Truth Prevailing Against the Fiercest Opposition, Part 3

Truth Prevailing Against the Fiercest Opposition · Part 3

p. 8Your third Conſideration for ſubſtance this: THat by faith Men become the Sons of God, That Chriſt owneth all true Beleivers for brethren: Therefore ſuch of the Beleivers, who are in the right order of the Goſpel, ought to receive them into the full Communion of the Church, upon that account ſimply.

That Men become the Sons of God by faith in Chriſt Jeſus, is plain in the Scriptures, as you ſay, but that any ones faith would have paſs'd with the Churches in the primitive times for the faith of Gods elect, that ſhould have been found ſticking at obedience to any of the commands of Chriſt, appeareth not in the Scripture, but much to the contrary, James 2.10. For whoſoever ſhall keep the whole Law, and offend in one point, he is guilty of all. John 15.12. Ye are my friends if you do WHATSOEVER, I command you. VVhy call you me Lord, Lord, and DOE not the thing that I ſay. Luke 6.46. VVhat doth it profit, my brethren, though a man ſay he hath faith, and hath not works: Can faith ſave him.

And although now in theſe days we have an honourable opinion of the faith of very many perſons, that are unbaptiſed, yet it is much to be feared, that farre the greater part of thoſe that are ſo, (pretending want of conviction that it is a duty) do not neglect it upon that ground, but the fooliſhneſs of the act it ſelf, which to the earnal eye (that diſcerneth not the holy deſign of Chriſt in it) maketh it as offenſive to them now, as the Goſpel was at firſt to the p. 9Greeks, 1 Cor. 1.23. In conjunction with that diſgrace that attendeth it.

And ought not every one to be jealous over their own hearts, whether ſomething of this nature do not bribe the judgement, that it is not at liberty to give ſentence according to the merit of the cauſe, or at leaſt, whether it doth not indiſpoſe the ſoul to the impartial weighing thoſe grounds, which ſerve to evince it to be a duty. That in diſpoſition to things hindreth the true genuine working of the intellectual ſenſes, appeareth by Chriſts words to the phariſees, John 8.43. Why do ye not underſtand my ſpeech? Chriſt anſwereth himſelf in the next words, EVEN becauſe you cannot hear my words. So that their diſability to obey, (which is the ſenſe of the word hear in this place) indiſpoſed them to underſtand Chriſts words, in the 30. Deut. 17. But if thine heart turn away, ſo that thou wilt not hear. If the heart be againſt a thing, no wonder if the ear turn away from all the meanes of proving it to be the mind and will of God; and we are the rather induced to beleive, that this is the true ground of the non-conviction of many that are unconvinced of the duty of baptiſme, becauſe we find by experience, that all the perſons that are of any degree of eminency in worldly reſpects, either for learning, parts or eſtate, that God hath perſwaded to own the truth, do acknowledge their indiſpoſition to the obedience of it, made them indulge every weak argument to the contrary, and that they were never able to ſubmit to the truth of Chriſt in the naked ſimplicity of it, till God gave them the command of their own ſpirits:Pro. 25.28. Iſai. 28.9. 1 Cor. 3.18 Ioh. 5.44.Prov 25:28Isa 28:91 Cor 3:18John 5:44 till they became like Children weaned from the breaſt: In a word, till they were able to become fools for Chriſts ſake, and reſolve to delight their ſoules with that honour that cometh from God onelyonly.

But whether the fault of non-obedience be chargeable upon the wills of men, or the want of conviction, notwithſtanding all good meanes uſed to come at it, that God onelyonly knoweth, as alſo the truth and falſhood of mens faith; but however the Church is not without ground to fear the p. 10truth of that faith, that boggleth at obedience to Chriſt in thoſe commands, which diſtinguiſheth the Diſciples of Chriſt from Moſes his Diſciples; it is not obedience to the morral Law doth that, that God is to be worſhipped, was Moſes his Doctrine as well as Chriſts, That men ſhould be merciful and juſt, (which is the ſubſtance of the ſecond Table) was as well the Doctrine of Moſes as Chriſt, ſo that by obedience to the Law morral, a man may as well be ſaid to be Moſes his Diſciple, as Chriſts, becauſe they are both one in that: But by obedience to the iuſtituted Law of Chriſt, given for the ordering us in his worſhip, a man is truly ſaid to be Chriſts Diſciple, in diſtinction from Moſes, whoſe Ordinances were far different (provided it follow repentance from dead works, and faith towards God, without which I confeſs it ſignifieth nothing;) in which reſpect, doubtleſs, both Jewes and Gentiles are ſaid in baptiſme to put on Chriſt. Gal. 3.27.

But more eſpecially hath the Church cauſe to ſuſpect the truth of that faith that ſticketh at obedience to the poſitive Law of Chriſt, becauſe it is that chiefly that putteth men to ſhame, and caſteth out their name as evill. 'Tis not the ſimple worſhipping of God, that bringeth men diſgrace (no not with carnal men, that have not ſinn'd away their firſt principles of conſcience) but honour rather, becauſe every man by thoſe principles is prompted to ſome worſhip, but that which offendeth, is the worſhipping of God after his own way, which the world cannot bear; if men could be content with the Religion of Chriſt it ſelf, corrupted, they might live at Rome and be applauded.

So for the other part of the morral Law, which conſiſteth in Juſtice and Mercy. Mercy and Juſtice offendeth not the generallity of men (but onelyonly ſome particulars, where their own intereſt is ſtruck at by it) and the reaſon clear, becauſe the morral Law is written in every mans heart, ſo that he that liveth up to that, liveth to the conſcience of every individual ſoul, and conſequently compelleth revereate, from all men that have not ſinn'd away the light of nature.

p. 11But for the Law of inſtitutions, they being forreign to the hearts of men, found onelyonly in the written word, and in themſelves of a deſpicable complexion, and withal croſſing the deſires of the fleſh, and conſequently contrary to the religion of the world, which is formed by her worldly wiſe men, according to her carnallity, and to fit their own worldly intereſts.

It cometh to paſſe unavoidably, that whoſoever will follow Chriſt in the way of worſhip which he hath ſet up, in the naked plainneſs and ſimplicity of it, he ſhall be put to ſhame, ſcorned, contemned, diſgraced, perſecuted (at leaſt by tongue and pen) eſpecially by the learned, whoſe intereſt is ſtruck at, by an effectual following the Lamb in his own way.

But ſuppoſe the faith of thoſe that refuſe Baptiſm to be as good as the beſt, yet I utterly deny, that it giveth them an immediate right to full communion with the Church, ſimply upon that account.

The reaſon this, becauſe Jeſus Chriſt himſelf, who is the God of Order, hath appointed the Communion of the Diſciples to be orderly, ſo that though perſons be Diſciples by faith, and ſo have a remote right to all priviledges of Church Communion, yet have not an immediate right thereto, till they deſire it in that way which Chriſt hath appointed.

That Chriſt hath eſtabliſh'd order for regulating the communion of the Diſciples, is evident, from the Coloſſ. 2.5. where the Apoſtle hath theſe words, Joying and beholding your ORDER, and the ſtedfaſtneſs of your faith in Chriſt: As you have therefore received Chriſt Jeſus the Lord, ſo walk ye in him, or after him, as the Prepoſition in is expounded at the 8. verſe: And not after Chriſt: now that by in him, or after him, he meaneth, after his teachings, appeareth by the 7. verſe: Rooted and built up in him, and ſtabliſh'd in the faith as you have been taught.

And that the teachings of Chriſt reſpected their order in worſhip, as well as their faith, appeareth by the 8. verſe▪ where he oppoſeth the Jewiſh Ordinances, which he calleth p. 12the rudiments of the world, to Chriſts: and in the 12. verſe mentioneth Baptiſme by name, where in he affirmeth, they were buried with Chriſt.

Again, that Chriſt hath eſtabliſhed order for the regulation of the Diſciples Communion, appeareth by the 1 Cor. 11. where the Apoſtle blameth the Church for diſorder in their eating the Lords Supper, and that their ſin of diſorderly walking might appear the more hainous to them, he telleth them at the 23. verſe, That which he d…livered them, that is, thoſe rules which he had delivered them to order themſelves by, in their communion, which they had ſinfully tranſgreſſed, he received from the Lord.

And in the 1 Cor. 14 40. exhorteth them that all things in the Church be done decently and in order; and that matter of order is a thing ſtrictly to be minded, appeareth by Titus 1.5. For this cauſe left I thee in Creet; that thou ſhouldeſt ſet in order.

Now if it be askt, how it appeareth a diſorderly practiſe, for perſons to be admitted into the Church, and ſit down with them in full communion without Baptiſme?

I ſhall firſt enforce ſome of my brother Allens Arguments, and take off Mr. Goodwins exceptions againſt them; and then add one or two more.

The ſubſtance of his firſt Argument is this.

If Baptiſin was the next thing immediately to be done by the order of Chriſt after being diſcipled,P. 17, Of his Anſwer to Maſter Goodwins 40. Queries about Communion. then to ſit down with the Church in full communion before it, is a diſorderly practiſe.

But Baptiſm was the next thing immediately to be done by the order of Chriſt.

That Baptiſme was the next thing immediately to be done, appeareth by the Commiſſion, Math. 28.19. Go teach or Diſciple all Nations, baptizing them; where we ſee Baptiſme is the next thing to be done after diſcipling, and accordingly the Apoſtles practiſed it:Act. 2.41. Act. 8.12.Acts 2:41Acts 8:12 (which putteth the matter out of all doubt to all ingenious men) as all the p. 13inſtances of the Acts of the Apoſtles proveth.Act. 18.8.Acts 18:8

If you could ſhew any (ſaith Mr. Baxſter) that did delay Baptiſme (he meaneth to Diſciples) ſince Chriſts Command, P. 24. Of plain Scripture proofs.Math. 28.19 it would appear to have been ſinfull, as through ignorance or negligence.

Again, That it is Chriſts rule, that perſons ſhall be baptiſed without delay, when they are firſt made Diſciples, P. 126. Of Scripture proof.I have fully proved already, both from the Commiſſion for baptiſing, and from Scripture example, explaining that Commiſsion, and from the end and uſe of Baptiſme.

If any ſhould be ſo impudent as to ſay, it is not the meaning of Chriſt, that baptizing ſhould immediately follow diſcipling, they are confuted by the conſtant example of Scripture.

So that I dare ſay this will be out of doubt with all rationall, P. 127.conſiderate, impartial Chriſtians.

If this be ſo clear a truth, as every one with half an eye cannot lightly but ſee it, then is it not a plain caſe, that they that ſhall attempt to ſit down with Church-bodies before Baptiſme, or thoſe Churches that ſhall admit unbaptiſed Diſciples into full communion, that they all depart from the rule of Chriſt, and walk by a rule of their own deviſing, and inſtead of Law-obeyers, take the boldneſs to be Lawmakers.

Mr. Goodwin objecteth p. 64. of his water-dipping, that His proof, meaning my Brother Allens, is built upon a clear miſtake of the word Teach in the Commiſſion, Math. 28.19. for to teach, doth not ſignifie to teach men, ſo as to make them wiling to obey, which is my Brother Allens ſenſe, but to do that which is apt to make Diſciples, whether any he actually made Diſciples or no.

That this ſenſe of the word Teach is a part of the truth, I deny not, but that it is all that is contained in the word Teach, that I deny, for theſe reaſons following.

1. Becauſe then all perſons whatſoever, to whom the p. 14Goſpel was at any time preached by the Apoſtles, were upon their bare hearing of it, whether they beleived or blaſphemed, to have been baptiſed by them: For you ſay, the word Teach, doth not imply an actually diſcipled perſon to Chriſt, but onelyonly the having inſtructions proper to make men ſo. If that were all the ſenſe, then the Apoſtles were bound by their Commiſſion, to baptiſe in the Name of the Father, Son and Spirit, all they preached the Goſpel unto, though they knew neither Father, Son, nor Spirit, or beleived a word they ſaid, yea, thoſe that commanded them to teach no more in that Name, and beat them for it, and impriſoned them, being filled with indignation, Acts 5.18.

Secondly, To ſhew, that this ſenſe of yours hath not all the truth in it, it appeareth by the 2. Acts 41 which ſaith, not that all that heard the Word were baptiſed, but they that gladly RECEIVED the Word, which ſheweth clearly enough what is meant by the word teach in the Commiſſion, namely, ſuch whereby perſons became glad receivers of the Word, why elſe did he not baptiſe every body that heard him.

Sir, you ſay truly, it is a loud untruth to ſay, there is not one example of a perſon baptiſed barely upon his hearing of the Goſpel preached unto him: but I pray Sir, whoſe cauſe do you plead by ſaying ſo, your own or ours; and here I heartily deſire the Reader to conſider, whether you have not in a few words deſtroyed your own ſenſe of the word Teach, and eſtabliſhed my Brother Allens; for if there be not one example throught the Acts, of a perſon baptiſed barely upon his hearing the Goſpel, but all examples ſpeak of their being Beleivers or Diſciples firſt.

Why then, ſurely the Apoſtles underſtood by the word Teach, the making them actual Diſciples, which is our ſenſe, and not onelyonly the ſaying ſuch things to them, which were proper to make them ſo, which is Mr. Goodwins: or elſe they practiſed contrary to their own judgement.

But thirdly, that by teaching is meant actual diſcipling, is the judgement of our Adverſaries; Mr. Baxter giveth p. 15this for the ſenſe of the word Teach in the Commiſſion very frequently, in his plain Scripture proof, p. 15. Go ye teach, is go make me Diſciples, in which expoſition of the verb foreign Mr. Baxter confeſſeth to agree with Mr-Tombes, I ſay as he, ſaith Mr. Baxter, that the verb ſignifieth, make ye Diſciples.

Ʋrſinus upon theſe words, Go teach all Nations baptiſing them, The word which Chriſt uſeth, ſaith he, properly ſignifieth, make Diſciples; thus it is expounded, ſaith he, by John,Note well. John 4.2. The Phariſees heard, that Jeſus made and baptiſed more Diſciples than John; and what Ʋrſinus meaneth by Diſciples, appeareth plainly p. 414. of his Catechiſme, Teach all Nations baptiſing them, that is, all who by your doctrine come unto me: and p. 420. That unto the uſe of baptiſme faith is required; and in p. 415. theſe diſcipled perſons he calleth, converted perſons. So that in this learned mans judgement, by teaching in the Commiſſion, is meant diſcipling, by Diſciples Beleivers, commers unto Chriſt, converted perſons, and not as Mr. Goodwin, that to teach ſignifieth not to make them actual Diſciples, but onelyonly the ſaying ſuch things to them, which are apt to make them ſo.

But fourthly and laſtly, the reaſon Mr. Goodwin giveth, why by the word teach muſt be meant as he ſaith, and not according to the common conſent of Interpreters, I humbly apprehend to be invalid, his reaſon is this, becauſe if we underſtand the word Teach of actual diſcipling, theſe abſurdities will follow.

Firſt, He muſt be conceived to commiſſionate them to do that which was not in their own power to do.

Secondly, It would follow, that though they preached never ſo faithfully, yet they had falſified truſt, and acted ſhort of their Commiſſion, if they had not at all times made thoſe, to whom they preached, actuall Beleivers.

To which I anſwer: This Argument ſtandeth upon an unſound bottom, which is this, That it is an abſurd thing to conceive, that God ſhould put more into a Commiſſion p. 16given to Men, then is in the Creatures own power to do. What is more frequent in Scripture, than to put that into the Commiſſion both of Prophets and Apoſtles, which was not in their own power to effect, Iſaiah 6.9, 10. Ge make the heart of this people fat, and make their eares heavy, and ſhut their eyes, leaſt, &c. is not here more put into the Prophets Commiſſion than was in his own power to do? could he make their hearts fat, or make their eares heavy, or ſhut their eyes? Nay, are not theſe effects attributed to God, though put in the Prophets Commiſſion? John 12.40. He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart, that they ſhould not ſee with their eyes; yea, theſe effects are attributed to themſelves in Math. 13.15. Their eyes they have cloſed leaſt they ſhould, &c. So that though theſe effects are put in the Prophets Commiſſion, yet altogether out of his own power to do, without the joynt concurrence both of God and the Creature.

So alſo in the new Teſtament, Acts 26.17, 18. Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I ſend thee, to open their eyes, and turn them from darkneſs to light, and from the power of Satan unto God.

Is not here much more put into Pauls Commiſſion than he was able without God to do? or will any body ſay, that Paul acted ſhort of his Commiſſion, or falſified his truſt, if he did not actually open all the eyes of the Gentiles, and turn them from the power of Satan to God.

But Sir, to convince you that there is more included in the Commiſſion than was in the Apoſtles power to effect, ſuppoſing the word Teach ſhould ſignifie onelyonly what you apprehend, namely, the ſpeaking ſuch things which are proper to make Diſciples.

Conſider this, They are charged to baptiſe all they taught, and was that in their power? could they baptiſe any more than were willing to be baptiſed? or ſhould they have been judged falſifiers of their truſt, or acting ſhort of their Commiſſion, for not baptiſing all thoſe that ſhould take horſes, and ride away from them when they had heard the Word. It appeareth therefore undeniably, that the p. 17very principle whereupon you found the abſurdity is not good, and conſequently no force in your argument, but this being all you have levied againſt my Brother Allens Argument, built upon the Text, and being found weak, his concluſion lifteth up its head, and that is, that it is diſorderly for perſons to hold Church-Communion before Baptiſme, becauſe Baptiſme by Chriſts order was the next thing to be done after diſcipling, and that immediately.

Secondly, A ſecond Argument to prove it a diſorderly Practiſe, for the Diſciples to hold Church Communion before Baptiſme, is this.

If the Scripture maketh Baptiſme the gate or entrance into the viſible Church or Body of Chriſt.

Then is it a moſt diſorderly practiſe for perſons to ſit down in Church-ſociety without it.

But the Scripture maketh Baptiſm the gate or entrance into the viſible Church or Body of Chriſt.

Mr. Goodwin den…eth now (in effect) that Baptiſme is the Ordinance of entrance into the viſible Body of Chriſt; yea, he is ſo far from thinking ſo,P. 61: Of his Water dipping. that he thinketh the injunction of it, is but after the manner of the free-will offerings under the Law; ſo that men may either obey, or not obey, without ſin; yea,P: 48: Water dipping. that a Church may be of as ſound and worthy a conſtitution without Baptiſme, as with it.

Now before I make particular anſwer to Mr. Goodwins Exception to the interpretation of the Scripture alledged to prove it, I deſire to make one obſervation, which I would commend to the ſerious conſideration of the Reader, which is this.

That notwithſtanding the vaſt variety of differences in the judgement of Profeſſors, about other matters of Chriſtian Religion (both learned and unlearned) in ſo much, that ſetting aſide ſome few famous fundamentals, it is a hard matter to find two men univerſally agreeing

Yet for this opinion, that Baptiſme is the Sacrament of entrance into the viſible Church of Chriſt, all the Profeſſors of Chriſtian Religion hath met in it as one man, as far as I p. 18ever yet heard or read of, whether Papal, Prelatical, Presbiterial, or Independant, or Anabaptiſt, except ſome few perſons lately, the moſt whereof are given to Seekeriſme.

And is not that opinion juſtly to be ſuſpected for an error, that croſſeth the judgement of almoſt all the world reputed Chriſtian, as well thoſe that are under no temptation (by worldly reſpects) to baulk the naked truth, as thoſe that are.

This Argument I confeſs amounteth not to a demonſtration, but it juſtly provoketh an eye of jealouſie over that opinion, that ſingleth a man out from all his brethren of like pretious faith, and rendreth him like the Widdow Paul ſpeaketh of, deſolate.

I ſhall now proceed to eſtabliſh this truth, by ſhewing the invalidity of your great exception to the interpretation of the 1 Corinth. 12.13. which Text my Brother Allen inſiſteth on to prove it; the words theſe, By one Spirit we are all baptiſed into one Body: my Brother Allen underſtandeth with Mr. Baxſter, and the generally reputed Orthodox, the word baptiſed properly of water Baptiſme.P. 342. Of plain Scripture. Mr. Goodwin will needs underſtand it juſt now of Spirit Baptiſme; but why,P. 68, 72. Of his water dip. becauſe the Text ſaith, By one Spirit we are baptiſed, and as for water, it is not mentioned.

To which I anſwer. 1. The not mentioning of water is no Argument, that the Text is not to be underſtood of water Baptiſme, becauſe the word water is not mentioned in the Commiſſion it ſelf for baptiſing, which yet notwithſtanding is plainly enough interpreted by the Apoſtles, to be meant of water Baptiſme, becauſe of their practiſing it, by vertue of their Commiſſion.

So alſo in the 1 Corinth 1.13, 14, 15. the word water is not ſet down, but no body in their right wits will underſtand the words otherwiſe, Were you baptiſed in the Nume of Paul, I thank God I baptiſed none of you▪

But you ſay the Text ſpeaketh of another Element,P. 342. Of Inſânts Ch…rch-Memberſhip namely, the Spirit; 'Tis true, it doth mention the Spirit as a concurrent cauſe, ſaith learned Baxſten, but p. 19the Text ſpeaketh of reall Baptiſme.

2. How frequently are effects attributed to the Spirit in Scripture, in this ſence? Is not Baptiſme the Doctrine of the Spirit as well as other duties?Acts 1.2. Acts 2.38. Act. 8.29.38. Act. 1.48.Acts 1:2Acts 2:38Acts 8:29Acts 8:38Acts 1:48 and that which the Spirit exciteth to amongſt other acts of obedience? did not the Spirit ſend Phillip to the Eunuch, as well to baptiſe him with water as preach to him? and did not the Spirit inſpire Peter to command Cornelius to be baptiſed? and is not the proper office of the Spirit, to excite men to, and guide men in the performance of all dutie? why then may not reall Baptiſme with water, being an act of obedience, be attributed to the Spirit,1 Pet. 1.22.1 Pet 1:22 as well as any other acts of obedience whatſoever.

3. To underſtand theſe words (By the Spirit) as a working cauſe, and Baptiſme as the effect, agreeth to the context, from the firſt verſe to the 12.

At the firſt verſe, No man can ſay, that Jeſus is the Lord, but by the holy Ghoſt; and is not that by the agency and working of the Spirit upon the heart, perſwading it to think ſo honourably of Chriſt, as to call him Lord. The Spirits work is to raiſe the eſteem of Chriſt in the ſoul. The ſoules calling him Lord is the effect of that work.

In the like ſenſe (I humbly apprehend) all the gifts ſpoken of to the 12. verſe, are attributed to the Spirit, namely, as ſo many effects of his operation, as the cauſe producing them.

Which having treated on at large, he cometh in the 13. verſe to tell them, that by the ſame Spirit, which enriched them with thoſe gifts mentioned, they became enabled to ſtoop to the yoak of Chtiſt, and put him on by Baptiſme, by which both Jews and Gentiles, receiving the Goſpel, became incorporated into the myſtical body of Chriſt, and ſo though many members, yet became now but one body: As with perſons in civil Corporations, who of many individuals become one body, by ſolemnizing the rite of entrance, without which no man is counted a Member.

p. 20But now not to underſtand the words, By one Spirit, and Baptiſed, the one as the cauſe, the other as the effect, would be to ſenſe theſe words (By the Spirit) differently, from the ſenſe of the ſame words divers times in the preceding verſes, and enforce a metaphorical uſe of the word Baptiſed, without any neceſſity,

But fourthly, to make it clear, that by Baptiſme here, he meaneth it, not of the baptiſme of the Spirit, it appeareth by that which is attributed to it, namely, the entring of all perſons into the myſtical body of Chriſt, he ſaith, it is …NTO ONE BODY, and we are ALL baptiſed into one body. So that it is the meanes ſanctified by God, for all the members entrance into that body.

It cannot therefore be meant of the baptiſme of the Spirit, becauſe then working of miracles, and ſpeaking with tongues, and propheſying, extraordinary (which the Scripture meaneth onelyonly by the baptiſme of the Spirit) ſhould be the initiating Ordinance into the body of Chriſt for all Church members, which I ſuppoſe every one will ſay is abſurd to imagine.

I have onelyonly to prove (for the making good this Argument) that when the Scripture ſpeaketh of the Baptiſme of the Spirit, it would alwayes be underſtood of working miracles, ſpeaking with tongues, and the like, and not of common and ordinary gifts, as faith and love, &c.

It appeareth thus. 1. In that the holy Spirit never giveth to faith, or love, or any common gifts of the Spirit, the name of baptiſme, for men to do ſo is unſcripturall.

2. Becauſe Chriſts ſpeaking to his Apoſtles, who had a good degree of faith and love, yet he did not deem them for the preſent baptiſed with the holy Spirit, but onelyonly telleth them, Acts 1.4, 5. they ſhould be ſo baptiſed, and adviſeth them to wait at Jeruſalem for it; whereupon they were baptiſed with it accordingly, upon the day of Pentecoſt, Acts 2.3, 4.

And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it ſate. And they began to ſpeak with other tongues, &c. p. 21Now in the 11. Acts 16. Peter calleth Cornelius his ſpeaking with tongues, the baptiſme of the holy Ghoſt, which Chriſt promiſed. Then remembred I the word of the Lord (meaning when he heard them ſpeak with tongues, Acts 10 46) John indeed baptiſed with water, but ye ſhall be baptiſed with the holy Ghoſt

So that the meaning of John the Baptiſt, Math. 3.11. and Chriſt, Acts 1.4, where they ſpeak of the baptiſme of the Spirit, muſt needs be of ſuch a being filled with the Spirit, and pouring forth of the Spirit, as whereby perſons do ſpeak with tongues, and the like, becauſe the Scriptures ſo interpreteth it, and to judge otherwiſe, were to be wiſe, not onelyonly above, but againſt that which is written.

But thirdly and laſtly, to put it out of doubt, you ſhall find the Scriptures putting abroad difference between that enjoyment of the Spirit, which the Scripture calleth the Baptiſme of the Spirit, and that by which perſons come to abound with faith, love, joy, peace, &c. as to the wayes of attaining the one and the other.

To attain ordinary fillings of the Spirit, in reſpect of theſe common fruits, we are exhorted to the uſe of meanes to get them, and blamed if we have them not,Eph. 5:18.Eph 5:18 Luke 24.25.

So that the largeneſs of the poſſeſſion of them dependeth ordinarily upon the Creatures induſtry, and in that way attained, and according to mens induſtry or ſloath, they ordinarily have more or leſs of the Spirit

But as for the Baptiſme of the Spirit, it is immediately conferr'd by way of extraordinary gift.

Conſult the Scriptures, where the Baptiſme of the Spirit is mentioned, and you ſhall find it ſo.

The firſt place is the 2 of Acts 2, 3, 4. verſe, …nd ſuddenly there came a ſound from heaven, as of a ruſhing mighty wind, and it filled all the houſe where they were ſitting: And there APPEARED unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it ſat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the holy Ghost, and began to ſpeak with tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance,

p. 22Now the Apoſtle Peter …lleth …his …he … of the Spirit, Acts 11.15, 16. and alſo expreſſeth their attaining it by the falling of the boly Ghoſt upon them; As I …eg… …o ſpeak the holy Ghost FELL on them, as on us at the beginning.

So alſo in the 8. of Acts 16. Who when they were come down, prayed for them, that they night receive the holy Ghoſt: (meaning principally) the holy Ghoſt in that way which they had not before, for they had the holy Ghoſt to enable them to beleive, as appeareth at the 12. verſe, but they had not the Baptiſme of the Spirit, which now Peter and John came to be inſtruments in by prayer for them, with laying on of hands (though not excluſive of a further preſence of the Spirit in a common way.)

But now how doth the Spirit expreſs this kind of attaining the Spirit? Mark at the 16. verſe, For as yet he was FALLEN upon none of them, onelyonly they were baptiſed in the Name of the Lord Jeſus.

So in the 19. of Acts 6. And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the holy Ghoſt CAME upon them, and they ſpake with tongues and propheſied.

Doth the Sun ſhine clearer at noon-day than this truth, that the common fruits of the Spirit are one thing, and the baptiſme of the Spirit another, namely, the gifts of ſpeaking with tongues, extraordinary propheſying, and working miracles, and if that be granted, and who can with reaſon deny it: It followeth then unavoidably, that the 1 Corinth. 12.13. ſpeaketh not of the Baptiſme of the Spirit, becauſe then ſpeaking with tongues, and working miracles, ſhould be the Ordinance of entrance into the viſible Church of Chriſt, for ALL Church-members, for it is plain, (whatever is meant by Baptiſm in that Text) that is the uſe of it we are all baptiſed INTO ONE BODY.

Fifthly and laſtly, to prove, that by the word baptiſed, in the 1 Cor. 12.13. is meant, reall baptſme, and not, the baptiſm of the Spirit. The ſcope and drift of the Apoſtle in mentioning it, ſaith a good ſay to it.

p. 23Which is to make an argument of it,1 Cor. 1…. from 1….10 25.1 Cor 1 to perſwade to Chriſtian love, care and tenderneſs one of another, as one may eaſily ſee that will conſult the place.

Now for proper reall Baptiſme, we find the Apoſtle make uſe of that often to the ſame purpoſe. Once before in the beginning of this Epiſtle, 1 Cor. 1.10, and 15. ſo in the 4. of the Eph. 4, 5. and to the Coloſſians alſo.

But we never read of working miracles, or ſpeaking with tongues, made any Argument of union▪

I hope then enough, and more than enough, is ſaid to ſatisfie any indifferent man, that the word baptiſed in the fore-mentioned place, is to be underſtood properly even of water Baptiſme, and conſequently the Argument from that Text, to prove Baptiſme the door of entrance into the viſible Church of Chriſt▪ unanſwerable.

But beſides this, 1 Cor. 12.13. to prove Baptiſme the door of the viſible Church, the 6 of the Romans 3. ſpeaketh the ſame language, Know ye not, that ſo many of us, as were BAPTISED INTO Jeſus Chriſt, were baptiſed into his death, &c.

Now to prove, that by Baptiſme in the firſt clauſe; he meaneth it not of mortification (which ſome conceive the Baptiſme of the Spirit) it appeareth thus: If the Baptiſm of the Text be uſed as an Argument to perſwade to perfect mortification, and a new life, then is it not the thing it ſelf. But it is uſed as an Argument to perſwade to perfect the work of mortification, and a new life.

In the 2 verſe▪ How ſhall we …t are dead to ſin live any longer therein? Now they were not already dead to ſin in a proper ſenſe, they were not already actually mortified, though the work was begun in them, for then there would be little fear of longer continuing in ſin, to which they were dead, from which he now dehorteth them.

But in the 3. verſe he mentioneth their Baptiſme, and uſeth it argument wiſe, to perſwade not to live any longer in ſin. Know ye not, that ſo many of us, as w…e baptiſed into Jeſus Chriſt, were baptiſed into his death? And at the 4. verſe, Therefore we are buried with him by baptiſme into death, p. 24that like as Chriſt was raiſed up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even ſo we aſlo ſhould walk in newneſs of life.

So that his doctrine (in my apprehenſion is plainly this) that though for the preſent they were not attained to the perfect ſtate of actuall mortification, yet by their baptiſme they were under an effectual obligation to uſe all poſſible meanes to attain thereto, and if this be not the true ſenſe of the place, I have loſt my taſt, good Reader judge.

Now to come home to the point, to prove Baptiſme the entring Ordinance into the viſible body of Chriſt. The Text ſaith plainly of Baptiſme, that it was INTO JESUS CHRIST: Now how into Chriſt, but into the myſtical body of Chriſt the Church? which in the 1 Corin. 12.12. is ca…led Chriſt, for as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body being many, are one body SO ALSO IS CHRIST: meaning in reſpect of the Church, which is his miſtical body, where though there be many members, yet all make but one body, as 1 Cor 12.13. ſaith, the gate and entrance whereinto is by the door of Baptiſme.

But in this point having the judgement of almoſt all the learned on our ſide, I need ſay the leſs; I ſhall therefore conclude, as to this, with offering the words of Ʋrſinus, and Mr. Baxſters Argument, with a word from the non-repeating it, as to the ſame perſon.

Ʋrſinus in his Catechiſme, Baptiſme is a Sacrament of entrance into the Church, P▪ 421▪whence it cometh, that the Supper is preſented to none, except firſt baptiſed.

As a Souldier before liſting, and a King before crowning and taking his Oath, Plain Scriture proof. P. 24.ſo are we (he putteth in infants too) Church members before Baptiſme. But as every one that muſt be admitted ſolemnly, into the Army, muſt be admitted by liſting, as the ſolemn engaging ſign, SO EVERY ONE THAT HATH RIGHT TO BE SOLEMNLY ADMITTED INTO THE VISIBLE CHURCH, muſt ordinarily be admitted by Baptiſme.

I prove it thus.

p. 25If we have neither precept nor example in Scripture ſince Chriſt ordained Baptiſme, of any other way of admitting viſible Members, but onelyonly by Baptiſm; then all that muſt be admitted viſible Members, muſt ordinarily be baptiſed.

But ſince Baptiſme was inſtituted, we have no precept or example, of admitting viſible Members any other way, but conſtant precept and example for admitting this way.

Therefore all that muſt be admitted viſible Members, MUST be baptiſed.

I know not what, in any ſhew of reaſon can be ſaid to this, by thoſe that RENOUNCE not Scripture.Mark well, Mr. Baxſter thinks they that bold men may be viſible members without Baptiſme, renounce the Word of God for their rule.

For what man dare go in a way that hath neither precept nor example to warrant it, from a way that hath a full current of both. Yet they that will admit Members into the Church without Baptiſme do ſo.

And what can any man in reaſon imagine to be the ground, why Baptiſme is but once practiſed, whereas prayer, and hearing, and breaking bread frequent? but onelyonly this, that God in the Ordinance of Baptiſme hath in ſome reſpect a different deſign (though in many other reſpects the very ſame, as I ſhall ſhew hereafter) and wherein can any one conceive that difference to lie, but here, that it is the Rite of entrance into the body of Chriſt, and conſequently no need of reiterating it, no more than there is of being twice made free of the City, or twice liſted into an Army? Some I find make a queſtion, whether Baptiſme ſhould not be repeated, in reſpect of the ſame perſon, which is ſtrange, conſidering, that though Chriſt in the Commiſſion ordereth the Apoſtles to Teach the Diſciples again, there is not a word of baptiſing again,Math. 18.20Matt 18:20 neither did the Apoſtles ever baptiſe any into the Name of Chriſt twice, that we find in Scripture, and ſurely they both knew and practiſed the mind of Chriſt,1 Cor. 11.1 Phil. 3 17.1 Cor 11:1Phil 3:17 and we are charged to follow their example, and to mark thoſe which walk contrary to avoid them.

From theſe premiſes it is clear enough, that Baptiſme is, in the wiſdom of Chriſt, the Ordinance of entrance into the viſible Church, or Body of Chriſt, and conſequently, p. 26there can be no regular enjoying the priviledges due to the body before it.

The truth is, to admit unbaptiſed perſons to all the priviledges of Church communion, is as irregular and diſorderly, as to admit the Mayor to the grand priviledges of the chair, before he hath been ſworn to the faithful ſervice of the City.

3. To prove baptiſed perſons, ſitting down in Church bodies with unbaptiſed, diſorderly.

I prove it thus:

That practiſe which bringeth down the eſteem of Baptiſme, and maketh it ſlighted, is againſt the Order of Chriſt.

But for Diſciples that are baptiſed, to walk together in a Church body, with unbaptiſed, bringeth down the eſteem of Baptiſme, and maketh it ſleighted.

That it is againſt the Order of Chriſt, that any thing ſhould be practiſed to prejudice the primitive eſteem of Baptiſme, appeareth:

1. By Chriſts joyning it with Teaching in the Commiſſion, without the leaſt hint of parting them, Math. 28.

2. By promiſing the ſame preſence, to the end of the world, as well to Baptiſing as Teaching.

3. By the ſingular uſe of Baptiſme to all Beleivers in all ages (of which more hereafter) which I ſuppoſe maketh Mr. Baxſter call Baptiſme a great Ordinance.P. 302. Of plain Scripture.

But for perſons that are baptiſed, to ſit down in a Church body with unbaptiſed, will make Baptiſme ſleighted.

I prove thus:

If unbaptiſed Diſciples enjoy all the ſelf ſame priviledges of the Church that baptiſed perſons do, which they do, if they ſit down together in a Church body, then muſt the reputation of Baptiſme needs be in danger.

1. Becauſe it admiteth to no priviledge of the Church, but what may be had without it.

2. Becauſe the act of Baptiſme is irkſome to the fleſh, which if not ballanced by ſome conſiderable advantage, p. 27will upon that account ſuffer: if this be not reaſon, ſet them to judge that are leaſt eſteemed in the Church.

4 That practiſe which conſulteth the loſs and ſpiritual dammage of the Diſciples, can never be an orderly practiſe.

But for baptiſed Diſciples to admit of unbaptiſed into full communion, is to conſult their loſſe, and ſpiritual dammage. That to admit Diſciples to full Communion before baptiſme, is to conſult their loſs, I prove thus.

If they are not baptiſed before joyning, in probability they are not like to be after, becauſe ſuch confuſed joyning ſecretly whiſpereth a low eſteem of the Ordinance, even by the baptiſed themſelves, otherwiſe they would not hold their communion without it, having no ſuch preſident in the Word.

2. Becauſe the act is unpleaſing to the fleſh.

3. becauſe they are in poſſeſſion of the priviledges of the Church without it, and conſequently one great Argument of conſidering the grounds of it, is as it were over, ſo that it is a rare thing if ever they be brought to ſubmit.

Now not to obey every Ordinance of Chriſt, muſt needs be a loſſe to the Creature, becauſe in their inſtitution, as well as in the creation, In wiſdome he ordained them all, aiming as well at the Creatures good, as his own glory: Therefore the Phariſees, that reject Baptiſme,Luke 7.30.Luke 7:30 are ſaid to reject the Counſell of God AGAINST themſelves.

5. That practice in the worſhip of God, which in reaſon, is like to lay the foundation of j…rrs, diſcentions and diſcords in the Church, can never be of Chriſts ordering, becauſe jarrs and diſcentions in the Church ſtandeth in direct enmity to his intereſt, wherefore he would not have the Church onelyonly be at peace amongſt themſelves, but as much as in them lieth live peaceably with ALL men.

But for perſons that are baptiſed, to ſit down in Church bodies with unbaptiſed, in all reaſon will breed jarrs.

Can two walk together except they be agreed?

I ſuppoſe he meaneth, that they cannot walk comfortably together, for otherwiſe they may walk together after p. 28a faſhion, beſides ſuch Interrogations in Scripture, affirm with Emphaſis the matter Interrogated.

So that when he ſaith, CAN two walk together, he would inſinuate, not onelyonly ſome degrees of improbability, but that it is next to an impoſſibility, that they ſhould maintain ſweet communion; but thoſe words (except they be agreed, muſt be underſtood warily, not of every light difference in opinion (for then there would be little ſweet communion in the Church at all, there being few that agree in every thing.

But in matters of moment (as this will eaſily be apprehended to be, by any indifferent perſon that weigheth it) it cannot lightly be, but there muſt be jarrs, diſcentions, to the embittering their fellowſhip.

That difference about meats and dayes, what trouble did it work in the Church at Rome, Roman. 14.3. Let not him that eateth DESPISE him that eateth not, and let not him which eateth not JƲDGE him that eateth: yea, at the 10. verſe, Why doſt thou judge thy Brother? why doſt thou ſet at NOƲGHT thy Brother? So that deſpiſing, judging and ſetting at nought, followed that poor difference about meats and dayes.

What difference then in reaſon would this about Baptiſme work, when that one party, namely, the unbaptiſed, ſhall look upon the other as practiſing will-worſhip, and making their Religion ridiculous, and adhering to a generation of men ſcarce worthy to live, as now Mr. Goodwin thinketh of them.

And on the other hand, the baptiſed they ſhall look upon their brethren ſprinkling childrens faces, preſuming to call that the Ordinance of Baptiſme, which in their judgements is a meer mockery, and doing it too, in the Name of the Father, Son and holy Spirit, which in their apprehenſions is little leſs than blaſphemy.

How ſhould theſe two parties of Beleivers walk together without ſore differences; and the more, by how much the more zealous they are for the pure worſhip of God, a luke-warm Spirit will beſt befit Churches of that conſtitution: p. 29this is ſo plain a caſe, that I think I need not proceed further in the demonſtration.

6. That practiſe which in the worſhip of God is not onelyonly beſide the cuſtome of the firſt Churches, which was ſettled by the Apoſtles, but directly contrary, can never be an orderly practiſe.

1. Becauſe they did what they did therein by ſpecial Commiſſion, 1 Cor. 11.23. 2 Cor, 10.8.

2. We have no reaſon to doubt the faithfulneſs of the Apoſtles in excuting it, for though they had frailties as other men, yet in what they did in ſettling the religion of Chriſt, they did by ſpecial direction and extraordinary aſſiſtance, Math. 28.19. and ſo their example is as Lawes to us.

Excellent is Mr. Baxſter to this point.

Moſes being appointed to the forming of the old Church and Common-wealth of the Jews, Saints Reſt 212.to the building of the Tabernacle his precepts and examples in theſe works (though we could not find his particular direction) are to be taken as divine, ſo alſo the Apoſtles having commiſſion to form and order the Goſpel Churches, their doctrine and examples therein are by their general Commiſſion warranted, and their practiſe in ſtabliſhing the Lords day, in ſettling the Officers and Orders of Churches, are to us as Lawes (ſtill binding with thoſe limitations, as poſitives onelyonly which give way to greater.)

The ground of this poſition is, becauſe it is inconſiſtent with the wiſdom of God, and faithfulneſs too, to ſet men to a work and promiſe to be with them, and yet to forſake them, and ſuffer them to erre in the building of that houſe which muſt endure to the end of the world.

That practiſe then in the worſhip of God, which is directly contrary to Apoſtolical cuſtome, can never be orderly

And Sir, (if I miſtake not very much) you have heretofore ſaid as much to this point, as any man in the world can ſay, for you have theſe words in your fourth Caution for Reformation.

p. 30The beſt patternes and examples under heaven are but ſeducers in what they fall ſhort of or beſides the Word of God: the injunction from heaven is very particular and expreſs; See that thou make all things according to the pattern ſhewed thee in the Mount, Heb. 8.5.

And Ezek. 43 10. Thou Son of Man ſhew the houſe to the houſe of Iſrael, that they may be aſhamed of their iniquity, and let them meaſure the pattern, viz. to build, ſay you (mark) with ALL POSSIBLE EXACTNESSE according to it.

Now whether the Diſciples, ſitting down in Church bodies before Baptiſme, be not directly contrary to the pattern and conſequently a diſorderly practiſe, let the world judge.

1. By the Scriptures, where we have Chriſt commanding baptiſme preſently upon diſcipling, Math. 18.19 which we ſee the Apoſtles practiſed with much faithfulneſs, in the whole ſtory of the Acts, to which we have ſpoken already.

2. Where we find the erection of the firſt famous Goſpel Church, the manner is thus reported, Acts 2.41.

1. They gladly received the Word.

2. Were baptiſed: And

3. They continued in the Apoſtles doctrine, and fellowſhip, and breaking bread, and prayer: but firſt you ſee, they were baptiſed, behold then the pattern in the Mount; and muſt not he be next to willingly ignorant that doth not ſee this, that is ſo plainly written, that he that runneth may read it.

Why then, if all other patterns be but ſeducers, and that our duty is, to build with all poſſible exactneſs according to the firſt pattern, have you not juſtified our ſeparation from you, for reſuſing to build according to this pattern.

2. Let the judgement of the learned,Mr. Baxſter Saints reſt, p 179: from Doctor Preſton. touching the primitive practiſe, be taken. This food we call the Euchariſt, (ſaith Juſtin Martyr, one of the moſt ancient Fathers, from the practiſe of the primitive Church) to which …o man is admitted, but onelyonly he that beleiveth the truth of our doctrine; p. 31being waſhed in the laver of Regeneration, for remiſsion of ſin…, which waſhing he expreſſeth thus; Then (meaning after faith and prayer) they are brought to the Water, and are BORN AGAIN OR BAPTISED, in the ſame way as we our ſelves were born again, for they are waſhed with water, In the Name of the Father, Son and Spirit. But that which is home to my point is, that no Diſciple touched the Euchariſt, as he calleth it, till firſt baptiſed indeed, after Baptiſme, then he ſitteth down with the body in full communion, but not before.

3. As we have the Scriptures of our ſide, and the judgement of the learned on our ſide, that this was the Primitive practiſe, ſo we had you your ſelf on our ſide at this point, when you writ your letter to Mr. Tho. Goodwin, p, 7. Covenanting is not lawful before Baptiſme, is is evident, becauſe it is not lawfull for a Church to receive the unbaptiſed into fellowſhip with them, as Members of that body; neither is there example or APPEARANCE of warrant in Scripture, for ſuch a thing: And at that time you were as confident, as Confidence it ſelf could make you,Pag. 1. of what you then wrote, as you there affirm, or if you were not of other things, yet of this, becauſe you ſay, and that according to truth, That there is neither example nor appearance of warrant in Scripture for ſuch a thing: Yea, in that letter p. 5. Evident it is, that thoſe that were added to the Church, were baptiſed, before this is affirmed of them.

So that upon Principles of your own (which is that we ought to build with all poſſible exactneſs according to the pattern) you are condemned.

1. By the Scriptures.

2. By the learned.

3. Out of your own mouth, all which ſpeak Baptiſme to goe before Church-fellowſhip, and conſequently, to walk otherwiſe a diſorderly practiſe; anſwer who can: And the truth is, if we are not to follow the cuſtomes of the Primitive Churches in worſhip, in every thing, that we can follow them in, with this limitation, (Poſitive giving way to Morral) which they did under the Law, how are they a pattern to us, how ſhall we underſtand where to follow them, and wherein to leave them.

p. 32Upon the whole matter then I conclude, that though by faith men become the Sons of God, and that Chriſt owneth all true Beleivers for brethren; yet they have not thereby a preſent immediate right to full communion with the Church, ſimply upon that account, becauſe the ſame God, that ordained faith, the meanes of adoption, hath ordained Baptiſme to goe before viſible memberſhip into the Church of Chriſt, much more before a conſtant ſitting down in full Church Communion, they then that walk otherwiſe caſt off the Rule, and ſo reproach the wiſdom of Chriſt, complain of the Rule as imperfect, and become Judges of the Law.