Calebs Inheritance in Canaan, Chapter 6
CHAP. VI. Page 23. 24. Is a preludium to the ſubſequent chapter touching the Covenant.
WEE are now come to view that paſſion of Weakneſs that lies in thoſe two Pages, and firſt, of his diſtinction given of Idolatrie, which though I grant to be good; yet he ſtill miſtakes in application: for hee comes again to tell us, that in the room of this precious Ordinance of God, the dipping of beleevers, which Chriſt hath confirmed by his blood, is ſet up an Idoll of mans invention, namely the ſprinkling of Carnall poor infants; and doubtleſs if there be an Idoll in the world, now ſet up amongſt men, this muſt needs be one in his ſence, becauſe he hath learnt this to be an Idoll, either the worſhipping a falſe God, or the true God in a falſe manner, &c.
Anſw. Let any reader Judg whether this man of the waterie element doth not ſpeak with as high a piece of confidence, as if he had a ſpirit of infallibilitie to judg our practice by, hee tells us that dipping of beleevers, was an ordinance confirmed, by the blood of Chriſt, therefore ſprinkling of Children muſt needs be an Idoll his Allegatitions have been examined in all the parts thereof, and: we ſtill find notwithſtanding any thing he hath ſaid to the contrarie) that Childrens Baptiſm remains an Ordinance, That dipping is not the way of the Goſpel; and therefore I muſt tell him, that dipping was never confirm'd by Chriſts blood; Ergo, He ſpeaks untruths in the name of the Lord: neither is it an Idoll of the firſt or ſecond magnitude; no Image of Baptiſm, ſet up in the room thereof by mans invention, which are terms by him uſed, to beſpatter the truth. But the contrary is proved, The Adminiſtrators Right, a perſon qualified and ordeined; the manner, by ſprinkling or pouring out water Right, the form of words Right, and the ſubject Right: And therefore an Ordinance that ſhal ſtand (mauger al the malice of men) as a pretious Ordinance of Ieſus Chriſt, ſo long as the Sun & Moon endures. And therefore inſtead of your appealing to men, ſince there hath been enough ſaid, If you and I had never written; let us appeal to God; and let all thoſe that own their childrens right in the Covenant ſay, Amen.
In Page 25 he concludes again, that Infant Baptiſm is corrupt in the four Eſſentialls aforementioned,
Anſw: Firſt then by his own words, tis not anihillated, but onelyonly Corrupted, and that a perſon though corruptly Baptiz'd ought not to be Baptiz'd, that being already prooved. But,
Secondly, He reckons without his hoſt, and therefore muſt come to a new accompt: They are not Eſſentialls, nor any of them, as laid down by him, but whimſies of his own brain; therefore.
The next thing we are to follow him in is the buſineſs of the Covenants, with its diſtinctions and extent; from which he undertakes to prove, that Infants are not ſubjects of Baptiſm. Though we have hitherto built upon a good Foundation; yet if hee ſhakes down his main pillar, it will be time to forſake the houſe. But before wee can come to his Arguments, we muſt paſſe by many falſitis and prolocutions, and goe through many impertinencies, which muſt be born withall amongſt the Patrons of Error. The firſt thing he deals with is, A (pretended) falſe conſequence, which he ſaith, wee draw from ſcripture, to maintain Infant-Baptiſm: It runs thus, The Covenant of Grace is made with beleevers, and their ſeed: Therefore the ſeale of the Covenant belongs to them. To diſprove which he tells us, 'tis againſt the Law of the new Teſtament.
Anſw. The new Teſtament is Chriſts laſt will to his Church; in which hee ſhews forth more love then he did in his firſt Teſtament, which was made to the ſame Church; and the Covenant of Grace, in the ſpirituall part thereof, is the ſame in both: If therefore in the old Teſtament, which was his firſt Legacie, hee took Children into his kingdom, and yet now, his bowels ſhould be ſhut againſt them who are not then called into libertie, but a greater bondage then before. But grace in the Covenant being unchangeable, therefore Children ſtill remain within Chriſts kingdom, except our oppoſits can ſhew us how, when, and where they were out-law'd.
Secondly, His inſiſting upon the Command, Matth. 28. Go teach and Baptize, doth not at al croſs this conſequence, as hath been already proved; therefore no conſequence of ours is forc'd to oppoſe the new Teſtament.
Thirdly, But ſuch without which his practice is not Goſpell, becauſe it ſhuts up the tender bowels of our Lord Jeſus in a narrower compaſs then ever the Law did, and the fancies and burthens, Maſter Patient would put upon our ſhouldiers, in that which they call the Ordinance, would be heavier then ever the Loyns of the Law were; As to that Inſtance he brings of Peter in Page 26. to prove conſequencies againſt commands unlawfull, becauſe he would have diſſwaded Chriſt from ſuffering, in theſe words, Far be it from thee Lord:
Anſw. Inſtead of handling the word like a Miniſter, he ſtretcheth the ſtrings of Scripture, till they crack: what kind of conſequence could this be, or from what place of Scripture, or againſt what command, was this a conſequence to ſay, Far be it from thee Lord? Surely the moſt any Engliſh Grammarian can make from thence is; That it was a diſſuaſive, but no conſequence. However, by this we may Judg how feeble this mans Judgment is, when he thinks God hath Choſen him as one of thoſe, that ſhall confound the wiſe of the world, that doth not yet underſtand what a true, or right conſequence is.
Maſter Patient afterwards tells us, that all ſuch conſequencies and books and arguments as are brought againſt commands (to prove Infant Baptiſm, which is cleerly implied) he may ſay of them, as Chriſt to Peter, Get the behind mee Satan, thou art an offence to me. Page 6.27.
Anſw. Alas poor man, if the Phyſicks of truth offend his ſtomack, which ſhould cure him; 'tis a ſad ſigne hee is near paſt recovery. How ever, take this extract from his own Inſtance, that ſo far as any man ſhall diſſwade others from truth, and cauſe them to apoſtatize from the ways of Chriſt, hee Acts the Divels part, Ergo This I ſay not; Get thee behind me Satan but this I ſay, that book by him publiſht, in which he ſo bitterly reviles the good old wav of God: for the ends aforeſaid. The ſtate would doe well to have all ſuch books, though in Folio, put into an Index Expurgatorius, amongſt the whole Rabble of Erroneous and Hereticall peeces, that have been printed in theſe Licentions book-days: and ſo condemn them to the fire, as they have done others not fit to be ſuffered. And by this meanes, all Proteſtant Churches through the world, will know, what Religion wee are of.
In Page the 27 he pretends to come nearer the conſequence, and grounds thereof, but doth not cloſe till Page …8. And then hee tells us of the danger of the practice of Infant-Baptiſm, that if it be maintained in all it's dimenſions upon the Ground of the Covenant it will ſhake the very foundation of the Goſpell.
Anſw. All theſe are but great ſwelling words of vanitie, fit for nothing but to delude the ſimple, of which we have been ſlong ſince foretold, by the Apoſtles of Chriſt: but to the buſines of the Covenant at laſt hee comes; where at length we ſhall find with what groſſe ignorance, hee gropes about, to find a new way, but is miſtaken.