Truth outweighing Error: Or, An ANSWER TO A Treatise lately published by J. B. Entitled, A Confession of his Faith, AND A Reason of his Practice. OR, With who he can, and with who he cannot hold Church-Fellowship, or the Communion of Saints.  
By John Den, a Servant of the Church.  
He that is first in his own Cause, seemeth just; but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him, Prov. 18.17.  
For it was not an Enemy that reproached me, than I could have born it, Psal. 55.12.  
Sed nullum est Atrocius vulnus quam defectio amici. Sophocles.  
London, Printed for the Author, and are to be sold by F. Smith, at the Elephant and Castle near the Royal-Exchange in Cornhill, and at the same sign the first shop without Temple-Bar, 1673.   

To the Church of God; in God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ, especially to my well beloved Brethren in the Counties of Huntingdon and Cambridge: Grace, Mercy, and Peace be multiplied unto you from God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ the Son of the Father in Truth and Love.  
Dear Beloved,  
IT is once, yea twice declared in the Book of Job, That when the Sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, Satan came also amongst them; surely, not only to espy what miscarriage might give him advantage against them, but also to endeavour their subversion by the crafty insinuations of himself, and ministers, stirred up to that end; and no marvel, for if he durst presume to practise the same against our blessed Saviour, we may more assuredly expect his subtlety and puissance to be bend against us: wherefore Diligence and Sobriety is required, (1 Pet. 5.8.) that by the one you may avoid giving him occasion against you; and by the other discover his crafty devices, although carried on by fair pretences, like a Wolf in Sheeps-clothing, making use therefore of some of your own selves, according to the words of the Apostle Paul, (Acts 20.29.) which (as heretofore) is this day apparently verified; and that (amongst others) particularly in that Book presented to the World by J. Bunyan, entitled, A Confession of his Faith, and the reason of his practice touching Church-fellowship: wherein, (amongst other things) he endeavours the vilifying (the ready way for the extirpation) of the Ordinance of Water-Baptism, and that under the specious pretences of Charity, Church-edification, etc. that his Design might be so masked, as to be received by many conscientious Christians, who cannot (through his crafty vail) discover his intentions in reference to the aforesaid Ordinance, which he would not have us at all respect in the matter of Church-Communion. Which I no sooner saw, but I was filled with displeasure, apprehending myself obliged, as once Phineas was (in a matter whereunto this is not inferior, if the spiritual concern be respected) to manifest an holy indignation against the same, and (according to my ability) to vindicate the Truth therein degraded; whereupon I resolved to send abroad the ensuing Treatise, which I now commend to you; (what is well done, expects your Approbation; and what is amiss, your gentle Correction): withal entreating you to look to yourselves that you may not be ensnared; hold fast the form of sound words, lest that otherwise you be unawares beguiled; retain always a reverend esteem of God's Ordinances. Which if you do not, you will suddenly be surprised by that Adversary, who goeth about like a roaring Lion seeking whom he may devour; keep close to the Holy Scriptures, continue instant in Prayer, and that for me also, that Wisdom, Boldness, and Patience may be given me, that I may not cease to speak the things I have believed. Brethren, farewel, the God of Peace fill you with all Joy and Peace in believing. Amen.  
Your unworthy Brother in the Lord Jesus Christ, John Den.   

The Epistle to the Reader.  
READER,  
IF Solomon had cause to say in his time, Eccles. 12.12. in making many Books there is no end, what may be said in our days, when the World is so replenished with Books, and those pro & contra, even in matters of Christianity, insomuch as the question propounded by Paul, 1 Cor. 1.13. Is Christ divided? may now seem justly to be answered on the affirmative, or (which is rather to be consented unto) that the prediction of Christ Jesus (Matth. 24.24. That there shall arise false Christ's, many coming in his Name, saying, Lo here, and lo there is Christ) is now accomplished, for the discovery of whom, and demonstration of the Truth, that one Book (viz. the Holy Scripture) is only necessary, which of itself is able to make a man wise unto Salvation, through Faith which is in Christ Jesus; who therefore adviseth the Sons of Men to search the Scriptures, Joh. 5.39. because they are they which do testify of him: The consideration whereof hath hitherto obstructed my presenting any thing to public view, although divers times thereto incited, as well by the persuasion of some Friends, as the apprehension of the want of some assistance in the vindication of the Truth as it is in Jesus, which (as formerly hath required my hand) at this time induceth me to step forth particularly upon the perusal of a Treatise subscribed by J.B. entitled, A Confession of his Faith, and the reason of his Practice touching Church-Fellowship: Which (although sometime published) came lately to my view, wherein an apparent wrong and public abuse being offered to God and his Son Christ Jesus, in his endeavouring the explosion of the Holy Ordinance of Baptism; it took such impression within me, that I could not now forbear the presenting the ensuing Treatise to the view of the World in answer thereunto, whereof it may perhaps be said (as Paul of himself, 1 Cor. 15.8.) It is born out of due time: but if so, I presume wise Persons will allow, that an Abortive birth, wherein there is life, must not be rejected; wherefore, although peradventure there may be others (which I know not of) that may precede this upon the same account (whereto the priority must be granted): Touching this, let me say as (Abigail to David) Accept it as a Servant to the Servants of the Servants of our God, whereby perhaps some (although mean) Service may be rendered, which may be advantageous in the discovery of Truth from the disguised face of Error: Wherefore (in the Name of our Lord Jesus) let me entreat thee to read impartially, and try diligently by the Scriptures of Truth, what thou findest in this following Treatise declared, and the Lord give thee therein the Spirit of discerning; which shall be the earnest Prayer of  
Thine in the Lord Jesus Christ, John Den.   

Truth outweighing Error, etc.  
WHen the Woman clothed with the Sun, and the Moon under her feet, Rev. 12.1. and upon her Head a Crown of twelve Stars, was with Child, and cried travelling in birth, and pained to be delivered; then there appeared, vers. 3. a great Wonder in Heaven, viz. a great red Dragon, having seven Heads, and ten Horns, and seven Crowns upon his Heads, who with his Tail drew the third part of the Stars from Heaven, and cast them to the Earth. This Dragon stood before the Woman to devour the Child as soon as it should be brought forth: but his purposes therein being frustrated, he endeavoured (by divers assaults and stratagems) not only the destruction of the Child, but also the Mother thereof; seeking so craftily the pursuance of his enterprise, that he was fitly termed that old Serpent, the Devil and Satan, vers. 9 who by his subtlety deceived Eve, 2 Cor. 11.3. persuading her, That God was not so much their Friend as they imagined▪ for, saith he, God doth know that in the day you cat of that tree which he hath forbidden, your eyes shall be opened, and you shall be as Gods, etc. Gen. 3. thereby endeavouring to bring them into a  of the Laws of their Creator, that so he might induce them to consent to his wicked device; which craft (as then began) is daily practised for the corrupting the minds of Saints from the simplicity that is in Christ, of which devices Paul was not ignorant, 2 Cor. 2.11. but understood the working of Satan, to get (in his time) an advantage of Christians; sometimes (for that purpose) transforming himself into an Angel of Light, the easier to deceive mankind, and thereby to accomplish his own designs; for the effecting whereof he also sendeth forth Ministers transformed into the Apostles of Christ, and Ministers of Righteousness▪ 2 Cor. 11.15. of whom our Saviour doth admonish us to take heed, Matth. 7.15. as of false Prophets which come in Sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravening Wolves; thereby intimating, that it ought to be the continual care of Saints, in all Ages, to avoid such, lest that with feigned words, and fair speeches, their Souls should be ensnared in that crafty snare of Satan, wherein men become captivated at his will to their utter ruin and destruction. And as this we are admonished of, so, by continued experience, the necessity thereof is demonstrated. Time would fail me to relate how t●●t evil one hath, and doth endeavour, by subtlety, to accomplish what by force he cannot; That, as of old his Tail did more harm than his Horns; so now by the crafty insinuations of his Ministers, he endeavoureth the violation of God's righteous Laws, in procuring, first, a disesteem thereof in the hearts of Christians, that so they may (with the greater content) be negligent in the performance of the same, he well knowing what the event thereof will be, for through idleness of the hands the house falleth down; and thereby may he craftily accomplish his wicked design. An Instance whereof is apparent in that little Treatise lately published by J. B. entitled, A Confession of his Faith, and a reason of his Practice with who, and who not, he can have Church-fellowship or Communion of Saints: Wherein the Reader may as well discern the Spirit of the Author clearly demonstrated, as his Person by the letters of his Name subscribed; who (amongst other things) endeavoureth to vilify the Holy Ordinance of Water-Baptism, that thereby he might bring it into such  with others, as it is (notwithstanding his specious pretences) with himself; who knoweth, that if he could persuade Christians to think that the doing it is never the better, and the not doing it never the worse, it would then soon fall to the ground, J.B. pag. 104. For the prevention of which design, I shall presume (through the assistance of God) to weigh what (to the purpose) is said (by the Author of the aforesaid Treatise) in the balance of the Sanctuary, if peradventure it may be so far outweighed by the weight of Truth, that the vanity thereof may appear.  
Wherein I shall first take notice of the Confession of his Faith.  
Secondly, The reason of his Practice, etc.  
First, In his Confession you have divers things declared in the beginning thereof (as the Author saith) which (I suppose) few men deny; and thereto I shall yield my Concession; saying to him in the words of the Apostle James, Chap. 2.19. Thou sayest well; the Devils also believe and tremble.  
But when he proceeds further in the 15th Article of his Faith, pag. 9 wherein he would be thought to be some body, in giving a clear demonstration (as is pretended) how men come to obtain Righteousness, Redemption, and Salvation from the Curse of the Law,  
He saith;  
I believe therefore that the Righteousness and Redemption by which we that believe stand just before God, as saved from the Curse of the Law, is the Righteousness and Redemption that consists in the personal acts and performances of this Child Jesus, this God-man, the Lord Christ; I say, in his personal fulfilling the Law for us, to the utmost requirements of the Justice of God; by which means he became the end of the Law for Righteousness to every one that believeth, so finishing transgression, and making an end of sin, and making reconciliation for iniquity.  
Answ. In this Article are two things to be considered, viz. First, what is believed: Secondly, wherefore it is believed. First, What is believed: The Confessor tells us, That the Righteousness, Redemption, and Salvation from the Curse of the Law, obtained by Believers, consists in the personal acts of Christ. Art. 15. pag. 9 But sure this is not consonant to the Scriptures of Truth, which declare them to be wrought and accomplished by the Sufferings of Christ; this Peter acknowledgeth, 1 Pet. 3.11. For Christ also hath once suffered for Sins. And if we come to particulars, the truth thereof will appear: For, First, How are we made Righteous? doth not the Apostle declare, 2 Cor. 5.21. He hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin, that you might be made the Righteousness of God in him. So that you see we obtain Righteousness by Christ's being made Sin; and if you would know how he was made sin, let the Prophet answer, Isa. 53.6. The Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all; as it is written, He bore our sins upon his own body on the Tree, 1 Pet. 2.24. and this was his Passion, and not his Personal act. Secondly, the Redemption of Christians is wrought by the shedding the blood of Christ, 1 Pet. 1.19. And sure if that was a personal act, it must be the personal act of the Soldier that pierced him, and not of Christ himself. Thirdly, Salvation from the Curse of the Law; the Apostle declares, Gal. 3.13. consisted in his being made a Curse for us; and how that was, the Apostle testifieth by his hanging on the Tree, viz. the Cross; and that also was the suffering and not the act of Christ, which as it ought to be distinguished by every Christian, so much more he that pretends himself a Preacher (who should show himself in all things a Workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of Truth, 2 Tim. 2.15.) ought to distinguish between doing and suffering, and that more particularly in this matter; for if Righteousness, Redemption, and Salvation had been performed by his personal acts, there had then been no need of his Death and Passion, the necessity whereof is declared by Christ himself, Luk. 24.46. (Thus it behoved the Christ to suffer) and confirmed by the Apostle, Acts 17.3. that the Christ must needs have suffered: wherefore it must be concluded that the aforesaid blessings were not effected by the personal acts of Christ. And therefore, although the Confessor (J. B. Epist.) presumeth a candid Christian may judge the root of the matter to be found in him; it may from what hath been said, be feared that the root is evil, and then it is easy to judge what the branches will be.  
But now in the second place, let us see wherefore the aforesaid Article is believed, I was enforced to consider it: because he urgeth it so emphatically, I believe therefore, as if there was something preceding that would demonstrate the truth thereof: But I have weighed both the precedent and consequent Articles, with the Scriptures annexed; and I profess I know not what he means by Therefore.  
The Article precedent is, I believe this very Child is both God and Man, the Christ of the Living God. 
J. B. Art. 14. pag. 8.  And the Scriptures annexed are, Luke 2.7, 12. Matth. 1.21, 22. But why he should say from thence; I believe therefore, etc. to me doth not appear.  
This Confessor tells us, 
J. B's. Epist.  That above eleven years he hath weighed, paused, examined, & paused again these Doctrines, and that in cold blood. Surely it demonstrates his instability to be so tedious a tract of time (to use his own words) in pausing and weighing; I wish that may not be true in him according to the words of Paul, 2 Tim. 3.7. Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the Truth: For hitherto his Judgement and Understanding (notwithstanding his long pausing) seems as cold as his blood.  
If any object, That it is written, Christ gave himself for us, laid down his life, was obedient to death; all which amount to acts of Christ.  
I Answ. 1. That the sufferings were all voluntary; that he readily condescended to obey his Father's Will, wherein we have cause to accept the Grace of Christ. But, 2. This was no act, viz. no Personal act of his: There may be a voluntary submission, a free condescension, even so far as we may be said to lay down our lives, to obey God, and yet no personal act. Christians are required to obey God in sufferings; and it is accounted an Obedience to God when we lose our lives for his sake; wherefore although I do extol the personal acts of Christ in the days of his Flesh, and desire to respect them in their own Sphere; yet I must conclude, as aforesaid, that those blessings are not wrought by his personal acts, but by his sufferings; as it is written, The Captain of our Salvation is made perfect through sufferings, Heb. 2.10. Christ hath also once suffered for us, that thereby he might bring us unto God, 1 Pet. 3.18.  
J.B. Art. 16. pag. 10. I do believe that for the completing of this work, he was always sinless; did always the things that pleased God's Justice, that every one of his acts, both of doing and suffering and rising again from the dead, was really and infinitely perfect, being done by him as God-man: Wherefore his acts before he died, are called, the Righteousness of God, his blood, the blood of God; and herein perceive we the love of God in that he laid down his life for us. The Godhead which gave virtue to all the acts of the humane nature, was then in perfect union with it, when he hanged upon the Cross for our sins.  
Answ. It is the advice of the Holy Ghost, 1 Pet. 4.11. That if any man speak, he should speak as the Oracles of God: But sure this Confessor's words are more like the Oracles of the Devils, that of old were accustomed to be given so ambiguous and obscure, that no body could understand them aright, yet they might be wrested to the understanding of any.  
Such is the matter of the aforesaid Article, wherein it is hard to determine what he means; unless it is that the Godhead of Christ suffered death: which although he doth not plainly declare, yet he doth imply (if he saith any thing); For (saith he) every one of his acts of suffering was really perfect, being done by him as God-man.  
I wonder that he (who pretends that he doth not abusively present to the Reader, any other Doctrine but what he holds, 
J. B's. Epistle.  professeth, and Preacheth) should be so abusive to himself and Doctrine, as to Preach and Print that which is so inconsistent with common sense.  
But to proceed; he saith, The Godhead which gave virtue to all the acts of the Humane Nature, was then in perfect union with it when he hanged upon the Cross: Now to be in perfect union, was to be even as that was, viz. hanged upon the Cross, and also dead; which sure the Confessor means; for he further urgeth, that therefore his blood was called the blood of God; and hereby perceive we the Love of God, in that he laid down his life for us.  
Now if this be his meaning, it is directly contrary unto Truth: for the Godhead that was equal with the Father, Phil. 2.6. with whom there is no variableness or shadow of turning, Jam. 1.17. an Eternal Spirit, immortal, etc. (as it hath neither flesh nor bones, Luk. 24.3.) cannot die, hath no blood to shed.  
Death and Immortality are not congruous; and therefore herein this Confessor is mistaken: for the death of Christ was only as he was man. And therefore it is said, Heb. 10.5. (When he cometh into the World) A body hast thou prepared me. If the Godhead could have died, there needed not the preparation of this body of flesh, but thereby (being made man) he became subject to death (which he was not before:) as it is written, Heb. 2.14, 15. Forasmuch as the Children are partakers of flesh and blood; he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death, he might destroy him that bade the power of death: wherefore he did not assume the nature of Angels, but the seed of Abraham, vers. 16. As it is said, Heb. 2.9. He was made a little lower than the Angels, for the suffering of death: This also our Confessor acknowledged, saying, (Art. 12.) The great reason why Christ clothed himself with our flesh and blood, was, that he might be capable of obtaining Redemption, and that was by his Death, even the death of the Manhood; As the Apostle saith, 1 Pet. 3.18. Being put to death in the flesh, in the body of his flesh, Col. 1.22. And therefore although some Scriptures, alleged by the Confessor, call the blood of Christ the blood of God, and God's Life; it must not be taken as properly spoken, but in respect to that conjunction between the Deity and Humanity; as figuratively Christ is said to be Hungry, Thirsty, Naked, etc. Matth. 25.42. when it is properly to be understood of his People, as himself saith, Inasmuch as ye did it not to the least of these, ye did it not to me: And in this sense God saith, He that toucheth you, toucheth the apple of mine eye, Zech. 2.8. In which sense also the aforesaid Scriptures may well be understood, although the Deity is Immortal.  
Touching divers other Articles of this Confessor's Creed, although stuffed with many profuse words and incongruities of speech, contrary to that advice, 2 Tim. 1.13. Hold fast the form of sound words, I shall say nothing at this time, but pass to Art. 19 pag. 13. I believe that the sufferings of Christ were all voluntary, that he readily condescended to obey his Father's Will, wherein we have cause to accept the Grace of Christ. But 2. this was no act, viz. no personal act of his. There may be a voluntary submission, a free condescension, even so far as we may be said to lay down our lives to obey God, and yet no personal act. Christians are required to obey God in suffering, and it is accounted an obedience to God when we lose our lives for his sake; wherefore although I do extol the personal acts of Christ in the days of his flesh, and desire to respect them in their own sphere, yet must conclude, as aforesaid, that those blessings are not wrought by his personal acts, but by his sufferings; As it's written, The Captain of our Salvation is made perfect through sufferings, Heb. 2.10. Christ hath also once suffered for us, that thereby he might bring us unto God, 1 Pet. 3.18.  
The Articles about Justification, Election, and Effectual Calling; which I shall only give you the sum of what he saith, collected (for brevity sake) out of them all, wherein he declareth That there is a Decree, Choice, or Election, 
J. B. Art. 3. pag. 26. Art. 7. pag. 30.  before the Foundation of the World, even that which contains in itself the Persons Elected, and the Graces that accompany their Salvation, which must be wrought in the hearts of such Persons, there being a necessity of the use and effect thereof, 
Art. 1. pag. 31.  because they are chosen, and therefore they, and they alone are effectually called; it being the fruit of Electing love; 
pag. 32.  which Call is a word that outgoeth all opposition, wherein the Voice of God is heard, the Gates of Heaven are opened; 
pag. 33.  there is an effectual awakening of the Soul, in reference to sin, 
pag. 34.  and the World to come; a sanctifying virtue, whereby Faith, Hope, 
pag. 35. pag. 36. pag. 37. pag. 28.  and Repentance are so necessarily produced, that there is not any impediment that can hinder their Conversion and Eternal Salvation; which things are thus effectually wrought only in those which before the World were appointed unto Glory; and the rest were blinded, 
pag. 23. pag. 24. pag. 31.  that as they will not, so they cannot hear and turn.  
Answ. Here you have an account of this Confessor's Faith, which he saith, (in his Epist.) he would have open to the view and judgement of all men: Wherein (although he is so confident, that he makes his appeal even to his Enemies) such unsoundness appears, as even strikes at the Justice of the God of Heaven, declaring him to be exceeding partial and unequal in his deal. For I appeal to the World, whether it must not be so, if John Bunyan's Doctrine aforesaid (although eleven years examined) be true.  
If God hath chosen to Salvation before the Foundation of the World any persons, without any respect to qualifications; or if he hath in their Election ordained, That they shall be supplied with such Grace which shall of necessity produce the Effects intended, and that so beyond all opposition, that there is no impediment can hinder their Conversion and Eternal Salvation: And again, Hath blinded others, that they cannot hear, or turn: What respect of persons, without control is this? Yea, what iniquity and injustice is it which J. B. declares? But far be it from our God: Shall not the Judge of all the Earth do right? Whom that I may (according to my abilities) vindicate to the world against John Bunyan and his groundless Creed, I shall first endeavour to show his deceit; Secondly, I shall demonstrate the righteous deal of our God in behalf of the Salvation of mankind. Wherein consider these things in opposition to John Bunyan's Creed, viz.  
1. That God doth not Elect any man unto Salvation, without respect to qualifications foreseen.  
2. That there is not any such Eternal purpose of God, which necessarily produceth John Bunyan 's Effectual Call.  
3. There is no such Call as is beyond all opposition.  
4. There is not any such Estate as no impediment can hinder the Conversion and Salvation of a man.  
5. There is no Person originally so far blinded by the God of Heaven, that they cannot hear, and turn to him.  
These things, although Negatives, I shall Essay to demonstrate to be (although contrary to John Bunyan) consonant to Truth, by the ensuing Arguments: viz.  
Arg. 1. If God Electeth some Persons without respect to qualifications fore-seen; Then there is respect of Persons with God: But there is no respect of Persons with God; Ergo.  
The Major is undeniable; for if there be no respect to qualifications, there must be respect of persons, or respect to nothing. Peradventure it will be said, that there is respect to nothing, it is of God's mere will and pleasure: whereto I shall Answer, That if God looking upon every man alike, viz. without respect to any qualifications, chooseth one and not another, it is partiality; and therefore the Major appeareth true.  
The Minor is evidently proved, Rom. 2.11. 1 Pet. 1.17. and positively affirmed, Acts 10.34. I know of a truth (saith Peter) that God is no respecter of persons: which afterwards he demonstrates, vers. 35. In every Nation, he that feareth God, and worketh Righteousness (he doth not say he that is Elected) is accepted of him.  
Arg. 2. If God hath from the beginning Elected any persons to Salvation, without respect to qualifications fore-seen: Then the Sentence shall not pass at the last Day, and Judgement be rendered to every man according to their works. But the Sentence at the last Day shall pass, and Judgement be rendered to every man according to their works. Ergo.  
The Major is plain; for if it shall be according to our works, than not according to such Election; if it be of Election as aforesaid, than not according to works.  
The Minor is confirmed, 1 Pet. 1.17. Matth. 16.27. and Rom. 2.6. where it is said, God will render to every man according to his deeds; and vers. 7. speaking of Eternal Life, he saith, It shall be rendered to them who by patiented continuing in well-doing, seek for glory, honour, and immortality. Christ also declares, Rev. 22.12. That at his coming he will give to every man (without exception) according as his works shall be.  
Arg. 3. If those men that are saved, are saved through Election without respect to qualifications; Then must the residue be reprobated without respect to qualifications. But God reprobates not man without respect to qualification. Ergo.  
The Major is evident; for if there be a certain number Elected, the residue must be damned, let their qualifications be what they will: The consideration whereof, hath induced Learned men to blaspheme, saying, That God ordained men to sin, that he might justly accomplish his Determination; So saith Zanchius, Reprobates are held so fast under God's Almighty Decree, that they cannot but sin and perish. And again he saith, There lieth upon Reprobates, by the power of their unchangeable reprobation, a necessity of sinning, yea of sinning unto death without Repentance; and consequently of perishing everlastingly, Zanch. lib. 5. de Nat. Dei. The same also saith Piscator; Reprobates are precisely appointed to sin, that they might be justly punished. Piscat. resp. ad dupl. vorst. part. 1. pag. 220.  
Maccovius also was of this mind, saying, God did will sin, ordain men to sin, that he might justly accomplish his determination. Macc. disp. 17. pag. 11.  
Thus you see the Major is acknowledged by those that believe such an Election as J. B. describes.  
The Minor I shall prove thus, viz.  
Arg. 4. If God reprobates any man without respect to qualifications; Then are not his tender mercies over all his works. But God's tender mercies are over all his works. Ergo.  
The Major is unquestionable; for sure no mercy (much less tender mercy) can be to that man reprobated (and that without respect to qualifications) to Eternal damnation.  
The Minor is proved, Psal. 145.9. The Lord is good to all (without exception) and his tender mercies are over all his works.  
This that hath been said, may suffice also to show, that there is no such Eternal purpose, which necessarily produceth John Bunyan's Effectual Call: For the aforesaid Arguments have the same validity against that, as the former Proposition. I come therefore now to show you that there is no such Call as John Bunyan pretends to be beyond all opposition. Which I shall prove thus: viz.  
Arg. 5. If God's Call is ofttimes rejected, his Spirit resisted, and his Counsel despised; Then his Call is not beyond all opposition: But God's Call is ofttimes rejected, his Spirit resisted, and his Counsel despised. Ergo.  
I think I may spare the proof of the Major; for sure, unless (as J. B. seems to do) you will so distinguish in this case, as if God did not Call those that reject it, with such an intention as he doth others: (as Piscator presumes to affirm, That although God commands Reprobates to believe the Gospel, yet he will not have them believe. And again, God doth not offer Grace to those that are Called, with an intent to give it. And he further saith, Though God in words protest that he would have Reprobates believe, yet indeed he will not have them. Piscat. contra. Scasm. pag. 60, pag. 74, pag. 143.) which I hope you will not, lest you make the God of Heaven as deceitful as the false Gods, whom the Poets feign, did once set Tantallus up to the Chin in a goodly River, under a Tree full of beautiful Fruit, which hung even to his Nose; but so, that he could neither reach the fruit, nor stoop to the water to drink: which far be it from the Lord, who is true and holy in all his words and actions.  
Wherefore I shall proceed to the proof of the Minor, which is evident, Prov. 1.24. I have called, but you have refused. Acts 7.51. Ye have always resisted the Holy Spirit, ye have set at nought all my Counsel, Prov. 1.25.  
The next thing I come to, is to show that there are impediments which hinder the Conversion and Salvation of men; which will thus appear:  
Arg. 6. If God useth such means with the Unconverted as is sufficient for their Conversion, and yet they continue unconverted; Then something in themselves is an impediment: But God useth such means with the Unconverted as is sufficient for their Conversion, and yet they continue unconverted: Ergo.  
The Major is true; for if the means be sufficient, and such means used by the God of Heaven, their own obstinay must hinder.  
The Minor I prove from the words of Christ to Chorazin and Bethsaida, Matth. 11.21. If the mighty works which have been done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repent long ago. Now hereby it appeareth, That the means used with Chorazin and Bethsaida, would have been sufficient for the Conversion of Tyre and Sidon; and if so, why not to them? Surely because they were more obstinate. So that we must conclude, that was an impediment which did hinder their Conversion, and consequently their Salvation.  
But further concerning Salvation, I offer this:  
Arg. 7. If the Righteous man may turn from his Righteousness, put away a good Conscience, and make shipwreck of Faith; Then something may impede his Salvation: But a Righteous man may turn from his Righteousness, put away a good Conscience, and make shipwreck of Faith: Ergo.  
The Major is undeniable: and the Minor I prove, Ezek. 18.24. When the righteous man turneth from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, he shall die: Hymeneus and Alexander put away a good Conscience, and made shipwreck of Faith, 1 Tim. 1.19. Wherefore also Paul saith, 1 Cor. 9.27. I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection, lest that by any means when I have Preached to others, I myself should be a castaway. It seems Paul was not of J. B's mind, to think that no impediment could hinder his Salvation, for than he would not have used these words, Lest that by any means, I myself should be a castaway: But he thought and knew, as it was said of Eli to Samuel, 1 Sam. 2.30. They that despise me, shall be lightly esteemed; As the Lord said by Oded, 2 Chron. 15.2. If ye forsake me, I will forsake you: Whereof David did advisedly admonish Solomon, 1 Chron. 28.9. If thou forsake thy God, he will cast thee off for ever.  
I proceed now to the last thing, viz. To show you that no Persons are originally so far blinded by the God of Heaven, that they cannot turn to to him: which is thus proved;  
Arg. 1. If God doth so blind any man, Then he is willing that some should perish: But God is not willing that any should perish: Ergo.  
The Major is plain; for God must needs be willing to that which himself is the cause of.  
The Minor is proved, 1 Pet. 3.9. The Lord is not willing that any should perish. He confirms it by an Oath, (which ought to put an end to all strife, Heb. 6.16.) and because he could swear by no greater, he swears by himself; As I live, saith the Lord (Ezek. 33.11.) I have no pleasure (at all) in the death of the wicked, but desire that he may turn from his sin and live.  
Arg. 2. If God doth so blind men (viz. originally); Then their unbelief is no sin: But the unbelief of any man is sin: Ergo.  
The Major is plain; for if they cannot believe, it is no sin; our Proverb saith, Necessity hath no Law; and the Scripture saith, Where there is no Law, there is no Transgression: And it is true in this case, as John Bunyan himself confesseth, Laws themselves must give place sometimes for the profit of the Church, pag. 111. (I will not assent to that): But for the proof of the Major, I say, if they must give place for the profit of the Church, much more when necessity may be pleaded. No King would account that a fault which his Subjects cannot help; which is the case with men if they be blinded as aforesaid.  
The Minor is clearly proved, Joh. 16.9. The Spirit shall convince the World of sin, because they believe not on me: It seems it is such an apparent sin, as men themselves shall be convinced thereof.  
Arg. 3. If God doth originally so blind men; Then some men shall be excusable at the Day of Judgement: But no man shall be excusable at the Day of Judgement: Ergo.  
The Major is undeniable; for what better excuse than to say, Lord, thou didst so blind me, that I could not hear, or turn; it was thy own act, O Lord, I could not any ways help it; I was bound in the fetters of determined blindness, to do even contrary to mine own will, that thy destiny might be accomplished, (this Calvin saith, The Reprobate are not only held fast in God's fetters, so as they cannot do as thy would, but are also urged and forced by God's bridle to do as he would have them. And again, That Men have nothing in agitation, that they bring nothing into action, but what God by his secret direction hath ordered, Calv. Instit. lib. 1. chap. 17. sect. 11. Chap. 18. sect. 1.) Wherefore, O Lord, how could I avoid my impenitency and incredulity! and wilt thou punish me for that which I could not help; even for that which is the effect of thy Almighty Decree! that, Lord, be far from thee, who hast declared, Acts 17.31. That thou wilt judge the World in Righteousness. This surely would be a sufficient excuse.  
The Minor is proved, Rom. 2.1. Rom. 3.19. Every mouth shall be stopped: Thou art inexcusable whosoever thou art that judgest. The truth whereof will hereafter (through God's assistance) be more abundantly demonstrated.  
Thus the Error of John Bunyan's Faith is discovered, and that the contrary may further appear, I come now to show you, in vindication of our God, his righteous deal with mankind.  
Wherein touching Election, know, That God hath, from before the Foundation of the World, chosen some in Christ Jesus to Eternal Salvation; but not without respect to qualifications: For, though no qualification of ours was the efficient cause of our Election, yet God having testified his good pleasure concerning Man, in Christ Jesus, whose Sacrifice he was pleased graciously to accept, as a Propitiation for our sins; in him he is pleased also to declare his acceptation of all those who shall obey his will declared in Christ Jesus; not as any thing merited by us, but the effect of his everlasting kindness, wherein he was pleased to choose unto Salvation all those whom he foresaw to continue obedient to his holy Will; according to what is said, Rom. 8.29. Whom he did foreknow, he also did Predestinate, etc. determining that the rest should be damned, because of their disobedience, in not harkening to his Counsel, and not submitting to his holy Desires; which are frustrated through their obstinacy, thereby treasuring up to themselves wrath against the day of wrath, Rom. 2.4. contrary to the good pleasure of God, who endeavoured earnestly their Salvation. Now this Election is warranted by the Scriptures, as 1 Pet. 1.2. Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through Sanctification of the Spirit. Now what is the Sanctification of the Spirit; but when the heart being enlightened by the Spirit of God, is induced to accept of Grace offered, and to walk suitable thereto? And this being fore-seen, the Apostle declares our Election to be according to the foreknowledge of God, in respect of those qualifications considered; As Paul saith, 2 Thess. 2.13. God hath from the beginning chosen you to Salvation, through Sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the Truth. Now that cannot be without respect to qualifications, which you see is through such apparent qualifications, as is further plainly demonstrated, in the considerations of the deal of God with men in general; wherein I shall show you how God invites every man to obey his Will, that they may be saved; yea, strives with them to bring them to Repentance, and also waiteth long in expectation of the effects of the powerful working of his Holy Spirit in their hearts; promising Salvation according to his everlasting purpose, to all those that obey him, and threatening damnation (although with much lamentation) to those that obstinately despise him: which sure must needs be inconsistent with such an absolute Election as is pretended by John Bunyan; Which therefore I shall proceed to do in order; First, showing you the invitations of God: there is no Prophet silent therein, he calls by Ezekiel, Chap. 18.30. Repent, and turn from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin. As if he should say, Be not mistaken in yourselves, neither do ye mistake me, as to think I have determined your destruction: for if you repent, you shall live. Wherefore it is added, vers. 31. Cast away all your transgressions, etc. for why will you die, O House of Israel? God doth frequently call upon sinners; yea, rising up betimes, and sending, to procure their Repentance, because he hath compassion upon them, 2 Chron. 36.15. As Jeremiah witnesseth, Jer. 25.4. The Lord sent unto you all his Servants the Prophets, rising early and sending, saying, Turn ye every one from his evil way, and from the evil of his do. Now to what purpose was all this, if God had determined either their sin or their damnation? But hear what Solomon saith, Prov. 1.20. Wisdom crieth without, she uttereth her voice in the streets, she crieth in the chief place of concourse, in the openings of the Gates; in the City she uttereth her words, saying, How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity, and Scorners delight in their scourning, and Fools hate knowledge? turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my Spirit upon you; I will make known my words unto you: As it is further declared, Chap. 8.1. Doth not Wisdom cry, and Understanding put forth her voice? It is answered, vers. 2. She standeth in the top of the high places; she crieth at the Gates, at the entry of the City, at the coming in of the Doors: Unto you, O men, I call, and my voice is to the Sons of men; O ye Simple, understand Wisdom, and ye Fools be ye of an understanding heart. Consider the gracious and general invitations of the God of Heaven; he calleth and inviteth men to the obedience of his holy Will; yea, even the worst of men, Fools, Simple ones, and Scorners; and not only such who were so originally, but even those who continued so; as appears Chap. 1. vers. 24. Because I called, and you did not answer; therefore shall destruction come upon you as a whirlwind. Yet these persons did the Lord invite, persuading them by the motives of Grace, and entreating them by familiar expressions of kindness, as Paul saith, 2 Cor. 5.20. We then are Ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us; We pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled unto God. What expressions of mercy are here! was ever the like Grace heard of! which is again found in that text so full of love, Isa. 55.1. Ho, every one that thirsteth; Come ye to the Waters, Come freely; he that hath no money, come buy and eat; yea, come buy Wine and Milk without money and without price. (O great Grace!) Wherefore (saith the Lord) do ye spend money for that which is not bread? Harken diligently unto me; incline your ear, and hear: and come unto me, and your Soul shall live: What promises and gracious invitations are here! (Is this consistent with God's blinding of men? Is it likely that the only wise God should speak thus to such as he knows cannot hear or turn? surely nay). Christ himself calls, Matth. 11.28. Come unto me all ye that labour, and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Not only so, but God also strives with wicked men (and that very forcibly) to bring them to Repentance; As it is written, Rom. 10.21. All the day long have I stretched forth my hand (even) to a disobedient and gainsaying People. Now what is it for God to stretch forth his hand? Is it because God hath hands as we have? No: but the hand of God is taken in Scripture sometimes for the Power of God, as Exod. 3.20. I will stretch forth my hand and smite Egypt: Yea, sometimes it is taken for his Mercy, as Isa. 66.14. The hand of the Lord shall be towards his People. So that for God to stretch forth his hand to the wicked, is to strive with them by his Power, and manifestation of Grace. Thus God strove with back-sliding Ephrahim, Hos. 11.3. I taught Ephraim to go, I drew them with the cords of a man, with the bands of love; and I was to them as they that take off the yoke on their jaws; and I laid meat unto them. What expressions of love are these! I am not able furthey to illustrate them; none knoweth better this Declaration of the deal of God, than a tender Nurse, who taketh great care of her little Babes, and useth great pains with them: Even so doth the Lord with Sinners; yea with All, as Christ saith, Joh. 12.32. And I, if I be lifted up from the Earth, will draw all men unto me. Christ draweth; the Father draweth; he strives earnestly with men by his holy Spirit; which being resisted, he saith, My Spirit shall not always strive with man, Gen. 6.3. What shall we say to this? Did the Spirit of God strive with these Rebellious men (who died in their iniquity) or did it not? If you say it did, then is the truth of the matter granted, and God's Grace to damned persons acknowledged; but if you will say it did not, what meaneth then this speech, My Spirit shall not always strive? Surely therefore we may conclude, there was a time when God did strive with them by his Spirit; yea, by the same powerful Spirit that raised Christ from the dead; As it is written, 1 Pet. 3.18, 19 Quickened by the Spirit; by which also he went and preached to the Spirits now in Prison, which were sometime disobedient in the days of Noah while the Ark was preparing. What is it for Christ to preach by his Spirit, but by the operation of his Spirit, to enlighten, and convince the Sons of men: This he did to the old World, and this he doth to every man, Joh. 1.9. Christ is the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the World.  
Quest. But peradventure you will say, If God dealeth thus graciously, what is the reason men continue in disobedience?  
Answ. Not because God doth so blind them that they cannot hear and turn (as Joh. Bunyan saith) nor because God doth not work powerfully in their hearts; yea, so powerfully as to afford them, sufficient means to obey his Will, (as Moses saith, Deut. 30.14. The Word is nigh thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it)?  
Quest. But if then you further ark the Reason?  
Answ. I say, It is through their own obstinacy, and perverseness, whereby they do despite to the Spirit of Grace, as it is said, Rom. 2.4. Despisest thou the riches of his Grace, not regarding the goodness of God that leadeth thee to Repentance; but after thy hardness, and impenitent heart, thou treasurest up to thyself wrath against the day of Wrath. God leads to Repentance, but his goodness is despised; Man through the hardness of his heart, treasureth up wrath against himself; resisting the motions of God's Spirit; as Stephen said, Acts 7.51. Ye have always resisted the Holy Ghost, as did your Fathers, so do ye: As it is witnessed by that pitiful complaint of our Saviour, Matth. 23.37. How often would I have gathered thy Children together, as a Hen gathereth her Chickens under her wings, but ye would not? This obstinacy of man is the cause of his ruin, God sent his Prophets, but they would not hear, 2 Chron. 24.19. They pulled away the shoulder, stopped their ears, and made their hearts hard as an Adamant stone, lest they should hear the words which the Lord sent in his Spirit by his Prophets, Zech. 7.12. And therefore wicked men are charged with doing despite to the Spirit of Grace, Heb. 10.29. So that in truth it is wilful and obstinate disobedience that men are guilty of in not harkening to the Lord.  
God would have them obey his voice, but they will not; yet to manifest his Grace he waits abundantly for the Effects of the operation of his holy Spirit, and giveth space of Repentance, Rev. 2.21. that so he might win them to himself by his long-suffering; and therefore be waits that he may be gracious, Isa. 30.18. by his long-suffering, leading Sinners to Repentance, Rom. 2.4. as Peter saith, The Lord is long suffering, not willing that any should perish, 2 Pet. 3.9. M●●●ing till there is no remedy, 2 Chron. 36.16. Which we have evidently described by a Simile, Jer. 6.29. The Bellows are burnt, the Lead is consumed in the fire, the Founder melteth in vain, for the wicked are not plucked away. The Lord here alludes to a Refiner, who taketh great pains in the Refining a Mass of Silver; and exerciseth such patience, as to wait till the Lead (which Refiners use to put in for the better purifying the Silver) is consumed, and (through the extremity of heat) the Bellows burnt; so that all his labour is (more than) in vain: (thus God deals with men) whereof he complains, Isa. 49.4. I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain: Insomuch that (in justification of himself against John Bunyan and such others) he appeals to his Enemies in the case, viz. Judge, I pray you, what could I have done more for Sinners than I have done? Isa. 5.4. I have given my Son to redeem them from death, and in him I have also offered them Eternal Salvation, which I have invited them to embrace; and also endeavoured to effect in their hearts, by the motions of my holy Spirit, for the operation whereof I have waited, even until I perceived all my endeavours to be in vain; my Spirit is resisted, and in despite thereof they have persisted in wickedness, wherein what could I have done more, or what can I now do? save only bewail their folly, in that they should so (against my will) forsake their own mer●●●●… Jona 2.8. and that also the Lord frequently doth; he grieveth for the destruction of Sinners, Jer. 4.19. My bowels, my bowels; I am pained at my very heart: Not that God hath Bowels or an Heart like men, but the bowels of the Father are his tender mercies, and great compassion, being unwilling to punish; For the Lord doth not afflict willingly, nor grieve the Children of Men, Lam. 3.33. It is hard with the Lord (viz. against his good pleasure) How (saith he) shall I give thee up (O backsliding) Ephraim? How shall I deliver thee (to death) (O sinful) Israel? How shall I make thee as Adama? How shall I set thee as Zeboim? My heart is turned within me, my repentings are kindled together, Hos. 11.8. Thus the Son of God, being like unto his Father in compassion, when he beheld Jerusalem, Luk. 19.41, 42. he wept over it, because they would not know the things that belong to their peace; he was grieved for the hardness of their hearts, Mark 3.5. wishing it had been otherwise; O that thou hadst harkened to my Commandments, Isa. 48.18. O that Israel had walked in my ways, Psa. 81.16. What great compassion is this? what demonstrations of love are here? When Jesus wept for Lazarus, Joh. 11.35. The Jews looked upon it as a great demonstration of love: and is it not so in God towards Sinners? When David wept after Abner's Bier, and bewailed him, it is said, 2 Sam. 3.37. That all Israel understood that day, that the death of Abner was not of the King; but far contrary to his mind: And surely also we may conclude (from what hath been alleged) that the death of Sinners is not of our God, he never determined any such thing; neither is he any ways the cause thereof, it is far from him; whereby, as we may perceive the death of Sinners is altogether of themselves, and not by or through God's blinding them. So the order of his Election may be perceived contrary to John Bunyan's Faith; the Confession whereof I have now done with: (having offered thus much, because that God is much dishonoured, and many People deceived through the not understanding these things); I come now to the Reason of his Practice in Worship.  
J.B. pag. 48. Wherein he first distinguisheth between those with whom he dares not have Communion, and those with whom he dares (have Communion with, I suppose he means.)  
Concerning what he saith touching those with whom he dare not have Communion, I shall leave him unto himself; only take notice, That those who do not profess Faith and Holiness, yea, the open Profane, may be nearer Heaven than those that pretend great Zeal without Knowledge. Our Saviour said of old, Matth. 21.31. That the Publicans and Harlots enter into the Kingdom of God before you.  
But I shall now consider what J. B. saith concerning whom he dare; which he thus declares, I dare have Communion, yea, Church-Communion with those that are visible Saints by calling; with those that by the Word of the Gospel have been brought over to Faith and Holiness. pag. 65. Although (as afterwards he declares, as well as in his Title Page) they descent about Water-Baptism.  
Answ. If J. Bunyan had only said this, I know not who would have gainsaid; nay, if he had told us, that he could have Communion with the Church of Rome; I know not who would have opposed him, except the Catholics themselves, who peradventure (considering the Errors of his Faith) would not judge him fit for Communion with them.  
But John Bunyan proceeds to persuade others to do the same, and therefore he urgeth greatly the reason of his Practice, to draw Disciples after him. I wish the event be not as Christ said to the Pharisees, Matt. 23.15. Ye compass Sea and Land to make one Proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the Child of Hell.  
But before we judge, let us hear him speak, let us weigh what is said therein; I readily perceive he hath learned what Solomon saith, Prov. 1.17. That in vain is the Net spread in the sight of any Bird: Wherefore by crafty insinuations, and subtle evasions, he endeavoureth to darken Counsel, the better to undermine the hearts of the weak, that his deceit might not be discovered.  
Wherefore not suddenly coming to the matter, he endeavoureth by fair pretences (although mixed with tautologies and incongruous relations) to pre-engage the Reader.  
Quest. And then (at length) propounds this question, pag. 70. By what rule would you receive him into Fellowship?  
To which he answers himself thus; Even by a discovery of their Faith and Holiness, and their declaration of willingness to subject themselves to the Laws and Government of Christ in his Church.  
Quest. This answer being given, he offers a second question, viz. But do you not count that by Water-Baptism, and not otherwise, that being the initiating and entering Ordinance, they ought to be received into Fellowship?  
To this he presumes to answer, No:  
Answ. If I understand this answer, it denies Baptism to be a discovery of Faith and Holiness, or a declaration of willingness to subject to the Laws of Christ in his Church; for the Question is, Do you not count that by Water-baptism, etc. which must have respect to the former description of his Rule, wherein (it seems) Water-Baptism hath now no part, and in truth it must be so excluded (by J. Bunyan's opinion) for otherwise that (in despite of what he hath said) would be the Rule proposed by himself.  
But herein hath not John Bunyan forgot himself? Pag. 64. he acknowledgeth Water-baptism to be an Ordinance of Christ, a holy Ordinance, a duty enjoined to such as have received the Gospel before, yet now he denies it to be a discovery of Faith and Holiness, or a declaration of willingness to subject to the Laws of Christ in his Church. pag. 122, 123.  
What impudent Contradictions are here! an Ordinance of Christ, an holy Ordinance, a duty enjoined to Gospel-Receivers, and yet no discovery of Faith, Is not Faith discovered by Works? Jam. 2.17. And by what works, if not obedience to Christ's Ordinances, to holy Ordinances, to enjoined duties, I know not, surely? what, if not this, discovers Faith?  
Again, an Ordinance of Christ, an holy Ordinance, a Duty enjoined, and yet no discovery of Holiness? Is it not Holiness itself to obey Christ's Ordinances; his holy Ordinances; to perform duties enjoined? Thus the wise are taken in their own craftiness; 1 Cor. 3.19.  
Further, Is not a real subjection to Christ's Ordinances, a real performance of those Duties enjoined us, the best declaration of a willingness thereto? yet all this John Bunyan is pleased positively to deny; although he doth not only confess concerning Baptism as aforesaid, viz. That it is an Ordinance of Christ, an holy Ordinance, a Duty enjoined: But further tells us, It is of excellent use to the Church. pag. 64.  
But what is that? It seems it is no discovery of Faith, nor Holiness, nor a willingness to subject to Christ's Laws (it is of no use in these things) nor of any use in Church-Communion, what excellent use is it then of?  
John Bunyan answers; It is a representation of the Death and Resurrection of Christ; an help to our Faith; yea, meet to instruct us in the most weighty matters of the Kingdom of God, pag. 64, 65.  
Reply. Well said, John Bunyan! it seems now Baptism is good for something; the Devils sometimes were enforced to confess Christ, (saying, Mark 3.11. Luk. 4.34, 41. We know thee who thou art, Jesus the Holy One of God) although they were his great Enemies: Even so J. B. is (in this) inconsistent (not only to Truth, but also) to himself; for sure the obedience to such an Ordinance as is ordained by Christ; a representation of his Death and Resurrection, a help to our Faith, an instruction in the most weighty matters of the Kingdom of God, an enjoined Duty; is a discovery of Faith and Holiness, and a declaration of subjection to Christ's Laws.  
And if so, than it is the Rule of Communion John Bunyan himself proposeth in his aforementioned description, pag. 70. and so the cause he hath wilfully lost: but no marvel that men are deceived, when they stand up against the Ordinances of Christ.  
But tarry; We must not conclude, he saith, Baptism is no initiating or entering Ordinance into Church-Communion; and herein is the mistake, to think it is so; because in time past Baptism was administered upon conversion. pag. 70.  
Answ. If by time past, he meaneth the Apostle's days (which I presume he doth: for he further confesseth that Water-baptism in the Primitive times was generally submitted to before Church-Communion, pag. 91, 92.)  
I wonder where is the greatest mistake, whether in John Bunyan's vilifying the Ordinances of Baptism; or in the observation thereof (according (as himself confesseth) the Practice of the Primitive Church; and that upon Conversion before Communion? sure there can be no mistake in following so good a pattern.  
But he proceeds to tell us, The Word doth not testify it to be an initiating Ordinance. pag. 70.  
Answ. What testimony need we have further than your own Confession, (out of thy own mouth thou shalt be judged); Is not the Primitive pattern, their general Practice, a sufficient testimony? Doth not the word of the Scripture enjoin us to follow that Example? But peradventure J. B. would have a plain Text to say Baptism is an initiating Ordinance: wherein I commend John Bunyan in putting the question into such terms, as he well knew were not to be found expressly in the Scripture: he thought it would make most for his advantage, and might carry the best gloss in the denial; which to illustrate, he tells you, pag. 71. It wants the nature and power of such an Ordinance; for that which is the initiating Ordinance (saith he) doth give to the partakers a being of Church-membership in that particular Church, by which it is administered, without the addition of another Church-act; And this he endeavoureth to prove by the Example of Circumcision, which (saith he, pag. 71.) was to the Jews an initiating Ordinance, whereby they were made forthwith Church-members; and also none so accounted, nor admitted, but those that did partake thereof.  
Answ. His proofs for what is here said are various, although when enquired into, there is no such thing to be found, and therefore I may say it is a deceit of J. B; for (as he saith of Baptism, so must I say of Circumcision) by the Word there is no such thing to be found. Where is Circumcision called expressly in Scripture, an initiating Ordinance? yet J. B. is pleased so to call it; upon far less grounds than there is for Baptism so to be called: for if Circumcision was such an Ordinance as he describes, what must be said of Sarai, Rebeka, Deborah, and all the holy Women of old, who at once John Bunyan shuts the Church-door against, and will not suffer them to enter.  
It is well God's thoughts are not like men's. Surely I might upon better grounds than J. B. prove, That some uncircumcised persons were admitted to Church-fellowship. For if uncircumcised persons were admitted into the Temple of God to pray there, etc. Then uncircumcised persons were Church-Members; for the Temple was more peculiar, than the Passeover: But Anna, and divers Holy Women (uncircumcised persons) did reside in the Temple. Ergo.  
Yea further; if I should say, Holy Women did eat the Passeover, I suppose I should not be gainsaid: although it overthrows John Bunyan's position: but we see this, like the Sodomites, that whilst they endeavoured to break open the door of Lot's house, they were so smitten with blindness, that they could not find the doors of their own, Gen. 19.11. this astonished them. But John Bunyan is more obdurate, for he yet persists in the defamation of Baptism, and tells us, p. 74. First, There was none debarred or threatened to be cut off from the Church, if not first baptised, Secondly, That Baptism doth not give a being of Membership in this or that particular Church, by whose Members the Parties are baptised.  
Answ. First, how can J. Bunyan expect any instance to be given of the debarring of any unbaptized Person, when that (by his own Confession, pag. 91.) in the Primitive times they were (generally even all Disciples) baptised upon Conversion? And if so, much less can it be expected to find any threatened to be cut off from the Church, because not first baptised, there not being in those days such an Heretic hatched as would so explode Baptism.  
To the second, That Baptism doth not give a being of Membership into this or that particular Church.  
I answer, It is not required, if considered distinctly, neither did Circumcision so; although much boasted of. Did Circumcision give a being of Membership in particular Churches distinct; one Person to be a member at Jerusalem, another at Capernaum, etc. and there only? No surely; he that was a member in one place, was a member in all; and therefore J. Bunyan's needless questions and assertions, pag. 74. might have been spared; for the Eunuch, Cornelius, Lydia, the Samaritans, etc. were accepted as Church-members in general, and so of every Church in particular, and that even upon their Baptism, although this Anti-Baptism would have you believe that in the second of the Acts, Baptism, and adding to the Church, appear to be two distinct things; whom I would have remember Solomon his advice, Prov. 30.6. Add thou not to his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.  
But John Bunyan is now grown positive, and confidently saith, pag. 76. Take it again; Baptism makes thee no member of the Church, neither particular nor universal: neither doth it make thee a visible Saint: It therefore gives thee neither right to, nor being of Membership at all.  
Answ. Here is a brave flourish; but an impudent assertion, contrary to truth: but no marvel that you find him contrary to truth, who is contrary to almost all Christians, yea to himself, and that often in one little Book. Wherefore, although he excludes Baptism so utterly, as to say it doth not make us members at all; yet I shall affirm that Baptism in a sense (yea, in a great measure) doth make us Church-members, which also J. Bunyan doth confess, and that from the Example of the Primitive Saints: For he acknowledgeth, pag. 70. That in the Primitive times Baptism was administered upon Conversion; yea, he further grants, pag. 91. That in the Apostles days Water-Baptism went before Church-Membership.  
Now that which was administered upon the Conversion of Persons; yea, before they were Church-members, and thereupon to be accounted Church-members, (which John Bunyan in his right mind is forced to acknowledge of Baptism); sure must be said in a great measure to make us Church-members; and Baptism being so administered in the Primitive times, is it not necessary it should be so now? Can we alter the Primitive manner of receiving into the Church, without being guilty of great iniquity? aught we not to follow the Examples of the Primitive Churches?  
Since I have proceeded thus far, having now the appearance of so good grounds, I shall (through God's assistance) adventure to prove the necessity thereof, (not being at all affrighted with J. Bunyan's opprobrious censures), wherein if I should affirm Baptism to be an initiating Ordinance, it would appear to be true by John Bunyan's own Confession.  
Arg. 1. For that which ought to be administered upon Conversion, before Church-membership, is an initiating Ordinance: But Baptism ought to be administered before Church-membership upon Conversion: Ergo.  
The Major I suppose none will deny; the Minor I prove thus:  
Arg. 2. If Baptism was so administered in the Primitive Churches; Then it ought to be so now: But Baptism was so administered in the Primitive Churches: Ergo.  
The Minor is J. Bunyan's own grant, pag. 70. pag. 91. The Major is proved, 1 Thess. 4.1. where the Apostle beseecheth and exhorteth, and that by the Lord Jesus, That Saints should walk as we have received from them; yea, in 2 Thess. 3.6. he commands the Churches in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw from every one that walketh so disorderly; viz. not according to the Traditions of the Apostles.  
Again; Is not Baptism called (Heb. 5.12. & Chap. 6.1, 2.) one of the first Principles of the Oracles of God, a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ, part of the Foundation? and what is that but an initiating or entering Ordinance? Is not the laying the foundation of an house a great entrance to the building? So is Baptism in the practice of Christianity? And are not the first Principles in any Matter or Doctrine, the initiating or entering thereinto? The same is Baptism, as aforesaid, in Christianity. I might evidently set forth that it may truly be so called: but leaving that denomination, I shall (touching the Controversy in hand) state this Proposition, viz.  
That Baptism is a duty necessarily to be observed by Christians in obedience to God, and in order to Church-Communion: I say, necessarily to be observed; for some things are lawful for a Christian, but not expedient: Some things again are expedient, but not necessary; but other things are necessary and must be done, of which sort is Baptism. This Christ himself testifieth, Matth. 3.15. Thus it behooveth us, (mark) he speaketh not particularly of himself, but also of his followers, us: And also he saith, Thus it behoveth, Oportet nos: we must do thus to fulfil God's righteous Commands. When Paul was miraculously converted, he was Commanded by the Lord, to go into the City, and there it should be told him what he must do, Acts 9.6. and what that was appears from the words of Ananias, rehearsed by Paul himself, Acts 22.16. Arise and be baptised; This Peter showeth the necessity of, 1 Pet. 3.21. by a figurative demonstration, speaking of the Ark of Noah, Wherein few (that is eight Souls) were saved by Water: The like figure whereunto, (saith he) Baptism, doth also now save us.  
Surely, the Ark was so necessary for their Salvation (viz. their preservation from death) that only they that were therein were saved; and the Apostle tells you Baptism is the like: but (as he afterwards explains) not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good Conscience towards God.  
Now how necessary a good Conscience is, and how much to be pressed after, I think I need not tell you; and Baptism is the answer of a good Conscience towards God, it is so venerable an Ordinance (notwithstanding John Bunyan is pleased to slight it, saying, pag. 104. We are not the better if we do it, or the worse if we do it not: not the better (saith he) before God, nor the worse before men). That those who are subject thereto, are said, Luk. 7.29. to justify God, (what greater applause can men have) and on the contrary those that do not submit thereto, reject the Counsel of God against themselves: and must not this be concluded to be a necessary duty? yea surely, it was Commanded by Christ himself, Matth. 28.19. to be administered to all Disciples; Disciple all Nations, baptising them, etc. teaching them (that are so baptised) to observe the same, vers. 20. in the performance whereof Christ hath promised his continual Presence: wherefore Peter gave this counsel to the distressed Jews, Act. 2.38. (that cried out in great terror, What shall we do?) Repent and be baptised every one of you. As this was his advice to the distressed; so also it was to those that received the holy Spirit plentifully. Acts 10.48. He commanded them to be baptised in the Name of the Lord. It seems it is an Ordinance meet to be observed by all sorts of Christians: the Jailer and his house, Acts 16.33. Lydia and her house, vers. 15. Crispus and his house, Acts 18.8. Samaria, Acts 8.12. the Eunuch, vers. 38. yea, all (without exception) that gladly received the Word were baptised, and thereupon added to the Church, Acts 2.41.  
I might be large herein, but John Bunyan hath spared my labour, for he yields the case; and confesseth, pag. 122, 123. That Baptism is an holy Ordinance of God; a duty enjoined such who receive the Gospel: And what can be more said, if it be a duty enjoined, it is a necessary duty; etc. Wherefore I shall only add for Confirmation some Arguments as follow, viz.  
Arg. 1. If the non-subjection to Baptism debars men from Church-Communion; Then the subjection thereto is necessary in order to Church-Communion: But the non-subjection to Baptism debars men from Church-Communion: Ergo.  
The Major is undeniable; the Minor I shall prove thus:  
Arg. 2. If the walking disorderly, not according to the Traditions received from the Apostles, debars men from Church-Communion; Then the non-subjection to Baptism debars men from Church-Communion: But the walking disorderly, not according to the Traditions received from the Apostles, debars men from Church-Communion: Ergo.  
The Minor is proved, 2 Thess. 3.6. where the Apostle commands, That all who walk disorderly not according to their Traditions, should be debarred Communion. The Major I prove thus:  
Arg. 3. If the non-subjection to Baptism be a disorderly walking, not according to the Traditions of the Apostles; Then the Major is true: But the non-subjection to Baptism is a disorderly walking not according to the Traditions of the Apostles: Ergo.  
Nothing in this Argument can be questioned, except the Minor, and that surely cannot be denied by John Bunyan, (with whom I have now to deal); for by his own Confession, pag. 64. Baptism is an Ordinance of Jesus Christ, an holy Ordinance of God, pag. 123. and that of excellent use to instruct in the most weighty matters of the Kingdom of God, p. 65. an enjoined Duty, p. 122. an apparent Tradition of the Apostles; for in those days (he confesseth, pag. 70.) it was administered upon Conversion, and used then to go before Church-Communion. Again,  
Arg. 4. If the non-subjection to Baptism be a sin against God, a rejecting the Counsel of God against ourselves, and the breach of a good Conscience; Then it debars men from Church-Communion: But the non-subjection to Baptism is a sin against God, a rejecting the Counsel of God against ourselves, and the breach of a good Conscience: Ergo.  
The Major I think none can deny; and the Minor is evident by John Bunyan's own Confession, as aforesaid, and the Scriptures before alleged, Matth. 28.19. & 7.29. 1 Pet. 3.21.  
Further,  
Arg. 5. If all Church-Members in the Apostles days were baptised; Then Baptism is necessary to Church-Communion: But all Church-Members in the Apostles days were baptised: Ergo.  
One would think this Argument should put the matter out of doubt; both Propositions being acknowledged by John Bunyan himself, yea, urged by him as weighty truths; for he makes the Example of the Primitive New-Testament-Churches the ground of his Communion, p. 52. yea, so far, that he saith, He dares not do otherwise than they did: And if we follow that Rule proposed by himself, we must not do otherwise; and what then? Surely they baptised all Church-members before Communion, as he confesseth, pag. 91. But that I may not conclude with the Confession of a man so various (although it may well be alleged against himself) as in one little Treatise to speak so many inconsistencies; I shall proceed to another Argument.  
Arg. 6. If all Church-members are commanded to be baptised; Then the subjection to Baptism is necessary to Church-Communion: But all Church-members are commanded to be baptised: Ergo.  
The Major is apparent; The Minor I prove thus:  
Arg. 7. If Baptism is commanded to all Disciples; Then it is commanded to all Church-members: But Baptism is commanded to all Disciples: Ergo.  
No man can doubt of the truth of the Major, that believeth Church-members to be Disciples, which I suppose no Christian, in his right mind, will deny: And the Minor I shall prove from the words of Christ, Matth. 28.19, 20. Go teach all Nations, baptising them, etc. the Text is read, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: which being interpreted, is, Disciple ye all Nations, baptising them, etc. (viz. those that are Discipled, as by the Grammatical construction of the words may appear) teaching them (that is, the baptised Disciples) to observe (or keep diligently) all things whatsoever I have commanded you: One whereof was, to baptise those that were discipled. But it seems that either J. B. was never a baptised Disciple, or that his Instructors forgot to teach him this Rule of Christ, or else he hath soon forgotten what he learned, if it be not a perverse transgressing of what he knoweth, and so guilty of many stripes, Luk. 12.47.  
But to return; since John Bunyan is pleased (notwithstanding his aforementioned Confessions) to deny Baptism to be the Rule of Communion; let us hear what Rule he would have, which he thus declares, pag. 78. Even that rule by which they are discovered to the Church to be visible Saints; and willing to be gathered into their Body and Fellowship.  
Answ. Well said; but how must that be if not by obedience to Christ's Ordinances, to the holy Ordinances of God, yea, the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ? is not the subjecting thereto a discovery of a visible Saint, and a willingness to be gathered into the Body, even the Church?  
John Bunyan to this, pag. 79. answers, No: it is not (saith he) the practising of a circumstantial, but the commendation of their Faith by the Word of Faith, and their conversation by a moral Precept; wherefore he tells us, pag. 79. That when Paul had declared his Faith, he falls down to the body of the Law, saying, Receive us, we have wronged no man, we have corrupted no man, we have defrauded no man, 2 Cor. 7.2. From whence (with divers such Instances and Paraphrases of his own thereupon) he concludes, pag. 79. That by the Word of Faith and good Works, (viz. Moral Duties Gospelized) we ought to judge of the fitness of Members, by which we ought also to receive them into Fellowship.  
Answ. We read that Moses put a vail over his face, to hinder the splendour of his countenance from dazzling the eyes of the beholders; but, lo here, J. B. puts a vail over his face, to impede the discovery of his perverting the Ordinances of God, and the Rule of Communion; which that I may so far put away, that he may appear as he is,  
Concerning what is said; Consider, First, how this Thesis is consistent with John Bunyan's own judgement concerning Circumcision: for sure Baptism is not more a Circumstance than that; yet, by his own grant, that was of old the Rule of Communion. Secondly, Why (in his sense) he should call Baptism a Circumstance, I know not, it hath been proved a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ, a Foundation-principle, Heb. 6.1. A necessary duty, a duty enjoined to those that receive the Gospel; and is it notwithstanding all this but such a Circumstance; the Lord God of Heaven judge between us.  
Again; He comes to affirm; pag. 79. what is the Rule of Communion, viz. To have our Faith commended by the Word of Faith, and our Conversation by a Moral Precept, etc.  
Wherein know, that the Word of Faith, according to Paul's mind, Rom. 10.7, 8. is Christ: And what Faith doth he commend? surely not a bare Profession which consists only in words, but that Faith which presently produceth obedience: For so he saith, Luk. 6.46. Why call ye me Lord, Lord, and do not the things that I say? (of which Baptism is one; yea, a great Duty): to which also the Apostle bears witness, 1 Joh. 2.3. He that saith he knoweth him, and keepeth not his Commandments (of which J. Bunyan confesseth Baptism to be one, and that of great use) is a liar, and the truth is not in him.  
But perhaps John Bunyan will say, He would have works attend Faith, and therefore he adds, our Conversation must be commended by a Moral Precept.  
Wherein let me ask J. Bunyan, or any rational Christian, how this is possible in divers cases: as First, upon Conversion, when men are presently (upon the Preaching of the Word) turned from darkness to light, and so are received as Church-members, as soon as they are Converted, who before were Fornicators, Murderers, Thiefs, and what not, 1 Cor. 6.11. but upon their Conversion are received as Church-members even the same day, Acts 2.41. What experience can there be of their Conversion who were Adulterers the day before? If you say they are changed now, let me tell you it must appear otherwise than by so short forbearance (which is common with the worst of men), or else they may be as bad as ever, and so John Bunyan's Rule very uncertain.  
Secondly; The most Holy Conversation, in reference to what John Bunyan speaks, cannot demonstrate a Christian (for there are Wolves in Sheep's clothing, Matth. 7.15.) neither is it sufficient to be the Rule, the initiating Rule for Church-Communion; it must be said in this case as Christ once said, Matth. 5.20. Except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. Was not Paul exact in such a Conversation before his Conversion? Phil. 3.6. and it cannot be imagined that he did degenerate afterwards; and yet when Ananias was sent to tell him what he must do, he delivers his Message thus, Acts 22.16. Why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptised. Again, Cornelius was a devout and holy man, Acts 10.1. yet when he received the Truth and the Holy Spirit also abundantly, Peter commands him to be baptised, vers. 46. Surely if John Bunyan's Rule had been sufficient, John the Baptist might then, upon good grounds, have forbade the Baptism of Christ; & our Saviour, who fulfilled all those Moral Precepts, needed not have said, Thus it behooveth us (concerning Baptism) to fulfil all Righteousness. Wherefore, although I must extol an holy Conversation in its due place, wherein I wish that (as the Apostle saith, 2 Tim. 2.19.) All that name the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, may departed from all iniquity; yet let me tell you, The Apostle never urged any part of the moral Law, as the Rule of Communion under the Gospel; and therefore John Bunyan is strangely mistaken, to advise us, to make use of the Ten Commandments, pag, 79. to judge of the fitness of persons by; wherein (if we have respect but to the 4th, which enjoins the Sabbath so exactly, and upon such a penalty) I cannot wonder that he should conceit Christian-tenderness would not be exceeded by such strictness, whenas Christians are dehorted from judging one another therein, Col. 2.16. And truly I wonder more that a wise man should allege that instance of Paul, 2 Cor. 7.2. as a Rule for Church-Communion, when as he knows it was spoken to such as were begotten to the Faith through Paul's Ministry; and it is then strange, that he should offer that as a Rule for his reception amongst them, when that in truth he speaks not at all in reference to Church-Communion, but in a holy boasting of his own behaviour, and the rest of the Apostles, for the ornament of the Gospel.  
Which notwithstanding John Bunyan, pag. 80. fraudulently proceeds to defame the holy Ordinance of Baptism, urging that it is said, Rom. 14.18. The Kingdom of God, or our service to Christ (saith he) consists not in meats and drinks, but in righteousness, peace, and joy in the holy Ghost; and he that in these things serveth Christ, is accepted of God, and approved of men: which he afterwards tells you, pag. 81. is meant of the Law given upon Sinai, etc.  
Answ. John Bunyan saith, pag. 45. That he believes that Jesus Christ by the Word of the Scriptures, will judge all men at the day of Doom: But sure, if in his heart he thought so, he would be afraid of a sharp censure, if not the addition of many plagues, for adding to the words of God, and setting his post by the Lord's, which here he doth in telling you, That Paul saith, Our service to Christ consists not in meats or drinks, etc. when that it is the Kingdom of God he speaks of; which in this place I never read was understood of our service to Christ: But if so, what doth this respect Baptism? The Apostle speaks only of meats and drinks, which you may perceive by his words, the Romans (which J. B. confesseth were baptised) did differ about; which things also Paul (where he exalts Baptism) doth speak against: wherefore what all this is to the matter in hand, let a wise man judge, except to show John Bunyan's singularity; which also appears in his Explication of Righteousness, Peace, and Joy in the holy Ghost, which (with many fair glosses) he would have you to believe to be the moral Law given upon Sinai, which (notwithstanding what he saith) appears not only an addition, but even such a one as is inconsistent with the Scripture. For, First, Righteousness, (Paul tells you) comes not by the Law, viz. the Law given upon Sinai, Gal. 2.21. Secondly, Peace cannot come by it, because it cannot give life, Gal. 3.21. neither joy; for it could never make the comers thereunto perfect; and what joy or peace in such an Estate there can be, or in such a Law, I know not.  
But in truth, the righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost, which the Apostle speaks of, is none other but that which Christians are made partakers of in Christ Jesus, without the works of the Law, (and therefore to say we must do this Righteousness, is to derogate the honour of Christ) and he that in the fruition thereof serveth Christ according to his appointments (of which Baptism is confessed to be one of great use) is accepted of God, and approved of men, without looking back to Sinai, which J. Bunyan falsely calls, pag. 81. a perfect Law, contrary to the Scriptures, and the holy men of old, who call it weak and unprofitable, Heb. 7.18. that which could not give life, Gal. 3.21. or righteousness, Gal. 2.21. nor make any of the comers thereunto perfect, Heb. 7.19.  
But stay, saith John Bunyan, pag. 81. although this of old was declared thereof, now the moral Precept Evangelized is perfect.  
But may not I herein use John Bunyan's own words, and turn them against himself, as one justly guilty of Fictions, and Scriptureless Notions: for, where do you read in Scripture of the Law Evangelized? Surely the contrary is often found; and although James (as it is urged by John Bunyan) Chap. 2. prelling love, which he calls the Royal Law, (and indeed was before the Law given upon Sinai, 1 Joh. 2.7.) urgeth it to be according to what was before written, yet he doth not call the Law given upon Sinai, the Royal Law, or the Law of Liberty, as J. Bunyan falsely pretends, contrary to Paul's words, who saith, Gal. 4.24. It was a Law (although as much Evangelized in his days as now) which gendereth to bondage, yea, the Ten Commandments (written in stone) (so exalted by John Bunyan), he calls the ministration of death, 2 Cor. 3.7. of condemnation, vers. 9 and placeth it in opposition to the ministration of the Spirit, and of Righteousness, which is the glorious Gospel of Jesus Christ, that needeth not have any recourse to the Law, being in itself much more perfect, as indeed the Law of Liberty which James intends; As also Paul saith, Rom. 8.2. The Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus, hath made me free from the Law of sin and death.  
Wherefore in short, The Apostle James doth not (as John Bunyan pretends) exalt the Law given upon Sinai, as the Rule of Communion, but writing to the Brethren of the dispersed Twelve Tribes, whom he well knew were zealous of the Law, he endeavours thereby to convince them of their Duty, as Christ did to the Jews, Joh. 5.39, 45. And Paul the Heathens, by the words of their own Poets, Acts 17.28. confirming the Truth by the witness of themselves, Tit. 1.12. as I also often take occasion to do, from J. Bunyan his own Confession, although I should be as far from making his words the Rule of Truth, as Paul the writings of the Heathen Poets, which never were alleged to that end; yet. J. Bunyan might as well affirm it, as to say that James, Chap. 2. calls the Law given upon Sinai, the Law of Liberty, which also he is pleased to avouch as the Rule of Communion, pag. 82. alleging the words of Paul, I am under the Law to Christ; which sure (as he shunned naming the place) he might have been ashamed to have instanced in this case, it being only a Parenthesis in 1 Cor. 9.21. where Paul having declared his endeavours to gain many, that it might not be thought (John Bunyan-like) he would wave Christ's Ordinances, or pervert his Doctrine; he tells us, That in all this his condescension (before spoken of) he is not without Law to God, but under the Law to Christ, having (as if he should have said) great respect to his holy Ordinances, (which must not be violated by any means); not the Law of Sinai, for (if himself may be heard) he saith, Gal. 2.19. That he was dead to that, and that dead to him, as is confirmed, Rom. 7.1, 2, 3. by the Example of a Widow whose Husband is dead; from whence the Apostle concludes, vers. 6. That we are delivered from the Law, that being dead wherein we were held; whereupon sure it may be concluded of John Bunyan, as Paul saith, 1 Tim. 1.7. He would be a Teacher of the Law, although he understandeth neither what he saith, nor whereof he affirms; (although we know the Law is good, if a man use it lawfully) as farther appeareth in that Distich, pag. 83. where he saith, Communion is forbidden with such as live in the transgression of a moral Precept, alleging Paul's words, 1 Cor. 5.11. If any man that is called a Brother, be a Fornicator, or Covetous, or an Idolater, or a Railer, or a Drunkard, or an Extortioner, with such a one no not to eat: Paul saith not (John Bunyan tells you) if any man be not baptised, or join with the unbaptized, these (saith J. B.) are fictions and Scriptureless-notions.  
Answ. I must say to John Bunyan herein, as was said to Peter, Matth. 26.73. Thy speech bewrayeth thee: If any man that is called a Brother, etc. They were Church-members whom these words were spoken of, and already baptised (by John Bunyan's own grant) and therefore Paul needed not to say, If any be unbaptised, for there was none such amongst them: but it seems there were some that so far degenerated from their Profession, as to be guilty of some of the aforesaid Evils; wherefore Paul tells them, (without the Law of Sinai) they ought to be excluded from the Church, for the Gospel of Christ Jesus permits none such wicked persons to be retained. We say therefore, Although upon Confession of Faith, and submission to Baptism, etc. We ought to receive persons into Fellowship and Church-Communion, according to the pattern of the Primitive Churches; yet if any such shall be guilty of the aforesaid Evils, they must be again separated according to the blessed Rule of Christ, which Paul by the aforesaid words intends; wherein, although he doth not say, If any man be unbaptised, etc. (having then no occasion for such words) yet sure it is great impudence in John Bunyan to say they are Fictions, and Scriptureless Notions. Is it a Fiction to deny Communion with those that are disobedient to a Principle of Christ's Doctrine? is that a scriptureless Notion? Doth not the Scripture say, If any man transgresseth and abideth not in the Doctrine of Christ (whereof Baptism is a part) he hath not God? 2 Joh. 9 and v. 10. If any man come (like John Bunyan) and bring not that Doctrine, he is to be rejected.  
But to colour the design, John Bunyan proceeds to tell the World, pag. 83. That the Word of Faith, and the Moral Precept, is that which Paul enjoins the Galatians and Philippians, still avoiding outward Circumstances (he might as well have said Baptism): Hence therefore (saith he) when he had treated of Faith, he falls point-blank upon moral Duties, urging, pag. 84. that in Christ neither Circumcision nor Uncircumcision availeth any thing, but a new Creature; and that peace is promised to as many as walk according to this Rule, Gal. 6.15, 16. Which Rule (he would have you believe) excludes Baptism; and therefore he adds, pag. 86. In Christ Jesus no outward or Circumstantial thing, but a new Creature, (wherein he proceeds to tell us a fair tale): from whence he concludes, pag. 90. That seeing Baptism is no initiating Ordinance, nor visible Character of a Saint, no breach in a good and holy life, nor intrencheth upon any man's right but his own; Faith may be effectual without it, and his life approved by the worst of his enemies, he may keep the Law: wherefore his friends should not dishonour God in breaking the Law; Alleging the words of James, Chap. 4.11. Speak not evil of one another, Brethren; for he that speaketh evil of his Brother, speaketh evil of the Law, and judgeth the Law: From whence he reasons, That the failer must be in a Circumstance, for which he ought not to be judged.  
Answ. To all this I must answer in the words of Paul, Acts 13.10. Oh! full of all subtlety and mischief, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? Were not the Galatians and Philippians, to whom the Apostle wrote, Church-members, and baptised by thy own confession? Did the Apostle, in any of his Epistles, avoid Baptism in reference to Church-Communion, or count it such a Circumstance as thou dost? Did not Paul exalt it even to the Galatians, Chap. 3.27. where he demonstrates their Faith thereby? For, saith he, as many as have been boptized into Christ, have put on Christ. Can the Evangelical Precepts be enjoined without it? Was it ever said, that in Christ Jesus Baptism, or no Baptism, availeth not? Was it ever said (in Scripture) in Christ Jesus, no outward or circumstantial thing, but a new Creature? Is not this contrary to the Rule of the Apostles? Why art thou so bold to pervert the right ways of the Lord, as to conclude Baptism (which hath been proved a Principle, a first Principle of the Doctrine of Christ, a necessary Duty) to be no initiating Ordinance; no, nor the visible Character of a Saint, no breach in a good and holy life? What, is not obedience to Christ, to an holy Ordinance, to a Duty enjoined, a character of a Saint, yea a visible character? is not the contrary a breach, some breach at least in a good and holy life? Surely, if thy senses were not stupefied, thou wouldst never deny it, nor once mention (for justification thereof) that disobedience to Baptism intrencheth upon no man's right but his own. What is Infidelity, is it not a horrid sin?  
But saith John Bunyan, Whose right doth it entrench upon but their own? The God of Heaven saith, Isa. 3.9. woe unto their Soul, they have rewarded evil to themselves.  
But J.B. says, His Faith may be effectual without it, and his Life approved by the worst of his Enemies.  
Touching his Faith let the God of Heaven answer, 1 Joh. 2.3. He that sayeth he knoweth me, and keepeth not my Commandments, is a liar: And concerning his Life, I must say with the Apostle, 2 Cor. 10.18. Not he that commendeth himself is approved, but whom the Lord commendeth: Wherefore if he may keep the Law (as thou sayest) know it is not the Law of Christ, for that requires Baptism, and therefore no circumstantial, as the failer therein must not be judged; and therefore in this place the Objection offered by thyself, pag. 91. is well placed, viz. But notwithstanding all that hath been said, Water-Baptism ought to go before Church-membership; show me one in all the New-Testament that was received into Fellowship without it.  
Answ. Sure, J. Bunyan, when thou didst Pen this Objection, thy craft deceived thee, and thou didst not see how thou hast ensnared thyself; What answer canst thou make?  
John Bunyan will say, he hath a ready answer, which consists in two parts. First (saith he, pag. 91.) that Water-Baptism hath formerly gone first, is granted: but that it ought of necessity so to do, I never saw proof. Secondly (he saith) None ever received it without Light, etc.  
Reply. First John Bunyan here confesseth, That Water-Baptism went before Church-membership in the Primitive Times: Well said, John Bunyan, thou hast given away the Cause, and overthrown thyself. If it did so then, sure it must now, for we are to walk according to their Examples, Phil. 3.17. It seems God is stronger and wiser too than the Devil, he hath made a hedge about Water-baptism that it should not be violated, but instead thereof acknowledged for truth (even) by its Enemies.  
But John Bunyan saith, He never saw it proved to be of necessity.  
Answ. What, John Bunyan, how now! did the Apostles practise generally what they ought not? sure in plain terms thou wilt not say so; and if not so, it was their duty, and there was necessity for them to do their duty.  
But then, secondly, John Bunyan saith, None ever received it without Light going before.  
Answ. See if this man be not stupefied in his senses whilst he contends against the Truth; for he hath lost the matter in question: Who ever pretended that any received Baptism (upon good grounds) without light in it?  
The question is not, who have Light therein, but who ought to have Light therein? viz. Whether it is the duty of Christians, before Church-membership, to be baptised?  
Wherein (for Answer) I will offer John Bunyan's own words; Baptism (saith he, pag. 122.) is a Duty enjoined to those who receive the Gospel. Again, pag. 82. In the Primitive times it was generally practised first (viz. before Church-Communion) yea so as the unconverted themselves, knew it belonged to the Disciples of Jesus Christ; What can we have more than is here acknowledged? Surely, if it was so generally practised before Communion in the Primitive Churches; it ought to be so now. Did the unconverted then know it was the duty of Christ's Disciples to be baptised, as aforesaid? and must it be questioned now by John Bunyan, or any pretending themselves Christians? Was it then a duty enjoined to those that receive the Gospel? and is it not so now? surely yea. It may from hence be hoped, that John Bunyan is become a new man, and reputes what he pretends in the beginning of his Book.  
But stay, he is presently of another mind, for he again saith, pag. 82. That all that were received into Fellowship, were even then baptised first, would strain a weak man's wit to prove, if Arguments were closely made from these three Texts of holy Scripture, 1 Cor. 1.14. Gal. 3.27. Rom. 6.3.  
What, John Bunyan, art thou so unstable? I now understand plainly that Text of Scripture, Jam. 1.8. A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways; for he that wavereth is like a Wave of the Sea, driven with the wind and tossed: even so is this man, who in the same page of a little Treatise, confesseth Baptism to be a general Practice in the Primitive times before Communion, and yet again saith, it would strain a weak man's wit to prove it. But surely John Bunyan means a Fool that knoweth not to prove any thing; (and such a one as he, cannot in John Bunyan's apprehension maintain, will never hurt the practice of Baptism) otherwise it may be proved from his own Confession, if that be worth any thing. But it seems that may be contradicted, if Arguments were closely made upon the aforementioned Texts, wherein I shall advise John Bunyan (since he thinks so) the next time he meddleth in the derogation of Baptism, to make his Arguments from them.  
But, Sir, if you do, pray, (according to your own words) do them more closely than you have already, otherwise your fallacy will be discovered, and your Arguments fall to the ground.  
But I perceive he is willing (as he saith, pag. 82.) To pass those Texts at present, and instead of making Arguments thence-from, pretends that if we can show the Christian that in the Primitive times remained dark about it, than he will show the Christian that was received into Fellowship without it.  
Well said, Mr. Bunyan; When the sky falls, you will catch Larks. You have already told us the Primitive Christians all believed it, yea the unconverted knew (as you say) it did belong to the Disciples of Christ, and yet you would now know the Christian that was dark therein; and in that you know that to be impossible (if your own words be true) therefore you offer if we do that, than you will show the Christian that was received without Baptism; which you well know is also impossible to be done: Wherefore to show your resoluteness, right or wrong, we have this Thesis from you, pag. 82. That if you should grant (which you say is more than can be proved; but it is but your say so) Baptism to be an initiating Ordinance, and that it did, as Circumcision of old, give a being of membership to the partakers; yea, set the case men were forbidden to enter into Fellowship without it; yet the case may so be that (these things notwithstanding), men might be received into Fellowship without it. Where are we now? what is John Bunyan not content to set his posts by the Lord's posts; but Antichrist-like, he must needs advance himself above God? 2 Thess. 2.4. giving new Laws contrary to what the God of Heaven hath given in his Son Jesus Christ. If Baptism be an initiating Ordinance, and gives a being to Membership; yet all that avails nothing with J. Bunyan, he will receive members without it, and that in despite of God, although he hath forbidden it. What Doctrine is this? Would you know a reason of his Practice which he pretends to show you? In short, it is his will, maugre all opposition, even of God himself. For set the case men are forbidden by the Lord to enter into Fellowship without Baptism, yet J. Bunyan will receive them.  
But let us hear what he pretends as his warrant, pag. 83. And that is first, the Example of the Jews in the Wilderness, who (saith he) notwithstanding Circumcision, gave a being to Church-membership, without which it was (if you will believe John Bunyan) positively commanded none should be received into Fellowship, yet for all this more than six hundred thousand were received into the Church without it, and also retained there, and that even by Moses and Joshua.  
Answ. To this Position I shall say, First, Circumcision never gave a being to Church-membership, neither was there any such positive Command (as is pretended) that none should be received into the Church without it.  
John Bunyan I suppose will grant the contrary, for sure he will allow Holy Women to be Church-members.  
Secondly, The six hundred thousand were not received into Fellowship by Moses and Joshua, neither were they any ways accounted by them Church-members; but as they were the natural seed of Abraham, to whom the Promise was made.  
Thirdly, Their neglect of Circumcision was an evil, and a reproach to them, which was said to be rolled away in their Circumcision, Josh. 5.9. wherefore, whatsoever was the impediment, it matters not; it was a sin in them, and a reproach unto them, although J. Bunyan pretends they had a legal reason to excuse it, which also (as he thinks, or at least saith, pag. 94.) many have in these days to neglect Baptism, although an enjoined Duty, an holy Ordinance of God.  
What excuse (I mean legal) can that be?  
He saith, The want of Light: Our Brethren (saith he) have a manifest reason, an invincible one, one that all the men on Earth, or Angels in Heaven cannot remove; for it is God that createth Light: wherefore, if Moses and Joshua thought fit to Communicate with the Uncircumcised as aforesaid, why may not I have Communion, yea, the closest Communion with visible Saints, although they want Light in, and cannot submit to that? (meaning Baptism) I shall therefore (saith he) hold Communion with such.  
Answ. Who could ever have thought that John Bunyan should have Preached the Doctrine of those persons, against whom he hath so frequently manifested inveterate hatred? He hath often cried out against others for saying, The Light within is the Rule for Christians to walk by; but now he himself confidently affirms it, yea, in opposition to positive Commands, and express Prohibitions, making it the great reason for and against a Practice; yea, such a one as neither Men or Angels can remove. But this is no strange thing: Herod and Pilate, two great Enemies, agreed in one against Christ.  
But let me ask J. Bunyan, Whether Light makes a thing to be a Duty or no Duty? is God's Law subservient to our Light?  
I suppose he must answer, Yea; for it is congruous with his reasoning, that what God Commands, is no Duty to those that have no Light therein; or, at least, the want of Light is a sufficient excuse for the neglect thereof; For (saith he, pag. 94.) God creates Light (I suppose he means); therefore if they have no Light, it is because God hath not given it, etc.  
Well would it be, if this be so, for the greatest part of men to have such an Advocate as John Bunyan at the last day, to plead on the behalf of their disobedience, that they wanted Light to do otherwise; yea, that God never gave them Light. If the Rich man we read of, Luke 16. had but in this condition, had John Bunyan to plead for him, his mouth would not have been so soon stopped.  
But stay, I remember Christ said unto the unprofitable Servant, Luk. 19.22. Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee: And what if it should be so said to John Bunyan, where would he be then? and what would become of his Brethren under whose armholes he hath sowed pillows? Doth not he say, pag. 45. I believe Jesus Christ by the Word of the Scriptures, will judge all men at the day of Doom? And if so, the Word of the Scriptures saith, Luk. 12.48. He that knew not his Lord's Will (viz. hath no Light in it) shall be beaten; and good reason, for the want of Light is through their own neglect; the Light shined in darkness, but the darkness comprehended it not, Joh. 1.5. It hath been before proved, That this is the Condemnation, that Light is come into the World; but men love darkness rather than Light, Joh. 3.19. Would J. Bunyan think it a sufficient reason against Faith, for a man to say, I have no Light? If it be a good reason in one thing, it is good in all. Paul once said, Rom. 7.9. I was alive without the Law, at least he thought so when he did not know Sin; which by John Bunyan's reason is a sufficient excuse for any evil, if I want Light to do otherwise.  
But surely John Bunyan is conscious to himself, that notwithstanding what he hath pretended concerning the weight of the aforesaid Reason, which he saith is invincible; yea, so that all the men on Earth, or Angels in Heaven cannot remove; I say, he is conscious of the weakness and fallacy thereof; otherwise he would never have spent so much time in vain, as to allege afterwards Ten other Reasons to confirm his Opinion and Practice, when he had done it so invincibly before; unless therewith (as the Red Dragon with his ten horns) he is minded so to push against the Truth, that he might overthrow it root and branch. For the prevention whereof (although it need not much be feared from John Bunyan) I shall adventure a further encounter to try the strength of his Weapons, and the force of his Reasons: The first is this:  
Reas. 1. Because the true visible Saint hath already subjected to that which is better, even to the Righteousness of God, which is by Faith in Jesus Christ, etc. He is therefore to be received, not by thy light, not for that in Circumstances he jumpeth with thy Opinion, but according to his own Faith, which he ought to keep to himself before God, as Paul saith, 1 Cor. 10.29. Conscience I say, not of thy own, but of the other, etc. pag. 94, 95.  
Answ. Here you have John Bunyan's first Reason, wherein he tells you, the true visible Saint hath subjected to that which is better. But can a man be a true visible Saint, that visibly opposeth Christ's Ordinances? He that hath my Commandments, and keepeth them, saith Christ, Joh. 14.21. he it is that loveth me; he is my friend, Joh. 15.14. And our Saviour renders the Reason thereof, Chap. 14.23. If any man love me, he will keep my words: And again, vers. 24. He that keepeth not my say, loveth me not, (surely without offence I may add) Is no true visible Saint. But John Bunyan (not forgetting to oppose the Lord Christ) will vindicate such disobedience, and tell you the Saint he describeth hath subjected to that which is better.  
Well, be it so; doth it therefore follow the less must be despised? I hope John Bunyan will allow, The life is more than meat, and the Body than raiment; yet the lesser must be received for the preservation of the greater. Besides, had not Paul the greater when he was Converted to the Faith? Yet Ananias (although he was informed that he was a chosen Vessel, which was the better) commands him to be baptised, Acts 22.16. Had not Cornelius and his Companions the greater, when their hearts were purified by Faith, and also replenished with the Holy Spirit, Acts 10.44. Chap. 11.15, 17. yet Peter commands them to be baptised. Yea, had not Christ himself the greater, to whom the Spirit was not given by measure, Joh. 3.34. Yet when John (peradventure upon the same account as John Bunyan pretends) forbade his Baptism, Matth. 3.14. Christ answers, vers. 15. Suffer it to be so, for thus it behooveth us to fulfil all righteousness.  
Baptism, it seems, is no indifferent thing, although John Bunyan would have you believe it so, alleging as aforesaid the words of Paul, 1 Cor. 10.29. which words only have respect to the eating of meats, which were permitted, (although not enjoined) wherein (therefore) if a weak Brother should be offended, they were advised not to eat for Conscience sake; Conscience, saith Paul, not of thy own (for it is lawful in itself) but of the other (who thinks it unlawful): touching which J. Bunyan pretends (that you might think him to make his way plain) it may be objected, that what the Apostles wrote, they wrote to such as were baptised, and therefore the Arguments in the Epistles, about things Circumstantial, respect not the case in hand.  
To which he answers, First, that this is a mistake, the first to the Corinthians, the Epistle of James, the first and second of Peter, the first Epistle of John, were expressly written to all the godly as well as to particular Churches. pag. 86.  
Secondly, That if Water-baptism (as the Circumstances with which the Churches were pestered of old) trouble their peace, wound the Consciences of the Godly, dismember, and break their Fellowship; it is, although an Ordinance for the present, to be prudently shunned; for the Edification of the Churches is to be preferred before it.  
Answ. Touching this, as is here said, I must tell you first J. Bunyan is mistaken; and sure he either mistakes or forgets himself; for is not this the same J. Bunyan who in the same Treatise confessed, pag. 91. That in the Apostles days Baptism went before Church-Communion: Yea, he further saith, pag. 92. It was then generally practised by all Disciples, and if so, then sure the  Epistles (although general) were directed to baptised persons.  
Secondly, Those things which the Apostles treat of as indifferent, were such only, as were permitted either to be done, or not done; wherein many times there was no expedience in the performance thereof; as Paul saith in the aforementioned, 1 Cor. 10.23. All things are lawful, but all things are not expedient. Wherein he also saith, All things edify not; and therefore adviseth, That no man should seek his own, but every man his Brother's wealth: but there is no such indifferency in Baptism, which hath been proved a necessary Duty; if that be a Circumstance, it is a necessary Circumstance that must be performed; Although J. Bunyan supposeth it may pester the Churches, trouble their Peace, wound their Consciences, etc. wherefore in his judgement, although an Ordinance, to be shunned.  
How! Do Christ's holy Ordinances ever pester the Churches, trouble their Peace, wound the Consciences of the Godly, dismember and break their Fellowship: I never heard it so to do; (but very efficacious on the contrary); But if so, let me tell you, it is an evil sign (even as when the stomach is offended with wholesome food) A sign of an evil heart, from whence undoubtedly the cause thereof proceeds; But I 〈…〉 think, it is but the delusion of John Bunyan to conceit it, as once Ahab counted the holy Prophet Elijah, the troubler of Israel, 1 King. 18.17.  
Wherefore herein let us not be persuaded to shun that which ought to be embraced; But rather as David said to Michael, 2 Sam. 6.22. let us resolve, that if it be accounted vile and evil to obey our God in his Holy Ordinances; We will yet be more vile: Thus much for the answer to his first Reason. His second follows.  
Reas. 2. Observe secondly, One Spirit, one Hope, one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, not of Water, for by one Spirit are we all baptised into one body, one God and Father of all, and through all, and in you all, is a sufficient Rule for us to hold Communion by, & also to endeavour the maintaining that Communion, and to keep it in unity, within the bond of peace, against all attempts whatsoever, p. 96.  
Answ. What presumption is this, in wresting the Holy Scripture which persuadeth to unity, (amongst other Reasons) because there is one Baptism!  
But John Bunyan would have fellowship with the unbaptised (contrary to what is here intended by the Apostle) and that (as he saith) because this one Baptism is not of Water. Although the Text saith no such thing, and John Bunyan himself hath often acknowledged, Baptism of Water to be an Holy Ordinance of Christ, pag. 123. generally practised, pag. 92. And then, if one Baptism, what other, but that one (viz. Baptism of Water) so generally practised by all Disciples?  
He will tell us the Baptism of the Spirit, for by one Spirit are we all baptised into one body.  
To which I answer, The Baptism of the Spirit was not general, and so could not be intended by one Baptism.  
Secondly, It is not meant in the aforesaid Text, which saith by, not with, one Spirit: for, in truth, those that are baptised with Water, are by one Spirit, in one Faith, having one Hope, in one Lord, even one God and Father of all, baptised with one (viz. Water) Baptism, into one Body and Fellowship, which ought therefore to be kept free from John Bunyan's mixture.  
His Third Reason follows, pag. 97. viz. I am bold therefore to have Communion with such, because they also have the Doctrine of Baptisms, I say the Doctrine of them: For here you must note, I distinguish between the Doctrine and Practice of Water-baptism, etc. they have the best of Baptisms; the heart of Water-baptism, the Doctrine of Water-baptism, and want only the Sign, the outward Circumstance, which is forborn for want of Light.  
Answ. Oh Lord, what delusions are here! Righteous art thou in sending strong delusions upon them that receive not the love of the truth, 2 Thess. 2.10, 11. John Bunyan hath received Baptism, but what love he hath thereto, appears by his words; wherefore no marvel that his mind is blinded, and his understanding darkened, that he might believe lies, and deceive himself with fallacies, as he doth in the aforementioned Reason, where he tells us of some (of his Proselytes) that have the Doctrine of Baptism, but do not practise it because they want Light therein.  
What a Contradiction is this! if they want Light, they cannot have the Doctrine; if they have the Doctrine, they must have Light, so far as to know it; and therefore John Bunyan's distinction between the Doctrine and Practice of Water-baptism will nothing avail. We readily allow that, and oftentimes find that many have the Doctrine (although not without light) without the Practice, whom it seems are such as John Bunyan is bold to have Communion with.  
He may well say, Bold, for he hath no Scripture-warrant for it, and it is a great boldness to adventure in Church-Communion beyond what is written, yea, contrary to what is written; for our Saviour saith, Luk. 12.47. He that knew his Lord's will (that had the Doctrine of a Duty) and prepared not himself (to Practise) neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. And as such as neglect their duty are thus threatened, so evil is declared to persecute those that teach men so, and encourage them therein, Matth. 5.19. wherein what John Bunyan may expect I wish him seriously to consider; he seems, pag. 122. to be conscious to himself that some might judge him guilty thereof, whose mouths he would stop by his Equivocations, etc. but at the last day such things will stand in no stead.  
Reas. 4. I come now to his fourth Reason, pag. 99 I am bold to hold Communion with visible Saints, as aforesaid (viz. unbaptised) because God hath Communion with them, whose Example in the case we are straight Commanded to follow; Receive you one another as Christ Jesus hath received you, saith Paul, Rom. 15.1, 6. to the Glory of God; yea, though they be Saints of Opinions contrary to you; though it goeth against the mind of them that are strong, we that are strong aught to bear the infirmities of the weak: What Infirmities? (saith John Bunyan) Those that are natural, are incident to all: they are infirmities then that are sinful, all such infirmities are laid upon Christ, pag. 100 wherefore, vain man, think not by the straightness of thy order in outward and bodily conformity to outward and shadowish Circumstances, that thy peace is maintained with God; for peace with God is by Faith in the blood of his Cross, who hath born the reproaches and errors of you both: Thou errest in a Substance, he erreth in a Circumstance, upon whom must these errors fall? pag. 101. Must they for this be cast out of the Church? No: These are all, yea those reproaches, wherein the wisdom of Heaven is reproached, are fallen upon Christ, pag. 102. wherefore God hath received him, Christ hath received him; wherefore do ye receive him. There is more solidity in this Argument, than if all the Churches of God had received him. Will any say we cannot believe that God hath received any but such as are baptised? I will not suppose a Brother so stupefied, and therefore to that I will not answer.  
Answ. In the answer to this long Reason, wherein John Bunyan hath run himself out of breath; Consider first, That those Scriptures alleged by John Bunyan, nothing concern the matter in hand, for they were written to baptised persons by his own Confession, pag. 92. as also appears by the Apostle's words, Rom. 6.3, 4.  
Secondly, That receiving there spoken of, doth not intent the receiving into Fellowship, (for that was already done) but a holy reception in the bowels of love, and tender-heartedness, that so with one mind and with one mouth thy might glorify God, Chap. 15.6. whereto they are persuaded from the consideration of God's bounty, and the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ extended to them.  
Wherefore concerning unbaptised persons (as the Apostle doth not speak of them, or intent them, in reference to Church-Communion) I might now pass them by, as being nothing concerned in those words of the Apostle aforementioned by John Bunyan.  
But since he so much boasts of their Communion with God, I will answer in the Apostle's words, 1 Cor. 5.12. What have I to do to judge them that are without? I shall leave them to the Judgement of God, to whom they must either stand or fall, only advising all such to make their Calling and Election sure, 2 Pet. 1.10. not trusting to John Bunyan's words (who would sow pillows under their armholes) but walk according to the Rule of the Holy Scripture; and then the Church will have Fellowship with them: and God hath promised what they shall bind or lose on Earth, Matth. 18. shall be bound or loosed in Heaven; God himself hath great respect to his Church.  
But to return; If I should grant that God hath Communion with many of them; is not John Bunyan strangely stupefied, as to reason from thence, yea to account it an Argument of so great solidity, that the Church ought therefore to have Communion with them? Hath not God Communion wi●h many, that the Church may not have Communion with? The Apostle speaks, Rom. 2.14. of some Gentiles, which having not the Law, were a Law unto themselves, who did show the work of the Law written in their hearts: With such persons surely God had Communion, for he did communicate that knowledge to them by his holy Spirit; yet I suppose John Bunyan, considering his own words, p. 72. (( viz. That none were to he admitted into Fellowship but such as were Circumcised, nothing else could give the devoutest person that breathed a being of membership) will not say the Church of the Jews ought to have had Communion with them (although they had Communion with God) during their uncircumcision.  
Secondly, God hath Communion with Children, whose Angels behold the face of our Heavenly Father, Matth. 18.10. to whom pertaineth the Kingdom of Heaven, Mark. 10.14. Such Christ received; yet the Church ought not to have Communion with them before profession of Faith, etc.  
So that this solid Argument proves of no force; God's thoughts are unsearchable in reference to himself; but in relation to the Church he declares his will, wherein he appears a God of Order, and not of Confusion, and so it is ordained in the Churches. 1 Cor. 14.33, 40. whom although the Apostle exhorts, Rom. 15.1. to bear one another's infirmities; he doth not mean the denial of Baptism, or any other necessary duty (as John Bunyan wickedly pretends).  
But what infirmities then, saith J. Bunyan?  
I answer, Natural infirmities, and also their opinion in things indifferent, which the Apostle was treating of, Rom. 14. that either may be done, or may not be done, without sin; concerning which the Apostle saith, All things are lawful, 1 Cor. 6.12. It is lawful to eat, and lawful to forbear, Rom. 14.14. but touching Baptism, it hath already been proved a necessary duty, and cannot be omitted by a Christian without sin.  
But if so, John Bunyan tells you, That sinful infirmities must be born with.  
How John Bunyan! must the Church of God bear with sin? must it not be reproved? Is not this the ready way to make the House of God a Den of Thiefs? Matth. 21.13.  
But saith John Bunyan, All such infirmities are laid upon Christ, etc.  
I answer; That Christ bore the sin of the world, Joh. 1.29. upon his own body on the tree, 1 Pet. 2.24. I confess; and also that by him all that believe are justified from all things from which they could not be justified by the Law of Moses, Act. 13.39. I grant; Christ being set forth as a Propitiation (through Faith in his blood) for the remission of sins that are past, that God might appear just, and the Justifier of him that believeth in Jesus, Rom. 3.25, 26.  
But that the sinful Infirmities of Christians shall be so born by Christ, as to be forgiven without Confession and forsaking, I do not believe; If we confess our sins, saith John, 1 Joh. 1.10. He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins; he that confesseth and forsaketh shall find mercy, Prov. 28.13. But this bearing will not serve John Bunyan's turn, for. if there must be open confession and forsaking, it is nothing to his purpose, it will not then bolster up men in their disobedience.  
Wherefore he is bold to affirm, That all your infirmities are fallen upon Christ, yea, even errors in Circumstances, and errors in Substance, such whereby the wisdom of Heaven is reproached, Christ bears and takes away.  
If John Bunyan saith true; here are large pillows to sow under your armholes; those of old, were not so expert as Juhn Bunyan, although they made Lies their Refuge, Isa. 28.17. yet their bed was shorter, than a man could stretch himself on it; and the covering narrower, than that he could wrap himself in it, Isa. 28.20. But John Bunyan's is large enough; err in what you will, Christ hath born it; and the Church ought to bear with you, it seems; for there is no error, but it is either in circumstance or substance. Well, be it what it will, Although you reproach the wisdom of Heaven, it is (saith he) born by Christ, and must be born by your Brethren.  
But sure his daubing will appear to be with untempered mortar, Ezek. 13.10, 11. And if he may not be charged with that presumption, the Apostle tells you was in some, Rom. 6.1. Who would sin, that Grace may abound? yet I am sure whilst he is pleading concerning his Fellowship without Baptism, he countenanceth and encourageth all sin, overthroweth all Church-discipline; and you may then guests what (if his Rule be observed) will become of the Church itself, as further we will consider in his reprehension: Vain man (saith he) think not by the straightness of thy order, etc. that thy peace is maintained with God.  
Is not this the fruit of a stupefied head; otherwise, who would account, and also call his Brethren, vain men: and that for straightness of Order?  
Is not Order to be observed in the Churches, 1 Cor. 14.40? and can it be too strictly observed? surely No; whilst orderly, it cannot be too straight; except for John Bunyan who would not have it so, that his confused worship may come in the place.  
But then he will tell you, It is but outward and bodily conformity to outward and shadowish Circumstances that he accounts vain.  
But is not outward and bodily conformity, and that to such as he calls outward and shadowish Circumstances, required in a Christian? He doth not only so account Baptism, but also breaking of Bread, the Supper of the Lord, for so he saith, pag. 64. Touching shadowish or figurative Circumstances, Christ hath ordained two in his Church, viz. Water-baptism, and the Supper of the Lord.  
Now what Christian will call it vain, to conform to the Supper of the Lord (which is so exactly required by Christ himself)? Surely none, or few men but John Bunyan; and if conformity thereto be not vain, why must Baptism? which he confesseth to be of the same Ordination, pag. 64.  
Well, the Conformity to Christ's Ordinances is not in vain; The way of the Lord is strength to the upright, Prov. 10.19.  
Yea, bodily and outward Conformity. I beseech you brethren (saith Paul, Rom. 12.1.) by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living Sacrifice; Glorify God in your body, 1 Cor. 6.20. Yield the members of your bodies as instruments of righteousness unto God, Rom. 6.13.  
But it may be John Bunyan will tell me, I mistake him, for that which he accounts vain, is for persons to think thereby to maintain their peace with God, which is obtained by Faith in the blood of his Cross.  
To which I will answer; That although our peace with God is by Faith, yet it is maintained by our obedience to Christ's Holy Ordinances, they are the things that belong to our peace, that maintain and increase our peace with God, (I do not say God's peace with us) for without them there cannot be a good Conscience towards God, and then I am sure no peace with God continued.  
In short; the sum of this Reason is not only safe, but blasphemous: First, False; for it doth not follow that we may have Communion with men, because God hath Communion with them.  
Secondly, Blasphemous; For, besides what is said concerning Christ bearing all sin, whether in Circumstance or Substance (which is apparently false) God is hereby made the Author of sin; for in this Reason he urgeth, That the Church ought to bear with the sinful infirmities of their Brethren; For those (he saith) are caused for want of Light: And how come they to want Light? he tells you, pag. 94. It is God that creates Light, and he that withholdeth: So that God not creating Light in their hearts, causeth them to err, and to be guilty of sinful infirmities.  
Is not here verified what is written, God shall send them strong delusions to believe a lie? Is not this according to the words of that idle Servant, Matth. 25.24. who saith of God, he knew him to be an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed? So saith John Bunyan; who without Repentance may expect the like sentence.  
Reas. 5. I come now to his 5th Reason, p. 104. Because a failer in such a Circumstance as Water, doth not unchristian us: This must needs be granted, not only from what was said before, but for that thousands of thousands that could not consent thereto, are now with the innumerable company of Angels, etc. wherefore what is said of eating, or the contrary, may as to this be said of Water-baptism; neither if I am baptised, am I the better; neither if I be not, am I the worse: not the better before God, nor the worse before Men: Whereupon (after some plausible words, he concludes, pag. 106.) seeing the things wherein we exceed each other, are such as neither make nor mar Christianity; let us love one another, and walk together according to the glorious Rule above specified, (meaning to have Church-Communion with unbaptized persons.)  
Answ. To love one another, I should readily consent, for we ought to love all men: But for Church-Communion I cannot, until I see it proved that we ought to do so, which I am sure John Bunyan hath not; for he hath not yet proved it lawful, much less expedient, but further from being necessary, which he pretends. And surely this Reason cannot sway a wise man, to do that which is not proved lawful; I say, this Reason which is grounded upon a false Position: for although Baptism doth not make a Christian, yet the want of it may mar a Christian, and the neglect thereof unchristian men. For he that despiseth God (although once honoured) shall be lightly esteemed, 1 Sam. 2.30. A good Conscience may be put away, 1 Tim. 1.19. that there may be need of the formation of Christ in the heart again, Gal. 4.19.  
John Bunyan's instance of the thousand thousands that did not consent to Baptism, which are now (as he saith) in Heaven, is no sufficient proof that it ought to be, or that it may be despised now. I suppose he will confess there are thousand thousands as much in Heaven as they, who did not believe that Christ was then come in the flesh; but he that denieth it now is Antichrist, 1 Joh. 4.3. And notwithstanding John Bunyan's confidence, if he should now deny Christ come in the flesh, it would unchristian him.  
I might give many more instances in this case, but from hence you may perceive how inconsiderate he is, to conclude that of Baptism, (from false grounds) which Paul speaketh of eating meats, which were lawful to be eaten, or not eaten: Would any wise man oppose such indifferent things, to an Ordinance and Institution of Christ Jesus? sure Obedience to express Commands, whatsoever we are before men, makes us better before God.  
Reas 6. I come now to his 6th Reason, p. 107. I am therefore for holding Communion thus, because the Edification of Souls, in the Faith and Holiness of the Gospel, is of greater concernment, than our agreeing in, or contesting for the business of Water-baptism: That the Edification of the Soul is of the greatest concern, is out of measure evident, etc.  
Answ. John Bunyan's Position here stated, he endeavoureth by divers Reasons to prove, (viz. That the Edification of the Soul is of the greatest concern,) which I here omit, because whilst he endeavoureth to prove that, he mistakes the matter in question; for it is apparent that Baptism, and the rest of Christ's Ordinances, are the means appointed for the Edification of the Souls of men; and if so, the Argument is fallacious and must fall; which surely he is himself conscious of, and therefore to prevent it, he saith, pag. 109. Know that the Edification of the Church of God dependeth not upon, neither is tied to this or that Circumstance.  
Much said, but little proved; wherefore in short I may answer, You have only J. Bunyan's word for it, who, herein doth not only exclude Baptism, but also whatsoever he is pleased to call a Circumstance, whereof the Supper of the Lord is one by his own confession, pag. 64. so that it also is excluded (by him) from Church-Edification, contrary to what is declared of the Primitive Saints, who walking in the fear of God, having Fellowship one with another, were edified: yea, Paul accounts Church-discipline for the Edification of the Church, 2 Cor. 13.10. And in truth all Gospel-Ordinances are for Edification; so that if we must press after that, it obligeth us to press after the means tending thereto.  
But J. Bunyan seems to put a little gloss upon the matter, viz. When there is in the hearts of the Godly different persuasions about it, than it becometh them in the wisdom of God to take more care for their peace and unity, than to widen their uncomfortable differences. Thus J. Bunyan would have the Churches to be like Simeon and Levi, Brethren agreeing in iniquity; to bear with sin, and to wink at the transgressions of Christ's Ordinances, (rather than to disagree thereupon): contrary to the advice of the Apostle, who (as he withstood Peter to the face, because he was to be blamed, Gal. 2.11.) directs, That if any Brother walketh disorderly (viz. in disobedience to Christ's Ordinances) he must be withdrawn from, 2 Thess. 3.6.  
But John Bunyan, to persuade the Churches to strike hands in disobedience, and to countetenance their do therein; allegeth, pag. 110, divers instances of unlawful things done of old, yet winked at, if not approved.  
To all which (if it be so) sure the Apostle's words (Rom. 6.1. What shall we say thereto? shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbidden:) might (to sober men) be a sufficient answer.  
But that I might discharge my duty herein, I shall give (for the better satisfaction of those concerned) a particular Answer thereto in order.  
His first Instance is of Aaron, pag. 109. in these words, Although Aaron transgressed the Law, because he eat not the Sin-Offering of the People, yet seeing he could not do it with satisfaction to his own Conscience, Moses was content that he left it undone, Levit. 10.16.20.  
Answ. John Bunyan tells us, That Aaron transgressed the Law, because the Law was against his Conscience, and that Moses was content therewith; but surely then, Moses was not faithful in all things as a Servant, Heb. 3.5. For the same Apostle tells us, Heb. 2.2. That the Law was so steadfast, that every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward: which must needs be false if John Bunyan saith true; for he saith Aaron transgressed, yet Moses was content: sure it was great presumption in him to tolerate what the Law of God forbade: But the Text alleged, doth not say Aaron transgressed the Law; neither doth it say, the performance of the Law was against his Conscience, these are but John Bunyan's fancies: All that the Text saith is, That Moses was angry when he found the Sin-Offering burnt, and saith, Wherefore have ye not eaten it in the holy place? And thereto Aaron answers, It was Offered by the People this day wherein such things have befallen me, that if I had eaten, would it have been accepted? Which answer when Moses heard he was content, for therein the Law was not broken, neither was the performance thereof against Aaron's Conscience.  
The sum therefore of the matter is this; God, who took great care for his People, did Command that Aaron and his Sons should eat such parts of the Offerings of the People as he directed, viz. it was their due by the Law of God, so that they might eat thereof, what nature required, (they were not enjoined to eat all, or so much) the rest, viz. what they left, was to be burnt.  
And in the case before alleged, it seems Aaron eat none, but burned all: whereupon Moses apprehending it to be in contempt of God's Law (as Joshua thought of the erection of the Altar, Josh. 22.) was angry with them, but yet enquiring into the cause wherefore they did not eat it, Aaron tells him, That it was the day wherein he lost his two Sons, (vers. 2.) and therefore he could not eat it, neither did he think it would be acceptable if he had; which when Moses heard, he was content, knowing thereby that eating in general was not denied by Aaron, or against his Conscience, as John Bunyan falsely pretends; but that the occasion then required his forbearance: and therefore this is nothing to the purpose in hand, it is no more than if a Christian (owning the Supper of the Lord as a truth to be observed), should once at the Celebration thereof (being it may be under some trouble or discontent) absent himself; or if upon some special occasion Baptism should be deferred for some hours, who would find fault with this? which was Aaron's case.  
His second Instance is, pag. 110. concerning Eldad and Medad, Who (saith he) Joshua was so zealous against, because they Prophesied in the Camp, without first going to the door of the Tabernacle as they were Commanded, that he desired Moses to forbid them, Numb. 11.16, 26. But (saith he) Moses calls his zeal, envy; praying for more such Prophets: knowing although they failed in a Circumstance, they were right in that which was better; for the Edification of the People in the Camp was that which pleased Moses.  
Answ. What will not People do when they endeavour to fight against the Laws of Christ? If Moses did account Joshua's zeal envy, much more may it truly be said of John Bunyan, that his zeal herein produceth envy: I might in opposition to this Instance allege, what Paul saith of the false Apostles that preached Christ out of envy; yet Paul rejoiced that Christ was preached: And would it not be thought strange that any should collect from hence that their act was lawful, because Paul rejoiced therein, when as many times good is produced by evil acts?  
But further, Eldad and Medad in their Prophesying did nothing contrary to Law, they were not forbidden to Prophecy, nor that it should be done in the Camp, but on the contrary, God's Spirit came upon them there, and thereby they were induced to prophecy; and so it is nothing to the purpose for which it is alleged by John Bunyan, unless he can show us any incited by God's Spirit to neglect Baptism.  
But if you say, They ought to have went to the door of the Tabernacle?  
I answer, That it was not express duty to be performed on their parts, but for the manifestation of God's selecting them to govern the People, which in a holy modesty they eschewed.  
But then in the next place, John Bunyan gives you a third Instance, pag. 110. That in Hezekiah's time, although the People came to the Passeover in an undue manner, and did eat it otherwise than it was written, yet the wise King would not forbid them, but rather admitted it, knowing that their Edification was of greater Concern than to hold them to a Circumstance or two, 2 Chron. 30.13, 27. Yea God himself did like the wisdom of the King, and healed, that is, forgave the People at the Prayer of Hezekiah: And observe (saith he) notwithstanding this disorder as to Circumstances, the Feast was kept with great gladness, etc.  
Answ. What now, John Bunyan, how great a labyrinth hast thou brought us into (if thy words be true) must that be admitted in the Church? yea, doth God himself like it, even that which is undue, yea contrary to what is written? Sure we are left herein (if this be so) to every man's fancy; who is there that will not pretend the Edification of the People in all their Concerns? and how shall we control them? For, Quot homines tot sententiae, the Scripture must not be our Judge, For that may be admitted, saith John Bunyan, yea, well liked by God, which is contrary to what is written: This he further confirms, pag. 101. For all things (saith he) even Laws themselves must give place to the Edification and Profit of God's People.  
Surely John Bunyan doth not esteem that his God was wise enough; when he made Laws, as to foresee what would be for his People's profit and Edification.  
But as he doth herein deprave the wisdom of God; so he is contrary to himself. For he saith in another place, pag. 45. I believe that Jesus Christ by the word of the Scriptures, will judge all men at the day of Doom. Now this cannot be, if the Word of the Scriptures, and the Laws therein contained, must give place to a pretended Edification of the People; would not that (viz. to plead the Edification of the People) if his words be true, be a good excuse at the day of Doom?  
But I hope no man will be so unwise as to believe him, who is not only so contrary to himself, but to the holy Apostle, who desired the Godly (by the Example of himself and the rest of the Apostles) to learn not so much as to think above that which is written, 1 Cor. 4.6. and so much the rather, because he knew that afterwards there would arise such presumptuous persons as John Bunyan, who would pretend they might do otherwise (even contrary to the written Law of God) that good might come; Concerning whom Paul saith, Rom. 3.8. Their damnation is just.  
But perhaps you will say with John Bunyan, Was it not so in Hezekiah 's time? Did they not keep the Passeover otherwise than it was written, and yet allowed?  
I answer, No: There was no allowance of any thing contrary to what was written in the Law; wherefore, first, we must note concerning the time, there was a limitation by the Law of God; as appears, Numb. 9.9, 10, 11. The Lord spoke unto Moses saying: If any of you, or your posterity, be unclean, or in a journey afar off, that he cannot keep the Passeover in its appointed season, they shall keep it on the fourteenth day of the second month at Even, etc. which was the time that Hezekiah (taking Counsel by the Law of God) kept it, 2 Chron. 30.2, 3, 16. uncleanness and distance of place, not permitting the observation thereof in the first month, which was the time at first appointed, and that (although a Circumstance) so exactly, that God threatened death to the man that should neglect the appointed season, Numb. 9.13. And it is apparent what befell Jeroboam for his Error therein; 1 King. 12.23. Although he was as ready as John Bunyan to plead the Edification and ease of the People for his warrant, 2 King. 12.28.  
But if now any say, Why did the King pray God to pardon, if there was not an undue manner in the eating? And why is the Lord said to heal the People if they did not offend?  
To which I answer, First, That the observation of the Passeover in respect to the time when it was kept as aforesaid, was not undue: Nor, Secondly, any thing that the King either Commanded, or Allowed, yet there was an undue receiving the Passeover otherwise than what was written: But how was that? the Text declareth, That there was an intrusion of many of the People who had not cleansed themselves according to the Law, which although John Bunyan pretends the King did allow, (knowing that their Edification was of greater concern than to hold them to a Circumstance or two) the Scripture saith the contrary, viz. That Hezekiah did account it a sin (and not at all for Edification or Profit) and therefore prayed earnestly to God for pardon (lest that therefore his anger should break forth against them); unto whom the Lord was pleased graciously to hearken, and healed them: From whence John Bunyan wickedly concludes that God did like it; and thereupon urgeth it as a great Reason why now the Church should bear with undue proceed, contrary to what is written. But, well did the Holy Ghost reprehend such, Rom. 6.1. that because God was gracious in pardoning, they would presumptuously sin that grace might abound, which ought to be abhorred by all the Godly.  
But methinks some will say, John Bunyan offers further in this matter, pag. 101. viz. When Christ's Disciples plucked the ears of Corn, and were charged by the Pharisees with breach of the Sabbath, Matth. 12.1, 6. Their Lord excuseth them, and rebuketh their Adversaries; saying, Have ye not read what David did when he was an hungered, and they that were with him, how he entered into the House of God and did eat the Shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them that were with him, but only for the Priests? Or, have you not read in the Law, how that on the Sabbath-day, the Priests in the Temple, profane the Sabbath and are blameless: Why blameless saith John Bunyan?) because they did it in order to the Edification of the People; From whence he concludes, If Laws and Ordinances have been broken, and the breach of them born with, when the profit and edification of the People came in competition, how much more may we have Church-Communion where no Law is transgressed thereby?  
Answ. Yes surely; For where there is no Law, there is no Transgression; there cannot be in that any sin.  
But John Bunyan hath forgot in his Conclusion the matter in hand, which is not whether we may have Church-Communion where no Law is transgressed: (which he needed not have taken such pains to prove) but whether we may have Church-Communion with persons not obedient to Baptism, which before hath been often proved a Command, yea, a necessary Command, and confessed by himself to belong to all Disciples, (and so also undoubtedly intended by him in this Reason) according to the written Word, wherefore he pleadeth for doing otherwise than it was written; and doth tell you (but how truly you may judge) Laws and Ordinances have been broken, and the breach of them born with, when the profit of the People and their edification came in competition; which it seems John Bunyan prefers before the honour of God: when he conceits there may be Profit and Edification, he will break even Laws and Ordinances to carry on his design; to whom verily it will one day be said, Who hath required this at your hand? Isa. 1.12. to break my Laws for your own profit? When you did pretend to worship me, did not you serve yourselves, Zech. 7.6. yea, although it reached to the contempt of my Laws? You will, it seems, make them give place (to use John Bunyan's own words) for the advancing of yourselves.  
Will not this (in a wise man's judgement) be hard to be answered, when the God of Heaven shall plead in the defence of his holy Laws: the Disciples plucking the ears of Corn will not justify it; for know, that was no sin upon the account of any Law of God, they might eat, yea, take their food on the Sabbath day, there was no illegality therein.  
But if here you ask, Why Christ did not tell the Pharisees so?  
I answer, That he knowing the hardness of their hearts, endeavoured rather to convince them, by the instances of such things as were allowed by themselves: As Paul to the Athenians, Act. 17. allegeth the say of their own Poets: So doth Christ here, yet not allowing any disobedience; no not in the Priests, who John Bunyan is pleased to say were blameless, because they did it in order to the Edification of the People.  
But I will say they were blameless, because they did it in order to the Law of God, Numb. 28.9. which required the Offerings to be made on the Sabbath day; so that although the act considered simply, viz. the slaying the Offering, etc. was a profanation of the Sabbath, yet in that it was the Offering-Sacrifice, they were blameless, as aforesaid, because God (the great Lawgiver) required it, as our Saviour gives us the like instance of the Circumcising a man on the Sabbath day, which in that it was God's Command to be done on the Eighth day, was no breach of the Sabbath when it happened to be then done.  
As for the instance of David, although I might say something in the case, seeing our Saviour doth not justify it, but saith it was unlawful, I shall conclude that the like may be said of John Bunyan's Church-Communion, that he doth and teacheth that which is not lawful to be done; wherefore at his peril it will be for teaching men to break Christ's Commands, Matth. 5.19. although Edification be his pretence.  
Reas. 7. Wherein now leaving him, I come to his 7th Reason, viz. Therefore I am for holding Communion thus, because Love, which above all things we are commanded to put on, is of much more worth than to break about Baptism.  
This is the substance of this Reason, although many words are used therein to no purpose; wherefore I will in short answer, That I confess Love to be an eminent duty; it would be too tedious for me to set forth the Encomiums thereof, I wish hearty that it was more found amongst Saints; Concerning whom, I pray God their Love may abound yet more and more.  
But let me tell John Bunyan, Love hath its boundaries, and marks of demonstration● wherefore herein I shall say with the Apostle, 1 Joh. 5.2, 3. By this we know that we love the Children of God, when we love God and keep its Commandments; for this is the love of God, that we keep his Commandments. Otherwise (whatsoever we pretend) we neither love God, nor the Children of God: for as love to God, so love to the Children of God, is inconsistent with disobedience to God's Commands.  
Wherefore to John Bunyan's pretence, viz. That Love is of much more worth than Baptism, and that we are Commanded above all things to put it on.  
I must tell him, it is of more worth than Faith, 1 Cor. 13, 13. and if above all things, thou above Faith to be put on, yet I suppose John Bunyan will not allow in this case Church-Communion without Faith, which may as well be urged from this Reason; but herein, as in all, a Preacher of the Gospel, should learn rightly to divide the Word of Truth; the greater is not only demonstrated, but preserved many times by that which is lesser, as Life by food, etc.  
Reas. 8. But John Bunyan in his 8th Reason, pag. 119. would have you know, That for God's People to divide into parties, or shut each other from Church-Communion, though in greater Points, and higher pretences than this of Water-baptism, hath heretofore been counted carnal, and the actors therein Babish-Christians, etc.  
Answ. I confess this looks more like an Argument of weight, than any heretofore alleged; For, if this be true, he saith something to the purpose: for it must be granted, that what was in the Primitive Churches accounted Carnal, must so be accounted now: But, Praise a fair day at night. The end tryeth all things. I am sure that to shut out of Communion for the neglect of Baptism was never accounted Carnal, for in those days, by John Bunyan's Confession, pag. 91. Water-baptism went before Church-Communion, and therefore according to this Argument it ought to do so now.  
But he saith, That to shut out of Communion upon greater Points, and higher pretences than Water-baptism, was then reckoned Carnal.  
But by John Bunyan's favour, it is untrue; The Apostle himself commanded to withdraw from every Brother that walketh disorderly, not according to their traditions, 2 Thess. 3.6. To shut such out of Communion it seems was not Carnality, but according to the mind of God's holy Spirit; and those that deny Baptism, are guilty of that disorder, as hath been already proved; yea, it must be so; for John Bunyan confesseth, pag. 123. That Baptism is an holy Ordinance, which to neglect and despise, is disorder and unholiness, and the persons guilty thereof, therefore to be shuned.  
But John Bunyan, to confirm his assertion, tells you, That Paul, Apollo, Cephas, and Christ, were doubtless higher things than those about which we contend; yet when they made divisions about them, they were sharply rebuked.  
But as his Falsehood, so his Craft is discovered; For that division in Corinth, was not about higher things than Baptism, neither did it extend to breach of Communion. As for Paul, Apollo, Cephas, and Christ, they were neither of them denied, there was no higher Points in Question, neither (as to their division) are they charged with the denial of any Doctrine, or any practice in Worship.  
But their case was thus; they were it seems puffed up with pride and strove for superiority, wherein they took advantage by the eminency of their Ministers, who had been conversant amongst them; As the Bishop of Rome at this day saith, I am of Cephas, and thereupon challengeth the Primacy; so they said, some were of Paul, some of Apollo, and some of Christ, which in truth the Apostle sharply reprehends; but if either of them had been denied, and the Church had called such a person to account for his denial, and (if persisting therein) shut him out of Communion, this would not have been accounted Carnal proceeding, although John Bunyan is pleased further to say, Let Paul, Cephas; or Christ himself be the burden of thy song, yet the heart from whence they flow is Carnal, etc.  
I hope he doth not mean that the heart is carnal, that obeyeth the Doctrine of Paul, Cephas, or Christ, or that separateth from a person denying Paul, Cephas, or Christ; this would be too great presumption, whereof when I would clear him in my thoughts, (or, to prevent it) he appears guilty of great wickedness, and impudence; for he is bold to say, pag. 120. Let the cry be never so loud, Christ, Order, the Rule, the Command, or the like, Carnality is the bottom, and they are but babies that do it. Here John Bunyan leaves out, Paul, Apollo, and Cephas, and well he may, if it be but carnality and childishness to follow Christ, Order, the Rule, or the Commands.  
I wonder what John Bunyan would have us follow, or who would he have us separate from, or what must we respect? if neither Christ, Order, the Rule, or a command be any thing with him; what, must fancy hear the sway against all, which many times is grossly stupefied; and verily it is so in John Bunyan, otherwise he would not have spoken thus: And also further to add, That the great division at Corinth was helped forward by Water-baptism, telling you the Apostle intimates as much, when he saith, Were ye baptised in the Name of Paul?  
Who would have thought to have heard such unsound speeches, such perverse words from one that acknowledgeth Baptism to be an holy Ordinance of Christ? Is it likely divisions should be helped forward by an holy Ordinance? doth Paul intimate the same? nay, he doth urge the contrary, even by the aforesaid words; for when the Corinthians being puffed up with pride, and seeking for superiority, one pretending to be of Paul, and another of Apollo: Paul seeks to dissuade them thencefrom, and to convince them of their folly: He propounds these Questions; viz. 
Is Christ divided?  
Was Paul Crucified for you? Or,  
Were you baptised in the Name of Paul?   
John Bunyan might as well have said, the division was helped forward by Christ: There is as much to that purpose intimated in those words, Is Christ divided? as in these, Were ye baptised in the Name of Paul? But the truth is, Paul endeavoured to put them in mind that there is but one Christ, that neither himself, Apollo, or Cephas, were Crucified for them: And also one Baptism, they were not baptised into the Name of any but Christ; wherefore he exhorts them to leave off their folly and pride, and walk in love as they were commanded, but not to slight Baptism, as John Bunyan (whose tongue hath no bounds) is pleased to say Paul did, making no matter at all thereof in respect to Church-Communion. But I wish he may be ashamed of his thus wresting the Scriptures, and the intentions of the Apostle, who always spoke reverently with an holy estimation of Baptism; not like John Bunyan, who in a little Treatise both commends and depraves it, thereby rendering himself conspicuous for his instability.  
But if you ask why the Apostle spoke after that manner, saying, I thank God I baptised none but Crispus and Gaius, etc.  
Know, it was not because he made no matter thereof as to Church-Communion, but to take away the occasion of their contention, as he declares himself, lest any should say, I baptised in my own Name.  
And whereas John Bunyan seems to take advantage at those words, I know not whether I baptised any other; And from thence concludes (contrary to the Apostles thoughts) That he did not heed who were baptised by any body; as much as if he should say, that he did not heed whether they were baptised or no.  
I must answer; That I wonder any wise man should urge such a Conclusion from Paul's words▪ especially John Bunyan, who confesseth Baptism is an holy Ordinance, and was obeyed by the Corinthians: and if so, Paul must needs know they were all baptised, and then no matter by whom, viz. which of the Apostles: But to take away that occasion of boasting concerning himself, he tells them he did not know whether he baptised any but the persons aforenamed; which is no strange thing for a Minister to be ignorant of; for unless he keeped a Register, how should he remember it? There be some in our days that dare not slight Baptism touching Church-Communion, yet can say in this case, as Paul did.  
Further; whereas it is alleged that Paul said, I was not sent to Baptise, but to Preach.  
Know, herein he did not slight Baptism, but placed it in its due station; That Paul was sent to baptise, is evident; for he tells you whom he did baptise; and if he had no Commission for it, than it may be truly said, he baptised in his own Name: But he intends that he was not principally sent to Baptise, but to Preach, as he saith in another case, 1 Tim. 2.14. The Man was not deceived, but the Woman: Whence you have the same terms, which must be understood, the Man was not primarily deceived, but the Woman (as the Text saith) was first in the transgression.  
In the next place John Bunyan gins to flatter, and tells you, He would not teach men to break the least of God's Commands, and acknowledgeth therein Baptism to be an holy Ordinance▪ pag. 123. A duty enjoined to such as receive the Gospel, pag. 122. But it is the abuse thereof, he saith, (wherein he himself is apparently guilty) that he complains against; and therein forgets himself, and saith, (without any ground or truth) What is Baptism? Baptism is nothing.  
What, John Bunyan! A holy Ordinance, nothing! an enjoined Duty, nothing! Where are we now?  
He answers, pag. 124. That it is no strange thing, for God cried out against his own Institutions when abused by the People, Isa. 1.11, 12. To what purpose is the multitude of your Sacrifices, etc. saith the Lord?  
Reply. But is not this John Bunyan's blindness, or at least his crafty endeavours to insinuate his own opinion? Did ever God cry out against his own Institutions? against his own Appointments? No: verily the complaint was against the People, that they performed such things contrary to God's Institutions; and therefore it is not as J. Bunyan presumes to say, that the Ordinances are nothing; but to what purpose are they? they are vain, and why so? because not performed according to the Institution; wherefore the Lord adds, Who hath required these things at your hands?  
It must be known that God appoints the manner of the performance as well as the matter, yea, the qualifications of the persons performing it; whereof if any be wanting, we swerve from God's Institution; wherein I will say of Baptism, that although it is a necessary duty, yet if it be not accompanied with such qualifications as God requires, it profits not, it is in vain. So also may be said of Faith, which without works is dead, Jam. 2.20. yet verily it would be strange presumption for a man to say in general, Faith is nothing; yea, if those Israelites whom Isaiah speaks of, had walked honestly as to men (which it seems they did not) and denied the offering Sacrifices, the observation of the Sabbath, and the appointed Feast: I appeal to all sober Christians whether therein they would have been blameless; No sure: God often punisheth for the neglect of those Institutions, and therefore I shall conclude the answer to this Reason, with our Saviour's words, Matth. 23.23. These things you ought to do, and not to leave the other undone.  
I come now to his 9th Reason, pag. 125. which is this, viz. If we shall reject visible Saints by calling Saints that have Communion with God, that have received the Law at the hand of Christ, that are of holy Conversation amongst men, they desiring to have Communion with us, as much as in us lieth; we take from them their privileges, and the blessings to which they are born of God.  
Answ. Oh man full of all subtlety, how long wilt thou labour to deceive! Can a man (considering what hath been said) be a visible Saint, that denyeth Christ's Holy Ordinances? Can we be assured that a man hath Communion with God, who rejects his Counsel? Can a man be said to receive the Law at the hands of Christ, that denyeth his Institutions, and lives in disobedience to a Duty enjoined? Can they truly desire Communion, that refuse to obey Baptism when required? What Paul saith to the Corinthians, and other Saints, is nothing to our present purpose, for they were all baptised by your own confession: And what you say afterwards concerning the Supper is as little, unless you could prove that unbaptized persons have right thereto, and aught to participate thereof; which when you do, you may peradventure have a further answer.  
Touching what you say further in this Reason, stuffed with Eighteen Fancies of your own brain, I think a wise man will not judge me obliged to answer in particular: Wherefore I will only say, That it seems like the design of Baalam, who (of old) was intended to curse Israel; only herein appears a difference, God met Baalam of old and forbade him, thereby restraining his purposed designs. But it seems as if God hath given this man over, to belch out the fruit of his own imaginations, that in him might be verified the prediction of our Saviour, Matth. 5.11. They shall speak all manner of evil against you falsely for my Name's sake: Which to effect, he is bold to affirm, That Christians have been the cause of all the Judgements we have felt, and do groan under. It is no new thing, the Heathens of old were of the same mind, and thereby raised the Primitive persecutions: and we see the Devil playeth the same Game now: whereto I shall only say in the words of Michael, Jud. 9 The Lord rebuke thee.  
I come now to his 10th and last Reason, pag. 128. Which is grounded partly upon the thoughts of the World, and partly upon a supposed Condescension, so far as to commit our Souls to the Ministry of unbaptized persons.  
Whereto I shall answer; As to the first, We ought to obey God, rather than to please men, Act. 4.19. And as to the second, I say, wh●● we commit our Souls to such persons, we 〈◊〉 then have Communion with them: But at present I shall offer John Bunyan's own words, pag. 133. It must be the prudence of every Community, to preserve its own unity in peace and truth, and not to suffer such confounded Doctrines, as eat out the bowels of a Church.  
Wherefore John Bunyan and his Doctrine ought to be exploded, as a detected Gangrene increasing unto more ungodliness, 2 Tim. 2.18. For which purpose let us observe the Apostles advice, 1 Thess. 5.21. Try all things, and hold fast that which is good. The God of Heaven teach us by his Holy Spirit, to try those things that differ, and to approve what is most excellent. Amen.  
FINIS.   

ERRATA.  
Page 12. line 1. for the, read that. line 10, 11. f. Author saith, r. Author's faith. P. 16. l. 4. r. of Christ. P. 19 in the 2 last lines, from pass to, ought all to be left out until thou comest to line 18 of pag. 20. the Articles about Justification, etc. P. 20. l. 19 r. concerning. P. 27. l. 24. f. obstinay, r. obstinacy. P. 43. l. 5. f therein; I readily &c. r. wherein I etc. P. 44. the quotations p. 122, 123. in l. 17. are to be applied to l. 13 & 14. P. 56. l. 13. r. instructi●● l. ult. f. & 1. Luke. P. 63. l. 3. r. cannot but wonder.   

Books Printed for Francis Smith at the Elephant and Castle near the Royal Exchange in Cornhill.  
A New and Useful Concordance to the Bible, with the chief Acceptations, and various Significations contained therein. Also marks to distinguish the Commands, Promises and Threaten; with a Collection of those Scripture-Prophesies which relate to the Call of the Jews, and the Glory that shall be in the latter days: To which is now added, near Nine Thousand Scriptures, omitted in the former Edition, with the Addition also of the Scripture-Similies and Synonimous Phrases Alphabetically digested; With the Collection of the Names and Titles given to Jesus Christ, and the Appellation given to the Church of God in the Scriptures. Recommended to the studious Christian, by Dr. Owen.  
A Treatise of Baptism; wherein that of Believers and that of Infants, is examined by the Scriptures, with the History of both out of Antiquity, making it appear, That Infants-baptism was not practised for 300 years, nor enjoined as necessary by the Pope's Canons 400 years after Christ, with the fabulous Traditions and Erroneous Grounds upon which, it with Gossips, Chrisoms, Exorcisms, Consignations, Baptising of Churches & Bells, and other Popish Rites are founded: and that the famous Waldensian and old British Churches and Christians witnessed against it; with the Examination of the stories of Thomas Munster and John of Leyden.  
Symptoms of Growth, and Decay in Godliness; in 80 signs of a Living and Dying Christian, with the Causes of Decay, and Remedies for Recovery.  
The scholar's Companion: Or, a little Library, containing all the Interpretations of Hebrew and Greek words in the Bible, both in Latin and English in great variety, by means whereof the unlearned may easily attain unto the knowledge of the Holy Scriptures in their Original Tongues; a Work very useful for every useful Christian.  
Truth's Champion; wherein are made plain these particulars: First, That Christ died for all: Of his Power given out to all: Of Election: Of Predestination: Of Baptism, etc. The Copy of which Book was found hid in an old Wall near Colchester in Essex.  
Scripture-Redemption, freed from Men's Restriction; being the substance of several Conferences about the Death of our Dear Redeemer, and the Controversies which are the Constant Concomitants of it.  
The Mystery of Astronomy, made plain to the meanest Capacity, by an Arithmetical Description of the Celestial and Terrestrial Globes, by way of Questions and Answers; The Wonderful Works of God from the Earth his Footstool to the Throne of Heaven; with Divine Observations on every part.  
The Popish Labyrinth; wherein is made manifest, that the Papists are entangled in the Fundamental Articles of their Faith, that the Church cannot Err: Written in Dutch by that Holy and Learned man, Dr. Simon Episcopius. To which is added, The Life and Death of the Author.