Anti-Paedobaptism Part 3, Section 74
SECT. LXXIIII. Mr. Bs. allegations, p. 76, 77, 78. shew not a stronger ground of hope of infants salvation, so dying, then mine: His 23d. Arg. ch. 28. his 25th. ch. 30. are answered.
HE tels us, That he hath a stronger probabilty then I mention, of the salvation of all the infants of the faithfull, so dying, and a certainty of the salvation of some, in that God admitted them visible members of his Church. For Christ is the Saviour of his body, and he present his Church clensed and unspotted to the Father: And if God will have them to be visible members of his Church, then he would have us take or judge them to be members of it: And withal, there is less danger of mistake in them, then in men at years; because they do not dissemble, nor hide any hypocritical intents under the vizor of profession, as they may do. And it is certain also, that if God would have some and many to be of the true body of Christ, and so be saved, then hee would not have all to bee visibly out of that body. That he would have have them churchmembers is proved, and shall be, God willing, yet more. If God add to the Church such as shall be saved, then there is a strong probability of their salvation whom he addeth to the Church.
Answ. Mr. B. here, p. 74. in his arguments 2d. and 3d. intimated that he asserted a sure ground for faith concerning the salvation of believers infants so dying, and that to be a promise in the word of the salvation of those within the visible Church; and here he asserts a stronger probability then I mention of the salvation of all the infants of the faithfull so dying, and a certainty of the salvation of some, in that God admitteth them visible members of his Church. Yet pag. 78. he dares not say there's a full certainty of the salvation of all believers infants so dying: Yea, pag. 110. he saith, Rom. 9.8. the Apostle pleadeth that salvation is not by the Covenant tyed to all Abrahams seed. Out of which I infer, 1. That Mr. B. hath no sure ground for faith, to wit, a promise in the word concerning the salvation of all the infants of believers so dying. For the Apostle pleads, that salvation is not by Covenant tied to all Abrahams seed, and if not to Abrahams, then to none else; and the certainty of the salvation of some is acknowledged by me as well as by him. And sure if the Covenant assure not salvation to all, and neither it nor any other revelation of God tell us salvation belongs to this infant of such a believer or to that, there is no certainty concerning the salvation of this or that particular infant of a believer dying, nor is there a sure ground for faith concerning it, nor is the hope of it certain, and we are to suspend our judgement concerning it, which Mr. B. carp… at so much in me to make me and the truth I hold odious, which is almost all the work he does (for he proves nothing he says in opposition to what I hold) and though his speeches are inconsistent, yet when he sets down his opinion he agrees with me, that he dares not say there's a full certainty of the salvation of all believers infants; nor dare he I think say, that he is certain of any one believer on earth his infant dying, that he is saved. 2. That he hath a stronger probability then I mention of the salvation of all the infants of believers so dying, in that God admitteth them visible members of his Church, is said by him: But 1. he shews not what degree of probability I deny which he asserts: 2. I never opposed the strongest probability Mr. B. asserts, onelyonly I declared my self unsatisfied concerning the certainty, which Mr. B. dares not assert: 3. That God hath admi…ted them visible members of his Church Christian, is not yet proved by Mr. B. nor ever will be: 4. If he had, yet this proves the certainty of the salvation of none now existent; for the speeches, Ephes. 5.23, 27. must be understood of the Church which is so visible, that it be also the invisible. Now though it be certain, that some visible Churchmembers are saved▪ yet it is neither certain that all, or any visible Churchmembers or Churches now existent shall be saved, and therefore no more then a probability of the salvation of all or some infants of believers now existent can be inferred, though their visible Churchmembership were granted. As for the strength of the probability, I stick not to grant it as strong as he would have it, so that he assert not a certainty. And therefore, did not Mr. B. mind to pick a quarrel with me, and to affright people from my doctrine, this Chapter of Mr. B. might have been spared.
Yet Mr. B. adds. And the promises to them are fuller then Mr. T. expresseth, and give us stronger ground of hope. 1. God hath, as I have proved, assured that he will be mercifull to them in the general, and that in opposition to the seed of the wicked, on whom he will visit their Fathers sins: Now this giveth a strong ground of hope that he will save them. For if the Judge or King say, I will hang such a traytor, but I will be mercifull to such a one, it is an intimation that he meaneth not to hang him. If your friend promise to be good to you and mercifull, you dare confidently hope he means not to destroy you.
Answ. This proves not Gods promises any fuller then I express, for those I alledge not excluding but including in an &c. this, are as full as this, Exod. 20.6. Nor doth this give a stronger ground of hope then I do, who yeeld as much as Mr. B. infers, though I like not Mr. Bs. instance, which intimates that God should say, I will damn the children of the wicked to the 3d. and 4th. generation, v. 5. and save the children of them that love me to a thousand generations.
He adds. 2. God saith (as I have shewed) that the seed of the righteous is blessed. Now is not that a strong ground of hope, that so dying, they shall not be damned? It is not likely that God would call them blessed whom he will damn eternally, after a few days or hours life in a state of infancy, which is capable of litle sense of blessedness here.
Answ. What mercy is meant, Exod. 20.6. and what blessedness, Psal 37.26. hath been considered before, and thence it may appear, that a certainty of salvation to all infants of believers, or to any definitely now existent cannot bee inferred. Yet I oppose not the inferring thence a strong ground of hope. Nevertheless that God should call them blessed in a sort and yet damn them, is no inconsistency, nor doth it appear much less likely then that hee should reprobate Esau afore hee was born or had done good or evil, Rom. 9.11, 12, 13.
3. God (saith Mr. B.) entreth Covenant to be their God, and to take them for a peculiar people to himself, Deut. 29.11, 12, 13. And this giveth strong hope of their salvation. For as if the …ing promise to bee your King, and to take you for his s…bject, it is likely hee intends all the benefits of Kingly government to you: or if a man promise a woman to bee her husband, it is likely that hee intendeth to do the office of a husband: And so when God promiseth to be their God.
Answ. Though I yeild that there is ground for a strong hope o… the salvation of infants of Christian believers so dying, yet in the text cited there is nothing to that purpose. For 1. that Covenant was made on…ly with the people of Israel, and was a peculiar Covenant with that nation. 2. For the Covenant was of Gods being God to them while they owned him, and kept his Commandments and so w…s conditional. So that thi… Covenant is not a Covenant with every believer and his issue, nor did Gods promise to bee their God assure the salvation of all the Israelites infants so dying, much less the salvation of infants of Christian believers, to whom all the promises in the new Covenant are personal, none that I remember national or domestical as were to the Jews.
4. Saith hee, And Paul 1 Thes. 4.13. would not have the faithfull mourn for the dead as those that are without hope: now what dead are these? And what hope is it? 1. Hee saith the dead in general, which will not stand with the exclusion of the whole species of infants. 2. Hee speaks of those dead for whom they were apt to mourn. And will not parents mourn for their children? And for hope, it is evidently the hope of resurrection to life. For resurrection to damnation is not a thing to be hoped for. This seems plain to me.
Answ. …hough I oppose not a strong hope of the salvation of believers infants so dying, yet to shew how vainly he talks of his shewing more for it then I do, the reader may take notice, that if the Apostle be interpreted of the hope of the resurrection to life of the dead in general and those they were apt to mourn for, as Mr. Bs. arguing intimates his mind to be, then the Apostle would have them hope for the resurrection to life not onelyonly of the infants of believers so dying, but also of their ripe aged children though infidels and profane, yea for their wives, kindred, neighbours, servants; whereas the Apostles speech is plainly meant onelyonly of them that are believers, who as they are said v. 1…. to sleep so v. 14. to sleep in Jesus, whom God will bring with Jesus, v. 16. dead in Christ, that is for Christ▪ …. M. Mede conceivs, applying at peculiarly to the martyrs, or as most … faith of Christ, such as shall be for ever with the Lord, v. 17. From … with many other instances in his writings it may appear how … superficially Mr. B. opens and infers from texts of Scrip…u…
5. Saith Mr. B. David comforteth himself concerning his dead child, because hee should go to the child, but the child should not return to him. To say that this was onelyonly that hee should bee buried with it, is to make David too like a Pagan rather then a Christian: However it seems hee was confident that he should not bee damned: or else hee would not say, I shall go to him. And to say David knew his salvation as a Prophet, is a groundless fiction that cannot be proved: Prophets knew not all things, not ordinarily things of another world by such revelation. Therefore what ever ground of hope David had, other faithfull parents have the like.
Answ 2. That David in those words 2 Sam. 12.22, 23. did express any ground of hope of the salvation of his child, and that thereby hee comforted himself concerning his dead childe, is more then I think can bee evinced from the text. Rendering a reason of his not fasting any longer, hee doth not alledge any thing concerning the happiness of the childe, but the bootlesness of h…s praying and fasting sith the childes life could not bee recovered. And the whole speech considered, the words import no more then this, can I bring him back again to life? I shall go to him, that is to the state of the dead, as counterfeit Samuel is brought in, saying 1 Sam. 28.19. To morrow thou shalt bee with mee, that is dead as I am, and as Jacob said Gen. 37.35. Hee should go down to his sonne into the grave, or state of the dead. And in these speeches though no more were meant, yet there is nothing that relisheth of Paganism, not so much as other speeches seem to do, Psal. 6.5. Psal. 30.9. Isai. 38.18, 19. Job 14, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14. For though they the express not the expectation of the resurrection or the present estate of happiness, yet it was not because they believed it not, but because it was sufficient to give a reason of his present action, in which hee gives first an account of what hee did before, hee fasted and wept while the childe was alive, for hee said, who can tell whether God will bee gracious to mee that the childe may live? In which words if wee may argue after Mr. Bs. mode, wee may as well say hee was too like a Pagan rather then a Christian, sith hee mentions no prayer for his childes happiness, but his natural life. 2. An account of his not fasting, because God had frustrated the end of his prayer and fasting. And yet in both hee shewed▪ faith in GOD, in his prayer acknowledging GOD the authour of life and death, and in the other the sentence of death passed on himself, and his acquiescence in Gods will concerning both. All which hee understood as one acquainted with GOD and his word. So that wee need not assert that David knew the happiness of his childe by special revelation, sith hee expresseth not any thing of it. And if hee did, yet hee might speak this not as an assured thing, but as probably hoped for, and yet not upon common grounds to all believers, but out of special favour to him (of which hee had more then common experience) and Gods wont of hearing his prayers. So that yet Mr. B. hath brought no stronger grounds of probability of the salvation of all believers infants so dying, then I have done notwithstanding his cracks. Let's view the rest.
6. Saith hee, Again, if there were not farre more hope of their salvation, then fear of their damnation; it would never bee said, That children are an heritage of the Lord▪ and the fruit of the womb is his reward; And the man blessed that hath his quiver full of them, Psal. 127.3, 4, 5.
Answ. 1. Mr. B. pretended to shew a stronger probability of the salvation of the infants of believers then I have done, but wherein do…h hee exceed mee in his assertion in this place or his proof? Did I ever say there is less hope of their salvation, then fear of their damnation? If I did not, why doth hee suggest as if in this conclusion hee asserted more then I do? If I have said so, let him shew it, or else let him bee taken for what hee is, a calumniator. 2. For his proof, would any man alledge this text to prove more hope of salvation of infants of believers then their damnation, if hee had any heed to what hee writes? when the text expresly makes the blessedness of the man hath many children to bee not at all in this place, in reference to hope of the salvation of the children▪ but in reference to his own safety and protection by his children, who may oppose enemies, and bee as arrowes or weapons to drive them back, or as helps to right his wrongs, and to embolden him to contend with them in the gate, which was counted a great blessing then, and agreeable to the promises of the legal Covenant, as Deut. 28. Psal. 144.12, 15, &c. may bee seen. But this is not meant of infants but of such as were grown up and able to defend their parents, and chiefly if not onelyonly of males, nor is the man said to bee blessed by reason of the goodliness of them, but the multitude of them, and they are said to bee an heritage as the land of Canaan, Psal. 1…6.21, 22. and his reward whether for their observing his law, or for other reason, such as for which Nebuchadnezzar was rewarded with Egypt, Ezek. 29.18, 19, 20. or as Psal. 137.8, 9. or as reward taken Catachrestically for any gift. Bee it meant of true believers (though no words in the text evince it) yet the children are said to be their heritage and reward not Gods heritage, nor is there any intimation of happiness to the childe, and therefore not a word intimating more hope o… their salvation then fear of their damnation, but of outward benefit to the parent such as may bee common to infidels with believers, and consequently not a word for a strong ground of hope of the salvation of believers infants so dying, much l…ss more then I bring to that purpose.
7. Saith Mr. B. And why should children be joyned in standing Church ordinances, as prayer, fasting, &c. if there were not strong hope of the blessing of these ordinances to them? 2 Chron. 20.13. The children that suck the breast were to bee gathered to the solemn fast, Joel 2, 16. (this will prove them also standing Churchmembers, seeing they must joyn in standing ordinances;) so why received they circumcision▪ a seal of the righteousness of faith, if there were not strong probability that they had the thing sealed and signified? God will not fail his own ordinance where men fail not.
Answ. There's nothing here endeavoured to bee proved but what I have also granted, that there is a strong probability that infants of believers so dying are justified and saved, and yet I see no strength in these allegations to prove it. For though the little ones and sucking children were to bee present to shew an universal humiliation, as did the beasts also, Jonah 3.8. yet the infants did not joyn in prayer, nor was the end of their presence any special blessing of the Ordinance to them, but the moving GOD to spare the whole people, invaded or in danger of perishing by fami…e, nor were the prayer and fasting standing Church-ordinances, any more then the Covenanting Deut. …9. Nehem. 9. but occasional, nor doth this presenting of infants prove them standing Churchmembers any more then the like Jonah 3.8 proves those infants, or the Ninivites beasts standing Churchmembers. As for Cir…umcision, that infants received Circumcision as a seal of the righteousness of faith, is no where in Scripture affirmed; and how much Paedobaptists are mistaken in their inference of the nature of Sacraments in general, or Circumc…si…n in special, from Rom: 4.11. hath beene often shewed before Sect. 31, &c. The ends of Circumcising of infants, was to distinguish the Hebrews from other people, and to fore-signifie from what people CHRIST was to come, and to engage them to observe the Law of Moses which they were to receive by reason of Gods command whether they hoped for their childrens salvation, or not, Abraham was to circumcise Ishmael, though hee knew hee was not a childe of the promise, and Isaac Esau, though hee were rejected by God. The speech God will not fail his own ordinance where men fail not, is like the Popish Schoolmens conceit, that Sacraments confer grace where no bar is put, and intimates that Circumcision was Gods o…dinance to assure at least rigteousness of faith to each infant circumcised, which is a false conceit.
8. Saith Mr. B. Why else doth God so oft compare his love to that of a mother or father to the childe? 1 Thes. 2.7. Num. 11, 12. Isa. 49.15. Ps…l. 103.13.
Answ. Though I grant a strong probality of the salvation of believers infants so dying, yet to shew the vanity of Mr. Bs. scriblings, as if hee brought more for it then I do, I cannot but observe the slighty dealing of Mr. B. in this point. For first, whereas hee alledgeth these texts as if GOD did therein compare his love to that of a mother or father to the childe, in the first Paul (not God) compares himself to a nurse; in the second, Moses speaks of himself as if God had put an impossible burthen on him, as if he could as a nursing father bears his sucking childe, carry all that people to the promised land. In the third, God saith he, would not forget Sion, who had said hee had forgotten them, though a mother should forget her sucking childe; and Psal. 103.13. the love of God as a father is spoken of them that fear him. So that the two first texts were through heedlesness mis-alledged grosly by him, the other two express Gods love onelyonly to his obedient and seeking people, mention nothing of his love to their infants. 2. God doth compare his love to a Fathers or Mothers not because he is engaged to believers infants to save them, nor because he hath natural affection as they have, but to shew his gracious care and dealing towards his elect children. 3. Gods love is no more comp…red to a believing parents love, then to an unbelievers; and therefore if this prove a strong probability of the salvation of a believers infant so dying, it doth prove the salvation of an unbelievers as prob…ble. 4. Gods love and care is compared to an Eagles in carrying her young ones, Deut. 32.11, 12. Christs to an He…, Matth. 23.37. According to Mr. Bs. reasoning, thi… should prove then the strong probability of t…e salvation of Chickens. But I am ashamed that the world should see the nakedness of these magnified reasonings, though I be necessitated to uncover it.
The 9th. from Matth. 19.14. is no more then I have alledged often for those infants; and what Mr. B. here alledgeth to prove this a right of other infants, is answered at large in the second part of this Review, sect. 17.
10. Saith he, We read of some that have been sanctified from the womb, and therefore were in a state of salvation; and Jacob was loved before he was born, and therefore before he had done good or evil was in the like state of salvation.
Answ. Have not I also granted this thing, and that upon the same reasons? Why then doth Mr. B. suggest, to draw par… is hearts from me to him, as if he said more in this then my self? Yet I cannot be very confident of the reason from Jerem 1.15. to which Gal. 1.…5. is parallel, sith the sanctification was to the office of a Prophet, which is appliable to infants so dying.
11. We find promises of salvation to whole housholds, where it is probable there were infants, Act. 16.34.
Answ. 1. Acts 16.31. is no probability that infants should bee meant, sith in the next v. it is said, he spake the word to all that were in his house, which is not to be said of infants; and v. 34. he rejoyced with all his house, believing God. 2. If they should, yet this can be no more then a particular promise to him, unless this were true, that God will save every believer and his house▪ And Mr. B. over l…sheth in saying, we find promises of salvation made to whole housholds ▪ when there is no more but this one.
The 12th. is from 1 Cor. 7.14. and it is built on Mr. Bs. interpretation of [holy] as if it noted a separation to God as a peculiar people. But I have fully answered Mr▪ Bs. 29th▪ ch. and have shewed his mistake in the first part of this Review, sect. 22, &c. and need to answer no more in this place.
Mr. B. goes on thus. It cannot be said, that these promises are verified according to their sense, if any mercy be given to any infant: Here the persons are determined, that is, all the seed of the faithfull; and we have large ground given probably to conclude, that it is eternal mercy that is intended to all that living to age do not again reject it, but that either at age keep Covenant, or die in infancy before they break it. And we have certain ground to conclude, that this salvation belongeth to some infants, and visible Churchmembership to all the seed of the faithfull. And I think this is more then Mr. T. doth acknowledge them.
Answ. It is indeed, finding the argumen…s frivolous which Mr. B. hath brought for the visible Churchmembership of infants, though I acknowledge salvation belongeth to some infants. It is before shewed how the promises may be verified according to the sense of the words if any sort of mercy be given to any children of the faithfull: Nor is it true, that in the promises brought by Mr. B. the persons are determined to be all the seed of the faithfull, and how the contrary is determined by the Apostle, Rom. 9.7, 8. according to Mr. B. himself, is shewed before, and what reason there is to understand Exod. 20.6. of temporal mercies, is shewed above; so that here is nothing new to be answered.
He adds, If that Matth. 18.10. be well considered, it may make another argument full to the point. If little ones have their Angels beholding the face of God in heaven, they shall be saved: For that is a mercy proper to the people of God. And that the Text speaks of infants, others have fully proved.
Answ. I grant the conclusion and argument, but deny that it is at all to the point in question between us, and that any one hath proved that by little ones, Matth. 18.10. are meant infants. Though the contrary be proved concerning Matth. 18.5, 6. in the second part of this Review, sect. 15. where Mr. Bl. and Mr. C. are answered: Yet to shew the frovolousness of Mr. Bs. talk, I add 1. that Matth. 18.10. cannot be expounded one of these little infants; for such a speech would shew that then there were more little infants before them: But it appears from v. 2, 4. there was but one set before them. 2. From v. 14, 11. the little ones were such as Christ came to save, and that it was Gods will none should perish: But this is true onelyonly of the elect and true believers, not simply of infants as such. 3. The words following, v. 15, &c. shew they are meant of a sinning brother, ergo, not of infants.
Mr. B. adds. That though he dare not say there is a full certainty of the savation of all believers infants so dying, yet he professeth to think it better grounded then mine, who (he saith) shut them out of the Church. But this I take to be and effect of that antipathy he hath against me, who still chooseth that opinion which is most opposite to me, and prefers it; as p. 141. the opinion of the old and new Socinians, who take away an ordinance, and whom he censures pag. 24. as above obedience, and so Gods; and the opinion of baptizers in infancy and at age too, pag. 143. and professeth he would have nothing to do with me when I offered assistancce to him in another point, as if he were like Maldovat the Jesuite that could have liked an interpretation had it not been Calvins. But I leave him to the Lord to judge him and me, and do not despair but that he may yet live to see his errour, and perhaps wish he had been better advised then so disdainfully to have rejected a friends offer.
He saith, He would urge another argument here from the universality of redemption, Christ dying for all, for every man, for the sins of the whole world, as the Scripture speaketh; but that it would require more time to explain himself in it then he could then spare. However he thinks no man should deny that Christ died for every sort of men, and every age, and so for some infants. To which I reply, Did he ever hear me deny it? And if he did not, why doth he talk of proving it here where he disputes against me? But he is willing to pick what quarrels he can with me. However when he intends to urge this argument, I hope I shall be provided to answer it, if it oppose my thesis. That the Scripture saith Christ died for every man, for the sins of the whole world, is more then I find: If I mistake him not, his Universal redemption he holds is conditional onelyonly, which I think to be a fiction, redemption and election in Scripture being absolute in respect of persons, …nd commensurate, redemption being as well from impenitency and unbelief as damnation: Yet were it granted him, that he should thence infer, not the salvation of all, but of believers infants so dying and never performing the condition, is yet a Riddle to me; and I cannot yet imagine it to be any better then a sick-mans dream in Mr. B.
Ch. 28. He urgeth his 23d. arg. from Christs being head of the visible Church in infancy, that infants may be members; whi…h I deny not: Nor is it the thing in question what they may be, but what they are. But this argument is answered before, sect. 57. And what he saith here out of Irenaeus, proves not what he would infer, That Irenaeus took them for visible Churchmembers, because he saith, Christ by the example of his age sanctifieth them. For every one sanctified by Christ is not a visible Churchmember: Mr. B. saith before, pag. 78. we read of some that have been sanctified from the womb, were they visible Churchmembers in the womb? I know no absurdity in it to assert that Christ was head of the Church when an infant, and worshipped as such, and yet no infants should be visible Churchmembers. Mr. Bs. perswasion that they know not Gods will that think otherwise then he doth, is but an effect of his fond affection to his own brats. And yet when he himself saith, pag. 62. I confess it is disputable whether Christ were ever a Churchmember properly, he should not be very confident in asserting Christ in infancy to have been head of the visible Church. And for Irenaeus his speech, it is so false, that were not Mr. B. willing to catch at any shadow for his purpose, he would have concealed it.
Mr. Bs. 29th. ch. and 24th. argument, is answered at large in the first part of this Review, sect. 22, &c.
Ch. 30. He tels us, that his 25th. arg. is probable at least, that the Scripture doth frequently and plainly tell us of the ceasing of Circumcision; but never speaks one word of the ceasing of infants visible Churchmembership, therefore we are not to judge that it is ceased. That the antecedent or minor in this argument is false, is proved at large, sect. 50, 51, 52. The consequence is shewed to be invalid, in that other things of which the cessation is certain, as the freeing of servants, the dedication of the first born, are ceased, and yet not expressed so much in Scripture as that of Churchmembership. To this saith Mr. B. The year of Jubile was one of their Sabbaths, and so a type, Col. 2.17. But I reply, Though the year of Jubile were a Sabbath, yet this proves not that freeing servants then is any more said to be ceased then infants visible Churchmembership. 2. Sai…h he, The dedication of the first-born was evidently a type of Christ, and the Church under him: Of both these many Scriptures are plain But let it be proved, that the admitting of infants into the visible Church is a meer type, or a meer judicial law proper to the Jewish Commonwealth, any more then the admitting of men or women into the Church. I reply, 1. Admitting of infants into the visible Church, was no other then by their circumcising or presenting at the Temple; and these are ceased, as proper to the Jewish Church or Commonwealth. 2. A thing may cease though we cannot prove it a meer type, nor a meer judicial law, as the receiving tythes, and paying them; and things may remain though they were t…pes, as mount Sion, the land of Canaan, the people of Israel, wh…ch were types, Heb. 12.22. Gal. 6.6. &c. 3. That the Jewish infant Churchmembership was not by a law, but by a fact of providence which took in the whole people of the Jews into the Church visible Jewish, and consequently the infants as part of that people; which by the breaking off that people, and taking into the Church onelyonly believers, is now ceased, as is shewed before, sect 50, 51, 52, 64.
What Mr. B. adds, If all Nations should have become Churchmembers th…y should have been circumcised, and then it had not been peculiar to the Jews; and that Sichemites being circumcised would not have been subje…t to Jacob, and that when in Esthers time the people of the land became Jews, they were not of the Jewish Commonwealth, and under their Civil government; is answered before, sect. 54.
That which he saith, p. 108. That he hath sufficiently proved that infants ought to be admitted visible Churchmembers, hath so little truth, that if the Reader observe it, he shall find sca…ce any of his arguments so much as to conclude the admission of infants into the visible Church, much less to prove it, but that they are visible Churchmembers. Whereby it is evident now (which I could not observe in the Dispute) that Mr. B. did leave the point to be proved, that infants ought to be admitted visible Churchmembers; and prosecuted another point instead of it, that they are visible Churchmembers. But enough is done in answer to that also, which I pray the Lord to bless for the undeceiving of the people of these nations who have been so shamefully misled by Mr. Bs. toy of an ordinance of infants visible Churchmembership unrepealed, no where extant, that were they not either willing to be deceived, o… left to errour by God for their want of love to the truth, they could hardly have been deluded by such vain arguing as he hath vented.