signe of too much hardness of heart in him, that he doth so slightly put it off, and so pertinaciously retains and avoucheth that errour, which his own writings refute.
FINIS.
End of the text · Henry Danvers, Second Reply to Baxter (1675)