Anti-Paedobaptism Part 3, Section 63
SECT. LXIII. Mr. Bs. ten Calumniatory questions, and Conclusion of his Letter, are answered.
ANd now (saith he) I have gone thus far with you, in an enquiry into the truth, I entreat you be not too much offended with me, if I conclude with a few applicatory questions to your self▪ Q. 1. Is it not an undertaking as palpably absurd as most ever any learned sober Divine in the world was guilty of, to maintain that [infants were visible Churchmembers not by any promise or precept, but by a transeunt fact, and that there was no law or ordinance determining it should be so, but onelyonly a fact of God, which is a transeunt thing not repealable?]
Answ. I am resolved not to be angry with Mr. Bs. interrogatories he ministers to me, imagining he doth it like an Ordinary in salutem animae, though I pitty him that takes so much on him as thus magisterially to censure what he does not, or will not understand, presuming perhaps he may take on him to determine as an irrefragable Doctor, after so much magnifying of his writings by learned and unlearned ones. But to his question I answer negatively, and return it back to him: is it not an undertaking palpably absurd, to make visible Churchmembership to be a right to a benefit by Gods promise as the sole efficient, and anothers faith as the condition?
But, saith he, either by this fact you mean Legislation and Covenant making, or not: if you do: what a saying is it that infants were made Churchmembers not by Covenant, but by a Covenant making, not by a Law, but by a Law making. If not: either you must say, that God makes duty without any law, and gives right to the benefit without any promise, or Covenant-grant as the cause; or else, that it is no benefit to have right to Churchmembership, and no duty to enter into that relation, and to accept of that benefit, and to bee devoted to God. Which ever of these wayes you chuse (and one you must chuse, or change your opinion) hath the world heard of any more unreasonable and ridiculous, or else more unbeseeming a Divine, from a learned sober man of that profession? Pardon the high charge: Let the indifferent ju…ge.
Answ. That I need chuse none of the wayes hee mentions, nor change my opinion, is amply shewed Sect. 55. this high charge would have been le…t out had he more sobriety and humility. I look upon it and overlook it as ridiculous and contemptible, and go on.
Qu. 2. Is it not a great disgrace to all your followers, that they will be led so far into such ways of Schism, and be so confident that they are righter and wiser then others, and that by such unreasonable arguings and shifts as these, which one would think any man should laugh at that knows what a law, promise, or Covenant is? And do you not prove, that it is not because of the evidence of truth, but by your meer interest or confident words, these people are changed and held to your opinion? Do they know what [a trans…unt fact is, that without law or Covenant makes Churchmembers?] I say, do they know this? which no man that ever breathed till now, ner ever man will know again? And do you not proclaim them men of d…stempered consciences, that dare go on in such a Schism, on the encouragement of such fancies as were hatcht so long after their perversion, and never waking man I think did before so solemnly maintain.]
Answ, Ne saevi magne sacerdos. The followers of me in the point of Baptism are not led by shifts, but the plain word of God, Matth. 28.19. Mark 16.16. Acts 2.38. & 8.37. from which Mr. Bs. dream of a law or ordinance of infants visible Churchmembership unrepealed, his conceit of infants discipleship mediate by the faith of the parent, is too silly a conceit to draw an intelligent man that will examine it, specially when they have so plain Scripture proof for their warrant, as the institution of Christ and practise of the Apostles, which they follow without Schism, endeavouring a reformation of that great corruption of infant Baptism, which hath been very pernicious to the Church of God. If any Schism have been, a great cause hath been in Mr. Bs. virulent charges of the truth, as if it were a damnable errour accursed of God, and his followers violent opposition (of which Bewdley hath had sad experience) of men for doing their duty in being baptized after profession of faith, and breaking bread together, though convinced by Mt. Bs. own arguing in his Book of Baptism, pag. 342. that it should be so. And if in this point they conceive themselves righter and wiser then others, they are not to be blamed, having the plain word of God as interpreted even by Paedobaptists themselves, yea almost all Commentaries, for their warrant. And truly though I delight not in recriminations, yet I may justly retort Mr. Bs. words. Is it not a great disgrace to all Mr. Bs. followers, that they will be led so far into such ways of Schism as Mr. B. leads them into, who would have none to have pastoral charge with publick pay, that will not admit to the Lords Supper the baby sprinkled, that inveighs against Baptism of believers now used as if it were murther and adultery, that represents them that deny infant Baptism in the most odious way he can to the world, and is so confident that he is wiser and righter then others, and that by such unreasonable arguings and shifts as these, a law and ordinance of infants visible Churchmembership by promise and precept unrepealed no where extant, a discipleship by the parents faith mediately without any learning of their own, which one would think any man should laugh at that knows what visible Churchmembership, or Discipleship is? And doth he not prove, that it is not because of the evidence of truth, but by his meer interest or confident word…, the people of Kederminster, Bewdley, and elsewhere, are changed from the truth of the Scripture made known to them, and held to his opinion? Do they know wh…t an ordinance or law of infants visible Churchmembership and mediate Discipleship is, which I find not any man vented afore Mr. B. And doth he not proclaim them men of distempered consciences, that dare go on i… such a Schism as Mr. B. and with him many persons are brought into by him from me, and the baptized in Bewdley and elsewhere, on the encouragement of such fancies as were hatcht so lately, and never waking man I think did before Mr. B. so solemnly maintain?
Qu. 3. Is it not a desperate undertaking, and dare you adventure on it, to justifie all the world before Christs incarnation except the Jews, from the guilt of not dedicating their children to God, to take him to be their God, and themselves to be his people? Yea, to justifie all Jews against this charge, that should neglect or refuse to engage their children to God in Covenant as members of his Church? And doth not he that saith there is no law, say there is no transgression?
Answ. He doth: But Mr. B. should remember there is a law against bea…ing false witness against his neighbour, which he much urgeth against Mr. Eyre and others; but himself is deeply guilty of it in his high charges, and particularly in this▪ that I justifie all Jews neglecting to engage their children to God in covenant as members of his Church, and all the world not dedicating their children to God. Let him prove either, if he can; if not, let him tremble at his desperate undertaking to uphold his lie of infant Churchmembership and Baptism by such lies as these, and fear the fate of liars. What I hold, may be seen in that which goes before.
Qu. 4 Dare you yet justifie also at the Bar of God, all the world since Christs incarn…tion from the guilt of sin, in not dedicating their children to Christ and entering them into his Covenant as members of his Church? Dare you maintain that all the world is sinlesse in this respect?
Answ. I dare justifie the non-baptizing them, and am assured Mr. B. cannot justifie the baptizing of infant children.
Qu. 5. Have you well considered of the fruit of your way… apparent in England and Ireland at this day? Or have you not seen enough to make you suspect and fear whether indeed God own your way or not? And is it any wonder if posterity be left in controversie about the History of former times, when you can venture, even in these times when the persons are living in our company, to tell me that [you think I am mis-informed that they are Anabaptists, and you think that there are very few of them that were ever baptized,] when of many that we know, and multitudes that we hear of, there are so few that were not before against infant Baptism, and the Se…kers first such, and when the Quakers themselves commonly cry down infant Baptism; and it is one of the questions that they send to …e, and others to answer, [how we can prove it by express Scripture without consequences, or else confess ou… selves false Prophets.
Answ. My ways in opposing infant Baptism, and endeavouring to restore believers Baptism, are such (setting aside my infirmities) as upon conside…ation I find cause not to be ashamed of, but to rejoyce in, and conceive by many evidenc…s that God own… them. What fruit of them in England and Ireland they have had, I do not very well know; if they that are termed Anabaptists do hold unjustifiable positions or practises, they are not the fruit of my ways, any more then the Nicola… …ans, Gnosticks, and others ways, were the fruits of the Apostles preaching. My conscience beareth me witness, and so will the people where I have taught, the brethren with whom I have walked yea, I think some of my Antagonists, with whom I have acted in the publick imployment of approving Preachers, and perhaps the most eminent persons in England, that I have opposed the errours risen, and have sought reformation without separation, have joyned upon all occasions in the common cause with dissenters; insomuch that I had hoped impudence it self would never have dared so to belie me, as to make Schism, Quakerism, and such like evils the fruit of my ways. If many rents and errours have sprung up by accident after my writings, they are no more to be charged on me, then Antinomianism, Swenekfieldianism, &c. were to be charged on Luther; or Brownism, Familism, &c. on the Antiprelatists. What I wrote to Mr. B. I think still, yea, Mr. Bs. own relations confirm me, they are not Anabaptists, though they be against infant baptism. Those very persons, or some of that society which sent to Mr. B. (if my intelligence do not deceive) though they they were against infant baptism, yet neglected baptism when convinced of it as their duty, and they might have been baptized; and as it was foretold them they were likely to be without the opportunity, so it came to pass, for they were after carried away with the delusion of the quakers. It is not my observation alone, but it is the Authors conceit who wrote the book against them termed The quakers blazing star, who was carried away once by them, that the living above ordinances and as Seekers hath been one of the chief ways which hath brought it in, God justly leaving them to be deluded by Satan who would not submit to the way of Gods ordinances; and he adviseth persons, as to labour to be well grounded in faith and repentance, so to joyn in Church communion (of which he takes the Churches of the baptized to be most right, and accordingly hath himself been joyned by Baptism to them) as the best preservative against it. For my part, I think Mr. Bs. and other Ministers maintaining infant Baptism do give most advantage and encouragement to them, both to inveigh against them as men that will not yeeld to truth, but teach a manifest errour, and therefore not to be heard; and then Mr. Saltmarsh and others delusions about water baptism as now ceased, living in the spirit, expectation of it, no true Ministry now without the spirit as the Apostles had, and such like conceits driving them off from the Churches of the baptized, they are caught by those emissaries from Rome, and other agents of Satan, with that Divelish delusion, God justly suffering Satan to delude them with lies, because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved, 2 Thes. 2.10. So that I have as much cause to think quakerism the fruit of Mr. Bs. ways as of mine own. Nor will it be any wonder if posterity be left in controversie about the History of former times, when such a one as Mr. B. shall continue to load me with false accusations, with which I have many wayes shewed my self not chargeable; and not onelyonly he, but also Mr. Robert Baillee in his Dissuasives, Mr. Edwards in his Gangrena's, and others shall in English and Latine heap so many untruths on godly persons because dissenters, while they lived to shew the falsity of them.
Qu 6. Have you felt the guilt which we too strongly fear you have incurred of the perverting of so many souls, opening them such a gap to schism, contempt of the Ministry and Apostacy, destroying a hopefull reformation that cost so dear: or weakening our hands in the work, and filling the adversaries mouths with scorn, enticing the Jesuites and Friars to seem your proselytes, and list themselves among you, as the hopefull party to befriend their cause, hardning thousands both of the Papists and profane, and setling them again on their dr…gs, when many once began to shake! O what a Church might we have had, and were likely to have had? had it not been for the Separatists and you? And what a lamentable confusion are we now brought into by these? Have these things toucht your heart.
Answ. How far these things have toucht my heart, I must give an account to God my Judge, and not to Mr. B. who with his fraternity I perceive would pass a heavy doom on mee, and scarce award me a place in earth or heaven: And no marvel, if I were so pernicious an instrument as he describes me. But may I not require Mr. B. to shew me by what actions I have done any of these things? Is Mr. B. allowed to accuse in generals, and not to instance in particulars? may he without control accuse and not prove? May he have liberty, as in a Chancery bill hath been wont, to put in all he can imagine, whether true or false? Is not this the manner of quakers and scolds? Are my answers often made of no avail to clear my self, but that Mr, B. will still be imputing that to me, which my writings and courses do absolve me from? No marvel Dr. Owen said of him, Appendix to his Vindic Evang. pag. 5. A man that doth not know him as I do, would by his writings take him to be immitis & immisericors, a very Achilles, that will not pardon a man in his grave, but will take him up and cut him in a thousand pieces. I tell Mr. B. plainly, it is not my doctrine but Mr. Bs. which perverts souls, I mean his doctrine of Baptism and Churchmembership, besides his other errours; that neither my doctrine nor practise open a gap to Schism, but tend to the contrary, unity of Baptism being one of the bonds of Christians, Ephes. 4.4. the restoring of which is the regular way to union▪ Mr. B. by his violent opposing it and the assertors of it, doth really open a gap to Schism, I open no gap to contempt of the Ministry, but they themselves do it by opposing truth, and other wayes, Apostacy from Christ or godliness is no fruit of my doing, but is rather caused by those that urge persons to renounce the right Baptism and Communion of the baptised, of which I fear Mr. B. is guilty. A right reformation according to Gods word, cannot be while infant Baptism continues, in seeking to destroy it I promote reformation, Mr. B. by maintaining it destroyes reformation, and by proposals shews his inclination to persecution, which if I hinder I rejoyce. I weaken not Mr. Bs. hands in preaching the Gospel, but strengthen them, if I enervate his errour I am glad; he hath most unbrotherlike endeavoured to weaken my hands, and to stop my mouth. I fill not adversaries mouths with scorn▪ of him, but he hath thrown as much dirt as hee could on me, in his writings▪ I entice not Jesuites and Friers, and if they creep in among those of our judgement, is it any more then Jude v. 4. speaks of in his time? Can Mr. B. say they are not among his party? I harden no Papists, but shew their bottome errour, nor prophane persons, but take the right way to undeceive them; they that maintain their infant Baptism, settle them on their dregs, I mean their carnal presumption; by which they take themselves to bee Christians without knowledge of Christ. The Church that was likely to have been Mr. Bs. way, may be discerned by the Elders, by the Scottish Church, Mr. Bs. Church at Kederminster, the associated Ministers in Wocestershire and their Churches. Confusion is too great, for want of restoring Christs order, more would be if Mr. Bs. way were imposed, and no small oppression on tender consciences and dissenting brethren. I may say, oh what a Church might wee have had, if it had not been for Mr. B. and other such violent Paedobaptists as he is, opposing Christs way.
Qu. 7. Is [a transeunt fact, making infants Churchmembers without Law, promise, or Covenant] a sufficient medium to encourage you to venture on all these horrid things, and run such hazards as you have done? or is it possible that an humble sober man, and a tender conscience, durst make all this havock, and stand out in it, so many years considerately as you have done, and this upon such a palpably unreasonable pretence: When you should prove to us the revocation of infants Churchmembership, to tell us that they …ad it onelyonly by a transeunt fact? Is this a safe ground to build so great a weight on? Sir, my conscience witnesseth, that it is not your reproach that is the end of speaking these unpleasing words to you, but some compassion on you (do not scorn it) and more on your poor followers; and most on the Church of God which you have so much injured and troubled.
Answ. I venture on no such horrid things, nor run such hazards as Mr. B. imagines, nor is the transeunt fact that I build on, but Christs institution Matth. 28.19. though that transeunt fact I assigne is sufficient for the purpose I alledge it, and I cross interrogate Mr. B. Is it possible that an humble sober man, and a tender conscience, should make such foul work as he hath done by his writings, upon such a p…lpably unreasonable pretence, as a Law of infants visible Churchmembership, by promise and precept unrepealed, no where extant, and a mediate Discipleship hatch't in his brain? My reproach is a small matter, did it not tend to darken the truth I should neglect it, nor should I have answered these questions so fully, had not these things been impar…ed to the Preacher and others at Bewdley, ere they came to my hands. Though my reproach were not finis operantis, yet must it needs be finis operis. I thank Mr. B. for his compassion on me and my followers, I have the like on him and his followers. I do not scorn his compassion, but pitty his prejudice and pertinacy. If I have injured and troubled the Church my Antagonists have compelled me, the Lord knowes I had not a resolution to print, till the Assembly neglected the matter, and determined against me and the truth unheard. That I have injured the Church by printing I believe not, it is certain Mr. B. hath extreamly injured me and the truth, and troubled the Church of God, by printing his Book of Baptism. I should not have peace in my conscience did I not endeavour to detect his a…d other Paedobaptists fallacies, which I crave liberty to do, and shall easily pass by personal reproaches.
Qu. 8. Can you prove that ever there was one age, or Church (particular) on earth since Adam till about 200. years ago, that the Anabaptists rose, wherein infants were not de facto taken for members of the Church? If you can do it: Let's hear your proof
Answ. I can, and for proof look back to Sect. 50, 51, 52, 57. besides Constantin, Augustin, mentioned by Mr. B. p 329. Nazianzen, Hierom, &c. unbaptized though of Christian parents till adult.
Qu. 9. Can you bring us proof of any one infant of true Church-members, that was not rightfully a Churchmember himself from the creation till Christs dayes? or from the creation till this day? except the Anabaptists, who reject the benefit; whose case (as I said before) I will not presume to determine?
Answ. I can, for proof look back to Sect. 50, 51, 52, 57.
Qu. 10. Seing that infants have been de facto Churchmembers from the creation to this day (as far as any records can lead us) is it likely that the Lord, and head and all-sufficient Governour of his Church, would have permitted his Church till now to be actually made up of such subjects, as in regard of age he disallowed? and suffer his Church to be wrong framed till now? Or is it a reasonable, modest and lawful undertaking, to go about now in the end of the world to make God a new framed Church, as to the age of the subjects? And is it not more modest and safe, to live quietly in a Church of that frame as all the Saints in heaven lived in, till the other day, as a few Anabaptists with vile and sinful means, and miserable success, did attempt an alteration?
Answ. This question ariseth from these suppositions, 1. that infants have been de facto Churchmembers from the creation to this day. 2. That all the Saints in heaven lived in a Church that had infants visible Churchmembers till less then 200. years ago. 3. That the Anabaptists in Germany in less then 200. years attempted the alteration first of of leaving infants out of the visible Church. 4. That they did it with vile and sinful meanes and miserable success. The first of these is not true, as is shewed in the fore-going Sections, chiefly those in which the 8th. question of this Letter of Mr. B. is answered, the second is shewed to be false Sect. 52. wherein it is proved the Apostles lived in a Church that had not infants. The third is false, for both Christ altered it, and when the corruption of infant Baptism had overspread the Western Churches, many besides the late Anabaptists, as Petrus de Bruis and many other Saints in heaven did alter it. The fourth is in part false, For I think the Anabaptists so called, did not alter infant visible Churchmembership with vile and sinful means, but some of them (not all) did by vile and sinful means seek to set up a temporal dominion of the Saints (as I fear some now called Quinto-monarchians do) which is not to be imputed to all that are of the same way in point of discipline and ordinances, and that though this thing of erecting a temporal dominion had miserable success, yet the restoring of Baptism hath had success as other reformations, as of the Waldenses, Hussites, Non-conformists and others, who though by clamours of Preachers, and violence of Princes, they have been for a time suppressed, yet a remnant have been preserved, who have in time revived, and we hope notwithstanding all the clamours, accusations, and practises, used to corrupt & suppress them, will spread & grow up through the blesing of God. And to Mr. Bs. questions I answer▪ my aim is not to erect a new framed Church to God, but to reduce it to the frame Christ and his Apostles left it in, though it were after some ages altered by the corruption of infant Baptism, which had its original from the gross errour that by it Gods grace was given, and otherwise the infants should perish. And though in that Church, who were for infant Baptism many were Saints now in heaven, yet it is not safe to continue that errour, any more then to continue the errour of infant Communion now by Papists and Protestants rejected, though it were many hundreds of yeares practised in the same Churches. And sure I wonder if he condemn mee for seeking reformation of infant Baptism, how Mr. B. could justifie himself for not living quietly in the Church of England, as it was under the Prelates, though there were among them in that Church Saints now living in heaven, but seeking the reformation of discipline and ceremonies of humane invention, though greater troubles followed thereon, then I think hath followed this reformation I endeavour, and then I hope ever will. Surely if the way I take, and propound, and prosecute were followed, the reformation would be easie and safe, and that it is not followed, will be laid to the charge of Mr. B. and other Paedobaptists as their sin, nor can all his or their wit bee able to cleer them from it, nor from the guilt of breaking their solemn Covenant to endeavour the reformation of these Churches according to Gods word. Hee concludes,
Sir pardon the weakness, and bear with the plainness and freeness of Your faithful Brother (though not as is meet) Rich. Baxter. May 14. 1655.
Answ. I pray the Lord to pardon Mr. Bs. violent and clamourou…, though I hope not wilful opposing of the truth, and I love him not the worse for his plain dealing, yet cannot patiently bear his falshoods, wherein he accuseth the truth and servants of the living God, and by shewing him his errours, and evil dealing, have endeavoured to acquit my self as his faithful brother, as was meet, however he hath been, or shall be towards me affected.
He adds after, Sir, if you have any thing of moment to say, in reply to these, which you have not yet in your writings brought forth, I shall bee willing to consider of it: But if you have not, I pray you tell me so in two words, and spare the rest of your pains (as for me) and trouble mee no more with matters of this nature. For truly I have no sufficient vacancy from greater works. Yea, I am constrained to forbear much greater then these. R. B. After this, he tels me, That whereas I preached a Sermon at Bewdley, in which I refuted by many arguments infants visible Churchmembership, I must be either mutable or hypocritical, if I deny such a law and ordinance which I took on me then to refute, and desires a Copy of that Sermon, that hee may shew the sad mistakes and vanity of those my arguments.
To which I answer, 1. I refuted Mr. Bs. law of infants visible Churchmembership, as a thing pretended, not as a thing real, and so am neither mutable nor hypocritical, in denying such a law. 2. I have no delight in Mr. Bs. writings of this subject, unless there were more ingenuity and solidity in them, then I yet finde, and therefore am willing to gratifie him with no more of my manuscripts in this kinde. 3. As for the Copy of my Sermon he hath the matter of it with enlargement in the 50, 51, and 52. Section of this Book, which when he answers, fragili querens illidere dentem offendet solido. 4. What I had more to say then I have printed, he may perceive by my Books, and however Mr. B. conceives, yet I conceive that the reformation or confirmation of infant Baptism, is a matter of as great moment as the things Mr. B. is intentive on. However, hee might have answered my Letter without any of this trouble hee hath put himself to: But sith hee chose this way, I have thought it necessary to make this reply, and so to go on to the examining the rest of his Book, not yet examined by me at large, though there be little which is not answered in this and other parts before.