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 Infant's Baptism was not practised for Three Hundred Years, nor enjoined as necessary till (by the Pope's Canons here at large) Four Hundred Years after Christ; with the fabulous Traditions, and erroneous Grounds upon which it was (with Gossip's Chrism, Exorcism, Consignation, Baptising of Churches and Bells, and other Popish Rites) founded: And that the famous Waldensian and old British Churches and Christians witnessed against it.  
With the Examination of the Stories about Thomas Munzer, and John a Leyden.  
As also, The History of Christianity amongst the Ancient Britain's and Waldenses.  
And, A brief Answer to Mr. Bunyan about Communion with Persons Unbaptised.  
That Persons Baptised in Infancy, are to be Baptised after they Believe, which is not to be esteemed Rebaptisation, but Right Baptism. Pet. Bruis the great Waldensian Martyr, Osiander Cent. 12. L. 3. P. 262.  
By H. D.  
Ephes. 4.5. One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism.  
Act. 17.28. As certain also of your own Poets have said.  
London, Printed for Francis Smith, at the Elephant and Castle near the Royal Exchange in Cornhill, 1673.   

The Preface.  
AMongst all those Ordinances and Institutions of Christ, that the Man of Sin hath so miserably mangled, metamorphised and changed, none hath been more horribly abused than that of Baptism; which as to Matter and Form, Subject and Circumstance, hath suffered such apparent Alteration and Subversion, that nothing but the very name of the thing remains, and yet that also very improperly too, if duly considered.  
Which the better to Demonstrate, you have here not only a Platform of the Primitive Institution, in Christ's Commission, the Apostles Precepts and Practice, and the Spiritual Ends thereof, plainly laid down from the Scriptures, and confirmed by the Learned; But the change itself of Believers into Infant's Baptism, traced out and detected, with all the Foppish, Ridiculous Superstitions, and Fooleries, made essential to it, and concomitant with it, and that according to Apostolical Tradition, as their impious Forgeries would impose upon us;  
Than which, as nothing did ever more tend to defile and ruin the true Church, and reproach the Wisdom and Authority of Christ their Head; So nothing could rationally more establish and confirm the false, or more apparently promote the Sovereignty a●d Dignity of Antichrist their Head; which is so plain, that he that runs may read.  
For if the very Act of Sprinkling, or pouring a little Water on the Child's Head, or Face (with the Charms attending it) must give Grace, Regenerate, take away Sin, save the Soul, add to the Church, and give right to all the Ordinances; as Mr. Pope hath been pleased, sitting in the Temple of God, as God, to Ordain and Decree, and that with anathemas too, against every one that shall not so receive it:  
How naturally must it needs follow;  
First, That Christ's Conversion, and the powerful Preaching of the Gospel, his means to effect it, must be slighted and despised; Ignorance and Profaneness, the true Interest of this State, necessarily; brought in; Christ's Baptism, with all the Spiritual Ends and Uses, outed and contemned; the Jewish Antichristian Rites of a National Church and High Priesthood, with all the Apurtenances, introduced.  
But Secondly, That as the Nations should accept this New Project of being made Christians and Church-Members by the Pope's Christening, they necessarily oblige themselves by receiving his Law, to embrace also his Government, and to be Ruled in chief by himself (as the greatest part, called Christendom, have done accordingly) who can deny it? To the erecting a Throne for the Beast, and to give that vile Person (who blasphemously they call his Holiness) cause to say (looking over his goodly Fabric, with his Father of old, Dan. 4.30.) Is not this great Babylon, that I have built by the might of my Power, & for the honour of my Majesty? And so hath it become the Corner and ●oundation-Stone of the Antichristian Church and State.  
For as they who take (as far as they can judge) living Stones (called the Spiritual Seed, Saints by Calling, or Believers) to build Christ a House or Church, Orderly joining them together by Dipping, Do yield Obedience to Christ's Command, conform to the Primitive Pattern of the New- Testament-Churches, ascribe honour and glory to the Lord Christ the Institutor:  
So they, who take the Carnal Seed, viz. Ignorant and unconverted ones, to make up the National, or any particular Church, joining them together by Sprinkling, do thereby yield Obedience to the Pope's Canons, conform to the Jewish and Antichristian Pattern, and reflect Honour and Dignity to their Sovereign Lord the Pope, the Contriver and Imposer thereof. And is not this very observable, that Pope Innocentius the first, (that Abaddon and Apollyon) that had so many marks of Antichrist, as you'll find in the account here given of him, was the first Confirmer and Imposer hereof.  
But that which is most to be lamented is, That the Protestant Reformers, who detected and cast away so many Antichristian Abominations, should yet hold fast such a Principal Foundation-Stone of their Building; though it is granted, with the rejecting of many of its Superstitions, and also upon other pretended Grounds. For when the Rotteness of the Popish Grounds aforesaid did appear for Infants-Sprinkling, it had certainly fallen to the Ground, but for some new Contrivances to support it, though therein they have not been so happy to agree amongst themselves in their Conclusions.  
For some are for Baptising all Children, whose Parents are never so wicked; others only the Children of Professors; whilst others are for the Baptising the Children of such Professors only, whose Parents are Inchurched, viz. Belonging to some particular Congregation. Some are for Baptising Children upon their own particular Faith, (which with much confidence 'tis affirmed they have.) Others deny that with great Vehemency, affirming they ought only to be Baptised upon an Imputative Faith, viz. upon the Faith of others, though herein, as you'll find, they vastly differ; some saying, it must be by the Imputative Faith of the Church; others of the Gossip; others of the Parent or Proparent in Covenant upon the account of Federal Right.  
So that some are for Baptising upon an Ecclesiastical Faith, some an Imputative, some a Seminal, some an Habitual, some a Dogmatical, & some upon a Justifying Faith.  
Upon which Variety of Differences, you have Mr. Baxter himself in the beginning of his Book of the Sacraments say, That it may seem strange, that after 1600 Years use of Christian Baptism, the Ministers of the Gospel should be so unresolved to whom it doth belong; Yet so it is (saith he) and I observe it is a Question that they are now very solicitous about: and I cannot blame them, it being not only about a matter of Divine appointment, but a practical of such concernment to the Church.  
And it is no wonder, that such Contradictions should proceed from such contrary Principles; For if from ●ne Baptism, Ephes. 4. Christ would oblige and engage us to Unity, Let it not be thought strange, that from a Baptism so different from Christ's, such Differences and Divisions should flow.  
For as one ingeniously observes, That as it happens to Travellers, when they are out of the way, one conjectures he should go this way, another that, and sometimes at hot Disputes and Contentions about it, and in the contest many Byways are attempted. Yet still the further they go, the more they are out of the way, till they can come to the true Road again. So it hath been with the Baptisers of Infants, they are fallen into many New Devices to maintain it, which hath occasioned many hot Contests, Breaches and Divisions amongst themselves, whose principal Arguments and Scripture Pretences for the Practice, you have here also Examined, and Answered.  
The Ancient Waldenses you find here from good Authority, were great Assertors of this Primitive Institution of Believers Baptism, and faithful Impugners of Infants, as a Human and Antichristian Tradition and Invention.  
And is it not very strange, that the Protestants, who pretend to derive their Succession from them, should so much degenerate in so principal a Foundation, and give thereby so much advantage to the Common-Enemy to reproach their whole Separation? For since they assert but two Sacraments in opposition to their Popish seven, how lamentable is it that by this deviating from this Primitive Rule and Pattern, they should so miserably differ in both, but more especially in this of Baptism?  
Object. 1 But it may be objected, That if the business of Believers Baptism, be a thing so clear, as you would make it; how cometh it to pass, that so many learned and pious men, so many fearing God, both Men and Women, should so zealously and conscientiously cleave to such a piece of Error and Darkness, in Sprinkling their Children, whilst so few, in comparison, do embrace this great Truth of Baptising Believers?  
Answ. In answer to which Enquiry, I present the following Considerations for Satisfaction, viz.  
1. That the Wisdom and Grace of God may more appear, that many times Reveals his Truths to Babes and weak ones, which he withholds from the wise & prudent, to prevent boasting, and that no flesh should glory in his presence, and to fulfil his holy good Pleasure, who opens Hearts and Ears, and gives Understanding, as seemeth him good.  
2. To demonstrate that great Truth, That as God's People went into Mystical Babylon gradually, that Iniquity prevailing by Steps; so must their coming out be, some at one time, and some at another, as they came out of Literal Babylon.  
Therefore hath it been, that some Ages have recovered much of the Doctrinal part, whilst yet they have been very corrupt in Discipline, and held fast many Dregs of Antichristianism; as Luther and many of these Reformers, that under their zealous pleading for the Doctrine of Justification against Popish Merits, etc. yet held fast Images in Churches, and Consubstantiation, and many other things. And again, many that have got light in the Discipline, have yet been very corrupt in Doctrine, if not in Manners. Many having recovered the Form of Godliness, that have not lived up to the Power; and on the contrary many who have lived much in the Power of Godliness, and holy living, that have been zealous opposers of the Right Form.  
And as to that of Discipline, how Gradually hath it got Ground, sometime in the Negative, opposing false Worship and Superstition; sometime in the Positive part; some Age getting and recovering one piece, some others another, as for instance;  
How zealous have the Protestants been in opposing Popery in one Age, and yet as zealous opposers of any further Light that sprang up in the next? And again, how zealous the Puritans and Non-conformists were in opposing the Hierarchy and Prelacy, and yet as zealous opposers of a further Reformation as to Church- Order and Discipline according to Christ's Pattern? Oh what a strange thing was Independency among many holy, zealous and learned Men a few years since, and how few were there that stood up to assert it? But especially what a monstrous, prodigious thing was Anabaptism!  
3. Another Reason m●y be from the inconsiderable Persons, as to Gifts, Parts, Learning, Worldly Power and Greatness, that have been in the Profession and Practice of it, few but the Poor having embraced it.  
4. Another from the Contemptibleness of the thing itself, in the Administration thereof, being calculated not for the Meridian of fleshly Wisdom, or show, but the quite contrary; yet exceedingly accommodated to further Grace, Humility, Mortification, Self-denial, to increase Faith, Love, Holiness, etc.  
5. An other may be from the Reproaches and Slanders cast upon the Professors thereof; or real Falls and Scandals of those under it, who may be suffered to fall for the offence of others that seek it; for it is said, That offences must needs be, Matth. 18.  
6. And lastly, to instruct Humility in all attainments, having nothing but what we have received, and therefore to exercise Tenderness and Compassion to those that differ, knowing that he which is first may be last, and he which is last may be first.  
Object. 2 But why have you so many Quotations from Paedobaptists? As though it were probable, That men that so much oppose your Practice, would advantage you by their Assertions, if truly urged.  
Answ. 1 Answ. 1. To which I would reply, That it must be granted, that there needs no better Testimony, than the Confession of Parties themselves, and herein, I conceive, there is enough from their own Pens, to contradict and condemn their own, and to justify our Practice in every part thereof. And if they have injured themselves by their acknowledgements, it will be their parts to show their own Mistakes, or to reconcile, if they can, their Contradictions.  
Answ. 2 2. It is not so much from the force of the Authorities, as the strength of the Reason urged by them, that they are produced, not that any new thing is brought forth by them that hath not been offered by some of our own; But Arguments from some Persons of Note among themselves, prevail forty times more than the very same, from persons they have a prejudice against; And therefore Paul quoted they ownr Poets, Acts 17.  
Answ. 3 And 3ly. By how much they are against the Truth in their Practice, by so much the power and Providence of God may appear so, to make their own Pens and Tongues to fall upon themselves; witness what more especially is quoted from Mr. baxter's Right to Sacraments, and Dr. Tailor's Plea for the Anabaptists in his Liberty of Prophecy.  
Object. 3 But is it possibly to be imagined, that Mr. Baxter, that hath been esteemed the great Maul● of the Anabaptists, should make Assertions so much in Contradiction to his former Positions? Hath he then changed his mind, and revoked his former Apprehensions?  
Answer. Answ. That he hath made all these Assertions, and many more to the same purpose, his own Books are witness, from whence they are faithfully quoted, especially that which he calls The Second Disputation of the Right to Sacraments: From whence it is that Mr. Tombs fetches the twenty Arguments he wrote against Mr. Blake, and improves them all against himself, discovering Contradiction to his former Principles in every one of them, in his Book which he calls Felo de se, or The Self-Destroyer; to which Mr. Baxter hath never made the least Reply, that I have heard of, though in the end of Mr. Tombe's said Book he provoked him to a Reply, by these words, viz. By the reading of this Book, all Intelligent Persons may perceive Mr. Baxter's deceitfulness, or heedlessness, and if he persist in defending Infants Baptism, his unreasonable pertinacy in his own Conceit; and if he do not declare his forsaking his Doctrine in his Book of Baptism, his Impenitency, and unrighteous dealing with the Church of God, which he hath injured. Therefore how much is he concerned to give some account, how such Assertions can be reconciled to his former Writings, which in the apprehensions of such ignorant Creatures as we are, seem to be as contrary to each other, as Light to Darkness.  
Though I doubt not, but that through the Prosoundness of his Speculation, and Subtlety of his Distinction (having therein so much outdone Thomas Aquinas himself in his late Writings) he will as soon Reconcile these seeming Contradictions, as many of his former, wherein he hath so much abounded, (none more that I know of,) being, as you'll find, sometime a great Opposer, than a great Defender of Episcopacy; sometime for Nonconformity (in whose Tents he hath seemed to shelter himself in the Storm, and with their Indulgence to come forth of his hole) and yet at length so highly to disgrace the same. Sometimes a friend to Calvin, and then a greater to Arminius; sometime a great Defender of the Parliament and their Cause, & then none more to renounce them, or to betraitor them for their pains; sometimes a great Opposer of Tradition, and anon a great Defender thereof; sometimes a violent Impugner of Popery, and yet at last, who hath spoke more in favour of it, witness those very strange Passages in his late Book, called the Christian Directory, so much the talk of the Town, which coming just to my hand upon the writing hereof, I shall presume for the novelty of them (to make a little Digression) to give you an Account of some of them, 
Popish Christen lawful.  and which you may please to take as followeth, viz. That it is lawful to offer one's Child to be baptised in a Popish Country, in their way of Baptising, viz. with Exorcism, Chrism, Milk, Honey and White Garments, rather than not have it baptised. Those Ceremonies of Milk, Honey, White Garments and Chrysm, being (as he tells us) so Ancient, that their Original is not known; called by Epiphanius and others the Tradition and Custom of the Universal Church, p. 826.  
That Temples, Fonts, Utensils, Church, 
Reverence due to holy Places and things.  Lands, much more Ministers are holy, and Reverence due to them; For to say, as some do, that [they are indeed Consecrated and Separated, but not holy,] is to be ridiculously wise by self-contradiction. And that to be uncovered in the Church, etc. doth tend to preserve due Reverence to God, and to his Worship, 1. Cor. 16.20. P. 915.  
That the unjust Alienation of Temples, 
Alienating holy Places & Things.  Utensils, Lands, Days, etc. which were separated by God himself, and consecrated by Man, are sacrilegious. P. 916.  
That the name Priests, Sacrifices, Altars, may be used instead of Christ's Ministers, 
Popish Names of Priests, Altars, Sacrifice justified.  Worship, Holy Temple; And that sober Christians should allow each other the liberty of such Phrases, without Censoriousness or breach of Charity or Peace, p. 882.  
That the Communion-Table may be turned Altar- wise, and Railed in to keep Dogs and Boys from it, 
Railing the Altar.  and that it is lawful to come up to the Rails, and to communicate Kneeling, as being indeed things that Christians ought not to censure or condemn each other for. P. 882. compared with 859.  
That it is lawful, 
Keeping Holidays, or Saints-days.  to keep Anniversary Festivals, in Commemoration of Saints Departed, if it be lawful to keep the fifth of November. P. 762. Sect. 24.  
And to keep Humane Holy Days and Lent also, if Abstinence be enjoined, not in imitation, but Commemoration of Christ's forty days East. P. 866.  
That Church-music is profitable, being a Natural help to the minds alacrity. And it is a Duty, 
Church-music.  not a Sin, to use the Helps of Nature and lawful Art, though to institute Sacraments of our own: And that as it is lawful to use the comfortable help of Spectacles in reading the Bible; so is it of Music, to exhilarate the Soul towards God. Jesus Christ joined with the Jews that used it, no Scripture forbiddeth it; nothing can be against it, that I know of.  
And whereas some say, they find it doth them harm; as wise men say, they find it doth them good. And why should the Experience of some prejudiced self-conceited Person, or of an half-man, that knoweth not what Melody is, be set against the Experience of all others, and deprive them of all such Helps and Mercies, as these People say they find no benefit by? It is a great wrong that some do to ignorant Christians, by putting such Whimsies and Scruples into their heads, etc. P. 885.  
That it is lawful to make Vows of Chastity, 
Vows of Chastity.  and that such Vows, though amongst the Papists, ought not to be broke. P. 488.  

To use Crucifixes.  That a Crucifix, or Historical Image of Christ, is lawful, to excite and stir up in us Worshipping Affections. And that a Crucifix well befits the imagination and mind of a Believer. P. 876.  
That the Romish Clergy may be reputed true Ministers of Christ, by virtue of their Ordination, P. 775.  
That their erroneous saying of Mass, or Preaching their erroneous Doctrines, 
Popish Clergy Christ's Ministers.  doth not nullisy their office to the Church, no though they derive from Antichrist, the Head thereof, who sits not in the Temple of God as Antichrist, but as God; and so not an open, but a secret Deceiver, p. 776. And that neither the Ordinati●●, ●n Baptism that they confer, are to be esteemed Nullities, Page 777. That it is not necessary to believe that the Pope is Antichrist, ibid. 
To read Apocrypha and Homilies etc.   
That it is lawful to read the Apocrypha, Homilies, or any good book in the Church, besides the Scriptures, p. 901. & to read a Prayer, p. 848.  
That there is a Praying to Saints or Angels, 
Praying to Saints.  which is Superstitions, but not Idolatrous, Rev. 22.8. Col. 1.18.  
That it is lawful to bow at the name of Jesus, p. 858. To stand up at the Gospel, p. 858. 
Romish Rites.  To kneel at the reading the Commandments, p. 854. That the Ancient Church-Custome of Worshipping towards the East, was not to be condemned, p. 877. 
2d Original Sin.   
That there is a Secondary Original Sin, besides that from Adam, p. 822.  
But lest I should tyre you with Instances, I must refer you to that great Book itself, hoping though, that some judicious hand may ere long furnish you with a more exact Collection of these things, with some Animadversions also, to antidote the Poison of them, lest with the good things in the Book, tending to promote Virtue and Morality, the Antichristian Infection be taken in also; so destructive to Christ's Institutions.  
Oh! Was ever the like yet heard from any Protestant-writer, so to palliate, if not to justify such abominations (and that at this time-a-day too, in the midst of the fears of Popery) by such endeavours, not only to Reconcile us to so many of the Idolatrous Popish names (so long spewed out) as Altar, Priests, Sacrifices, etc. But so many of their things also; yea and those too, wherein so much of the Heart and Life of their Religion consists; viz. not only their Baptism, that Foundation-stone, though attended with so many impious and blasphemous Circumstances, as the following discourse makes manifest: But their Ministry also, those Locusts and Frogs that come out of the Bottomless-Pit, the top-stone of their Building!  
But that which is most to be admired therein, is his Plea for the validity of their Ordination by the Pope, though Antichrist himself; Because he doth not Ordain them as Antichrist, but as God (viz. as Christ's Vicar in the Name of Jesus.) As though the aggravation of the thing, wherein the Mystery of the Iniquity, Antichristianisme, and great Blasphemy lies, should be urged for its extenuation, and to enforce its validity. For by the same Argument, are not all their cursed Idolatrous Rites and Ceremonies to be vindicated, with all their Blasphemous Bulls, and Bloodiest Inquisitions and Massacres that have been imposed and perpetrated by the Pope's Authority, who never did them as Antichrist, but in the Name of Jesus Christ, and to promote his Service and Interest. And if this be a good Argument for the Popes, why not for the Turks Ministers also, the Mufti being not Ordained from Mahomet, as a Blasphemer, but as the greatest Prophet of God. And could not Jeroboam have pleaded much of this kind for his Calves, as Mr. Ainsworths' Arrow against Idolatry, very excellently upon the point reasoneth, which yet nevertheless would not excuse him and his Adherents for their worshipping the Devil therein, nor deliver them from all the wrath and vengeance that followed them for the same.  
But alas! Whereto will not men run, left to themselves, who leave the Word for their Rule, to embrace the Traditions and Inventions of men? Oh! were not those twenty Queries, 
In his 2d Admonit. p. 142.  so much against the self-evidencing Authority of the Scriptures, in favour of Tradition, a heinous provocation, to say no more of them?  
And not only so favourable to their Ministry, but so many of their Ministrations also, of Bowing, Kneeling, Music, Homilies, Apocrypha, Vows, Holiness of Days, Times, Places, yea even Images and Crucifixes also. And as though by a Monkish zeal and confidence, and some sweet pretensions to Brotherly Love, Peace and Moderation, with the Legerdemain of Fallacy and Quiddity, and (as Rutherford calls it) unwashen distinction, we were at last to be Trapan'd into Popery, and persuaded to lick up all the vomit again. And thereby to create to himself the honour of being (as the great Dictator, so) the great Reconciler of the World, and to do no less in the achievement, than to reconcile Christ and Antichrist, God and Belial, Heaven and Hell.  
And is there not ground from hence to cry out with the Prophet, Be astonished, O ye Heavens at this, and be ye horribly afraid? And admiringly to say, Is not this one of God's wonders we are to marvel at, mentioned Isaiah 29.13, 14. Forasmuch as their Fear towards me is taught by the Precepts of Men. Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this People, even a marvellous work and a wonder. For the wisdom of their Wise men shall perish, and the understandin●●f their Prudent men shall be hid, and surely their turning things upside down, shall be esteemed as the Potter's clay: with 1 Cor. 1.19. For I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the Prudent, Where is the wise? Where is the Disputer? etc.  
And as to those other Quotations that are so often cited from Dr. Tailor's Liberty of Prophecy; I know it is usually said, That what he wrote therein, was not his own Judgement, but done on purpose to set the Parliamentarians together by the ears, in taking so much the part of the most hated Sect amongst them.  
To which I would say, That surely Dr. Taylor had the Reputation of a person of more Integrity, Conscience, and Honesty than so egregiously to prevaricate in the things of God.  
Yet if that really was his design in bringing forth so much Truth (with such fullness of Demonstration) though in guile, envy, and deceit, we are yet therein to rejoice, as saith the Apostle Phil. 1.4. And the more also to magnify the Power, Wisdom, and Grace of God, so to take the wise in their own craftiness, and that can make Balaam himself, that designs to curse his People, to bless them altogether.  
Object. 4 But why do you take so much pains, and Quote so many Authors, to prove Believers Baptism? who ever denied it? For is it not all along urged, that Pagans and Infidels should not otherwise be Baptised, but upon Profession of Faith; and that the Children of Christians, if not baptised in Infancy, should be baptised upon Profession of Faith?  
Answ. To which I Answer, That the Arguments in the first Part, are not so much to prove that Believers professing Faith are to be Baptised; but that they only are so to be, and not others. And that the Authors that are produced to prove Believers Baptism, whether from the Commission, Order, or Ends thereof, do also by Substantial Arguments conclude against the Baptising of any other; and so necessarily, by their own Grants, exclude ignorant and unconverted one's: And besides, as so many of themselves acknowledge, the Catechumen were not only the Children of Heathen, but of Christians also, and such too as were born to them after their Christianity; witness those many instances given in the Fourth Century, and by Mr. Baxter himself.  
And as for Baptising Professors, whether the Children of Pagans or Christians, we ask no more, Because Sprinkling of Infants, as by many Arguments you'll find, is a mere Nullity, no Baptism, if not worse than none, as you'll find made good: An Ordinance being so profaned, and the Name of God taken in vain, where neither true Matter, nor right Manner is observed.  
Object. 5 But it may be said, and I have already met with it, To what purpose is this coming forth, in a point so controversal, at this juncture, where there is more need of Healing than Dividing Subjects?  
To which I reply, Answer. That if Paul useth so powerful an Argument from one Baptism, Eph. 4. to press Union and Peace, then if there hath been another Baptism set on foot in opposition to it, that must needs be a  with a witness, it being no less than an Error in a Foundation, Nay that which doth assert two Foundations, and two Principles; And if so,  
Then what more hopeful Endeavours can there be put forth to effect Peace, than to discover & remove such a Rock of offence, by Delivering from the false, and Recovering to the true and one Baptism, which doth not only heal the Division betwixt the Baptist and Poedobaptist, but the Poedobaptists amongst themselves, who are, as you have heard, at so great odds in the point, and so solicitous, as Mr. Baxter tells us, in a Practical of such Concernment.  
Without which, there being such an Error in the Principle, such a Foundation of Antichrist held fast, all Exhortations to Union, viz. in Church-fellowship and Communion will signify little. Therefore let the cause be removed, the bone of contention taken away, the peaceable effects necessarily follow.  
A faithful Pleading and Pressing whereof, is the upright design of this Undertaking, and is therefore with the more Faith and Confidence recommended to the Blessing of God, and to the Hearts and Consciences of all Sincere, Upright Ones, that desire to keep the Commandments of God, and the Testimony of Jesus Christ.  
With this earnest Desire and Expectation, that the Candid, Ingenuous Reader, however contrary-minded, will overlook what of frailty and weakness he may take notice of, which may be too much; and eye principally the Design, Drift and Scope thereof. And that if by the multitude of Quotations, through so ancient a tract, he finds any particular mistake, misquotation, or misapplication, that he will not so dwell, or insist upon it, to reject the Truth of all the rest, that are full and clear without exception; which is the way that Carpers and Sophisters take, and the method that Papists have all along taken in Reply to our Protestant-Writers. Though this withal I can assure you, that I have not willingly given any such occasion; But have either transcribed the Authorities from their own Works, or from some Authentic Writers, that have so done, and especially from the Magdiburgensian History, so much esteemed amongst the Protestants, and whereof I shall be accountable to any judicious Enquirer, that may doubt the truth hereof.  
Though by the the way, it must be remembered, That all Humane Authority urged from Antiquity, is at best but Argumentum ad Hominem: It being Scripture-Authority only, that is of Divine force, and, as coming from God, can oblige the Conscience.  
Therefore if you will but please, before you make up your Judgement, and pass the Definitive Sentence, to read the whole, and laying all parts together, weigh them (with an impartial mind) in the Balance of the Sanctuary; you will find, I doubt not, That as no Ordinance of Jesus Christ is more fully and clearly asserted from the Scripture, founded with greater Wisdom and Righteousness, or of more excellent Use to the Church, than that of Believers Baptism, however it hath been contemned, nicknamed, and reproached:  
So no Invention of Man, or Innovation of Antichrist hath been more pernicious, either to the Church or World, or founded upon less of Reason, Righteousness, and Truth, than that of Sprinkling Infants, though it hath so long and so currently passed for Christ's Ordinance of Baptism.  
Lastly, If any shall be offended at this Witness, (though thus made good by a sevenfold Demonstration twice told) Let th●m know, (that the Providence of God hath so ordered, as they'll find herein) that they cannot oppose it, without opposing and contradicting themselves; there being scarce one Argument in the whole Book, that is not substiantially confirmed by some eminent men of their own.   

Amongst several Mistakes committed by the Press, the Reader is desired to correct these following, some whereof altar the sense, viz.  
PAge 29. Line 15. Read, or Church. P. 30. l. 18. r. and respective. l. 19 none for man. l. 22. r. Body of Christ. P. 50. l. 2. r. of Infants Bapt. P. 72. l. 4. r. by for t●. P. 86. l. 14. r. that. P. 94. l. 24. r. uncapable. P. 129. l. 19 r. the name. P. 134. deal rather. P. 145. l. 17. r. new Garment. P. 151. l. 4. r. for. P. 152. l. 23. r. know that P. 191. l. 22. r. entail. P. 229. l. 8. r. Generations. p. 271. l. 12. r. them. P. 276. l. 16. r. conform to. P 285. l. 15. r. Lanifrank. P. 287. l. 18. deal for. P. 296. l. 18. r. Manichean. P. 307. l. 12. r. ●ppositions. In the Postscript. p. 41. l. 13. r. contemptious traducing, p. 50. l. 1. deal which. p. 51. l. 19 by the Church.   

The Contents of the whole. The Book consists of Two Parts, the first proving Believers; The second disproving Infants Baptism, under these two Heads.  
1. That the Baptising of Believers, is only to be esteemed Christ's Ordinance of Baptism.  
2. That the Baptising of Infants is no Ordinance of Jesus Christ.  

The first whereof is proved in seven Chapters, viz.  
1. From Christ's positive Institution and Commission commanding it, P. 1.  
2. From the Apostolical Doctrines and Precepts teaching it, p. 6.  
3. From the Examples of Primitive Saints practising it, p. 9  
4. From the Spiritual Ends in the Ordinance enjoining it, p. 15.  
5. From the New-Testament-Dispensation requiring it, p. 35.  
6. From the Constitution of all the Primitive Churches confirming it, p. 39  
7. From the Testimonies of Learned Men in all Ages, since Christ, witnessing to it, p. 55.   

The second is also made good in seven Chapters more, viz.  
1. From the Scriptures total Silence as to any Precept or Practice to warrant it, p. 97.  
2. From the Silence of Antiquity itself, as to any practice of it for 300 years, or the imposing of it, for at least till 400 years after Christ, p. 107.  
3. From the erroneous Grounds, both as to fabulous Traditions, and mistaken Scriptures pretended for it, p. 151.  
4. From the Change and Alteration of the Rite and Ceremony itself of Dipping the whole Man, into Sprinkling a little Water on the Head or Face, p. 232.  
5. From the Nullity and utter Insignificancy of it as to any Gospel-Ordinance, p. 253.  
6. From the Absurdities and Contradictions of it. p. 261:  
7. From the eminent witness born against it all along. p. 269.   

The Examination of the Stories about Thomas Munzer, and John a Leyden. p. 318.  
With the History of the Antiquity of the Christianity of the Ancient Britain's and Waldenses.  
And a Postscript in Answer to Mr. Bunyan.    

Believers Baptism Proved.  

CHAP. I. Wherein the Baptism of Believers is proved to be the only true Baptism, 
I. From Christ's positive Commission.  from Christ's positive Institution and Commission, viz. MATT. 28.18, 19  
ANd jesus spoke unto the Disciples, saying, All Power is given to me in Heaven & Earth, Go ye therefore, and teach all Nations, Baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy-Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you, and lo I am with you always unto the end of the world. With  
Mark 16.16. And he said unto them, Go Ye into all the World, and Preach the Gospel to every Creature. He that believeth and is Baptised, shall be saved; but he that believeth not, shall be damned,  
Where we have have this plain order of Christ laid down.  
First, That men should be taught the Doctrine of Faith; And Secondly, Being so taught, they should be Baptised; And thirdly, That they should in his School [or Church, whereof they are then made Members] be instructed in every thing else, they ought to learn.  

Baxter.  Which Method Mr. Bauter himself doth fully acknowledge in his Book called, The Second Disputation of right to Sacraments, P. 149, 150. in his 16th. Argument, where he hath these Words, viz. This (saith he, speaking of the Commission of Christ ●o his Disciples) is not like some occasional mention of Baptism; but it is the very Commission itself of Christ to his Disciples for Preaching and Baptising, and purposely expresseth their several Works, in their several places and Orders.  
Their First task is to make Disciples, which are by Mark called Believers. The Second work is to Baptise them; whereto is annexed the Promise of their Salvation. The Third work is ●o teach them all other things, which are after to be learned in the School of Christ.  
To contemn this Order (saith he) is to contemn all Rules of Order; for where can we expect to find it, if not here. I profess, my Conscience is fully satisfied from this Text, that it is one sort of Faith, even saying, that must go before Baptism, the Profession whereof the Minister must expect, [But is it possible, that an Ignorant Babe can observe this Order, and answer this expectation] of which (saith he) see, what is to this purpose before cited by Calvin and Piscator, which he also mentions, P. 85. viz.  
Calvin 
Calvin  upon Mat. 3.6. saith, Therefore, that men may rightly offer themselves to Baptism, Confession of sins is required, otherwise the whole Action would be nothing else but sport.  
Piscator, 
Piscator.  upon Mark 1.4. saith, It is called the Baptism of Repentance for Remission of sins, because John Preached the Remission of sins to the Penitent Believers.  
Which Quotations of Mr. baxter's both here and hereafter fetched from that his second disputation, etc. I desire the Reader to take notice, I transcribe out of Mr. Tombe's Book, called Fel● de se, (th●t of Mr. Baxter being not not at hand, nor easily to be come by) in which Book Mr. Tombs very judiciously returns Mr. baxter's 20. Arguments, he wrote against Mr. Blake, upon himself, as naturally opposing Infant's Baptism. And which I conclude were faithfully recited, and would hope convincingly improved, because Mr. Baxter hath never contradicted them, that I have heard, nor given the least reply thereto, as his Bookseller informeth.  

Mr. Perk.  Mr. Perkins in concurrence herewith upon these words; Teaching all Nations, Baptising them, saith, I explain the terms thus; mark first of all, it is said, Teach them, that is, Make them my Disciples, by calling them to believe, and to repent. Here we are to consider the Order, which God observes in making with men a Covenant in Baptism. First of all he calls them by his Word, and commands them to believe and to repent. Then in the second place, God makes his promise of Mercy and Forgiveness. And Thirdly, He Seals his promise by Baptism. They that know not, nor consider this Order which God used in Covenanting with t●em in baptism, deal preposterously, oversliping the Commandment of Repenting and Believing. And this (saith he) is the cause of so much profaneness in the world.  
Paraeus 
Paraeus.  also upon Mat. 3.5. shows, That the Order was, that Confession as a Testimony of true Repentance go first, and then Baptism for Remission of sins afterwards.  
But how possible it is for an Ignorant Babe, or any but men of Knowledge to answer this Rule, and Order in Christ's Commission is left to common sense to determine: And whether they that assert another Order, viz. of Baptising first, and then teaching and expecting Repentance and Faith after, (which is the case of all Children) do not contradict this, and hold out thereby a necessity of some other Commission to justify such a practice.   

CHAP. II. Wherein the Baptising of Believers is proved to be the only Baptism from the Apostles Doctrine teaching the same. ACTS 2.37.  

II. From the Apostles Doctrine.  ANd when they heard this they were pricked at the Heart, and said unto Peter, and the rest of the Apostles Men and Brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the Remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.  
Acts 8.36, 37. And the Eunuch said, See here is Water, what doth hinder me to be baptised. And Philip said unto him, If thou believest with all thy Heart, thou mayst.  
Acts 10.42. And he commanded us to preach unto the people, to testify, That it is he, which was ordained of God to be Judge of quick and dead; To him gave all the Prophet's witness, that through his name, whosoever believeth in him, shall receive Remission of sins, while Peter spoke these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the Word, etc. Then said Peter, Can any man forbidden Water, that these should not be baptised, which have received the Holy-Ghost, as well as we. And he commanded them to be baptised.  
Acts 16.29. And the Keeper of the Prison fell down before Paul and Silas, and said, Sirs, What must I do to be saved; and the said, Believe on the Lord jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy House. And he accordingly believing in God and his House, as it is said, v. 34. were baptised he and all his strait way.  
To which may be added the Apostolical Order in laying down the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ, viz. First, Repentance from dead works. Secondly, Faith towards God. Thirdly, lie, The Doctrine of Baptisms, Heb. 6.12.  
Bede 
Bede.  saith, That men were first to be instructed unto the Knowledge of the Truth, then to be baptised, as Christ hath taught, because without Faith it was impossible to please God. Magdeb, Cent. 8. p. 220.  
Erasmus 
Erasmus  in his Paraphrase upon 28. Math. observeth, That the Apostles were commanded first to teach, and then to Baptise. The Jews were brought by Ceremonies to the Knowledge of the Truth, but Christians must learn first.  
So that doth it not from hence necessarily follow, that if the Apostles only taught, that persons should be baptised after Repentance, and Faith, according to the Commission, and that there is no instance to be found of any other teaching, that then such should be baptised, and no other. And for any to introduce another practice, it is not only contrary to Christ's Commission, but contradictious to the Apostles teachings.   

CHAP. III. Wherein believers Baptism is proved the only Baptism from the example and practice of the primitive Saints. ACTS 2.41.  
THen they that gladly received his Word were baptised. 
III. From the example of primative Saints.   
Acts 8.12, But when they believed Philip Preaching the things concerning the Kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptised both Men and Women, Verse 37.32. And Philip said, if thou believest with all thy Heart, thou mayst. And he answered and said, I believe that jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the Chariot to stand still, and they went down both into the Water, both Philip and the Eunuch, and he baptised him.  
Acts 18 8. And Crispus the chief Ruler of the Synagogue believed on the Lord with all his House, and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptised.  
Acts 22.14. And Ananias said unto Paul, the God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see the just fine, & shouldst hear the voice of his mouth. And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptised, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord, Acts 9.18. And he arose forthwith and was baptiqed.  
Which is also confirmed by the following Testimonies.  
Luther 
Luther.  de Sacrament. Tom. 3. fol. 168. saith, That in times past it was thus, that the Sacrament of Baptism was administered to none, except it were to those, that acknowledged and confessed their faith, and know how to rehearse the same, and that it was necessary to be done, because the Sacrament was constituted externally to be used, that the faith be confessed and made known to the Church  

Bulling.  Bullinger in his House-book 48. Sermon, Baptism (saith he) hath no prescribed time by the Lord, and therefore it is left to the free choice of the faithful.  
Those that believed at the Preaching of Peter upon the day of Pentecost, as also the Eunuch, whom Philip baptised. Cornelius the Captain, Paul the Apostle at Damascus, Lydia the seller of Purple, a Woman that feared God, the Keeper of the Prison at Philippi, and other more as well Women as Men, so soon as they tasted the gifts of Christ, and believed his Word, presently desired to be baptised.  
Mr. Baxter further in his 16. 
Mr. Bax.  Argument against Mr. Blake in the aforesaid 2d. Disputation, P. 149. (saith most significantly) If there can be no example given in Scripture of any one, that was baptised without the profession of a saving Faith, nor any precept for so doing, then must we not baptise any without it.  
But the Antecedent is true, therefore so is the Consequent. In proof whereof he produces the several Scripture examples of Persons that were baptised, which (saith he) might afford us so many several Arguments, but I shall put them together, viz.  
First, John, as I have showed you, required the profession of true Repentance, and that his Baptism was for the remission of sin.  
Secondly, when Christ layeth down the Apostolical Commission, the Nature and Order of the Apostles work, is first to make them Disciples, and then to Baptise them into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, as before.  
That it was saving Faith that was required of the Jews, 
Jews.  and professed by them (Acts 2.38.) is plain in the Text.  
The Samaritans 
Samaritans.  believed, and had great Joy, and were baptised into the name of Jesus Christ, Acts 8.12. whereby it appeareth, that it was both the Understanding and Will that were both changed, and that they had the profession even of a saving Faith, yea, even Simon himself, 37. v.  
The Condition upon which the Eunuch 
Eunuch.  must be baptised was, if he believed with all his Heart, which he professed to do, and that was the Evidence Philip expected.  
Paul 
Paul.  was baptised after true conversion, Acts 9.18.  
The Holy Ghost fell on the Gentiles before they were baptised, Acts 10.44.  

Lydia.  Lydias Heart was opened before she was baptised, and she was one the Apostles judged faithful to the Lord, and offered to them the Evidence of her faith, Acts 16.30.  
The example also of the Jailor 
Jailor.  is very full to the resolution of the Question in hand. He first asketh, Wrat he shall do to be saved; The Apostle answereth him, Believe in the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, and thy House. So that it was a saving saith that is here mentioned. He rejoiced and believed with all his House, and was baptised the same hour of the night, or strait way.  
Crispus 
Crispus.  the chief Ruler of the Synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his House.  
And many of the Chrinthians hearing, 
Corinth.  believed, and were baptised, Acts 18.8.  
Philip 
Philip.  in Acts 8.37. is determining a Question, and giveth this in as the decision? If thou believest with all thy Heart, thou mayst. And to say that this is but the Bone esse, meaning that it includes not the Negative, otherwise thou mayst not, is to make Philip to have deluded, and not decided, or resolved.  
In a word; (saith he) I know of no one word in Scripture that giveth us the least intimation, that ever man was baptised without the profession of a saving Faith.  
Thus Fa● Mr. Baxter, who to save us the labour, hath himself (you see) given such an exact Catalogue of the Examples of the baptised in the Scripture, among whom (as he so well observes) there is not one to be found, that answered not Christ's Commission, and the Apostles Precept in a professed Faith and Repentance: But 'tis said, he mentions only such as were baptised aged. That is very true, and the reason is; because the Scripture affords examples of none other as he confesseth.  
But Secondly, By his own grant in the words beforegoing. If Philip's answer was decisive, and not delusive, all others are excluded. And that none but such as are capable to give some demonstration, that they believe with all their Heart, aught to be admitted to Baptism.   

CHAP. IU. Wherein believers are proved to be the only subjects of Baptism, 
iv From the Spiritual ends of the Ordinance.  from the Spiritual ends of the Ordinance.  
THe first End or Use we shall meant on, is, 
1. To be a Sign of the Mysteries the Gospel  that the Baptised might have that represented in a Sign or Figure, and preached to his Eye in the Ordinance which had been preached to his Ear and Heart by the Word and Spirit of God, respecting the whole Mystery of the Gospel, and his Duty and Obligation therein? A Sign being, as Paraeus observeth, some outward thing appearing to the Sense, through which some inward thing is at the same time apprehended by the Understanding. Therefore he calls the Sacraments, Signa in oculos incurrentia.  
And therefore Mr. Perk●ns saith, That the Preaching of the Word, and the Administration of the Sacraments are all one in substance; for in the one the witness of God is seen, and in the other heard. Case Cons. p. 177.  
And some do call them Hieroglyphics, viz. Such visible Representations of things, as the Egyptians used to teach and instruct by.  
Which therefore calls for Understanding and Judgement, and Senses to be exercised in all that partake thereof, otherwise the action will be wholly insignificant, & therefore for any to carry a poor Ignorant Babe to the Ordinance of Baptism, is as much as if you should carry it to hear a Sermon, which would be as significat, as if you should represent some goodly Show to a Blind man, or instruct a stock or a stone. 
2. To witness Repentance.   
The second ●nd that we shall mention, is, that the party Baptised might thereby witness his Repentance, Mat. 3.11.3, 6. Act. 2. called therefore The Baptism of Repentance, Mark 1. To which whoever offered themselves, were to bring forth fruits meet for Repentance, and amendment of Life.  

Mr. Bax.  For which we are beholding to Mr. Baxter for very convincing Arguments, upon his first Argument with Mr. Blake in the fore mentioned Book, viz, wherein he doth positively affirm, that we must not Baptise any without the profession of true Repentance, which he proves thus.  
First Argument. If John Baptist required the profession of true Repentance before he would baptise them; then so must we; but John did so; therefore the third Consequence is clear. The Antecedent I prove from Mark 1.3, 4. He Preached the Baptism of Repentance unto Remission of sins, and doubtless that Repentance (saith he) which is to Remission of sins, is true special Repentance.  
Second Argument. If Jesus Christ hath by Scripture, Precept and Example directed us to baptise those that profess true Repentance, and no other, than we must baptise them, and no other. But the Antecedent is true, so therefore is the Consequent, which is fully made good from Mat. 4.17. Mark 1.15, & 16, 12. Acts 17.30. Luke 24.47. Where Christ himself did, and sent forth his Disciples also to Preach Repentance to prepare them for Baptism, which afterwards followed, as Mat. 3.11, Mark 1.8. Luke 3.16. Acts 2.37, 38, 41.  
Third Argument. If they that profess to be buried with Christ in Baptism, and to rise again, do profess true Repentance, etc. But all that are Baptised must do so, etc. Colos. 2.11, 12, 13 Rom. 6. 4, 5. Then in further Conficmation he Quotes.  

Bullinger  Bullinger upon Acts 2.38. Who saith, To be Baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, is by the Sign of Baptism to testify, that we do believe in Christ for the Rimission of sins. First mark, it is not only an engagemenent to believe hereafter, but the profession of a present Faith. Secondly, And that not a common Faith, but that which hath Remission of sins. Thirdly, and this was not an accidental separable use of Baptism, but the very exposition of, to be baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.  
A Third End of baptism is to evidence present regeneration, 
3. End to evidence present Regeneration.  whereof it is a lively Sign or symbol. Regeneration being called in allusion to it, The washing of Regeneration, Tit. 3.5. And a being born of Water and of the Spirit, John 3. Which is so essential to the Ordinance, that if that thing signifie● thereby be wanting, the Sign only will be very ineffectual, and insignificant● As,  

D. Tailor  Dr. Taylor late Bishop of Down, very elegantly faith it in his Plea for th● Baptists, lib. of Proph. p. 242. This indeed is truly to be baptised, whe● it is both in the Symbol, and in the Mystery. Whatsoever is less than this, is but the Symbol only, a mere Ceremony, an opus operatum, a dead Letter, an empty shadow, an Instrument without an Agent to manage, or force to actuate it. And to the same purpose you have,  
Mr. Baxter in his 10 Argument p. 117, 118. 
Mr. Bax.  Christ hath instituted no Baptism, but what is to be a Sign of present Regeneration: But to men that profess not a justifying Faith, it cannot be administered, as a Sign of present Regeneration. Therefore he hath instituted no Baptism to be admininistred to such.  
The Major is plain, saith he, in John 3.5. Except a man be born of Water and though Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God And so in Tit. 3.5. Where it is called The Laver of Regeneration,  
And what can be a fuller grant, that Infant's Baptism is neither significant, nor any Institution of Christ, than what these two learned men have here given us?  
4th. End is signally to represent the Covenant and Promise, 
4. End signally to represent the Covenant on man's part  that the Believer enters into hereby, viz. to die to sin, and live to Christ in new Obedience, by that Figurative Death and Resurrection, in being dipprd in Water, and by so going down under, and rising up out of the water, he is said to be buried, and to rise with Christ, to be planted into the likeness of his Death and Resureection, to die and live with Christ by Morti●●ation and Vivification To which purpose you have  
Mr. Perkins very significant, viz. The Action of the party baptised is a certain stipulation, or Obligattion, whereby he bindeth himself to give Homage to the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. This Homage standeth in Faith, wherereby all the promises of God are believed, and in obedience to all his Commanaments. The Sign of this Obligation is, that the party baptised willingly yield himself to be washed with Water? and also you have  

Mr. Baxt.  Mr. Baxter very fully upon his Thir● Argument to Mr. Blake, viz. It is o● the instituted Nature of Baptism to b● in general a professing sign for the present as well as an engaging sign for the future  
For first the Minister doth baptise into the name of the Father, Son an● Holy Ghost, and the party doth consent thereto; First voluntarily offering himself to Baptism; And secondly voluntarily receiving that Baptism: And his offer of himself here goeth before the Ministers baptising of him, and his reception of that Baptism is essential to it: So that Baptism essentially containeth on his part a signal profession of consent, to that which is meant in the form used by the Minister; [viz. I Baptise thee in the name, etc.] So that it is a most clear case, that Baptism as Baptism according to it's instituted nature and use, doth contain the persons actual signal profession of present assent to the Gospel, and acceptance of God, the Father Son, and Holy Ghost, as there in offered; and anactual signal profession that we there presently consecrate, devote, and dedicate ourselves to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost in the aforesaid Relations.  
Secondly another part of Baptism is the Ministers washing the person; and the person first offering himself to be washed, and after actually receiving it, doth hereby signally profess his consent. Now this washing doth essentially signify our washing from our former filth of sin, together with the guilt, our putting away the old man, which is corrupt according to our deceitful lusts, being buried with Christ? for all that are baptised must profess to be buried with him; and to rise again signifieth a being dead to sin, and alive to God to newness of life, and not only an engagement of this for the future, but a profession also of it at present, which is made good from Col 2.11, 12, 13. Rom. 6.4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11. Yea he that readeth the whole Chapter with judgement & impartiality will soon discern, that true Repentance, & abrenuntiation of the service of sin was to be professed by all that would be baptised, and thereupon they sealed their own profession and Covenant by the reception of Baptism, as Christ sealed his part by the actual baptising of them  

Dr. Tayl.  Concerning which you have Dr. Taylor very excellently, Page 243. Baptism (saith he) is never propounded, mentioned, or enjoined as a means of Remission of sins, or of Eternal Life, but something of duty, choice and sanctity, is joined with it in order to the production of the end so mentioned Know ye not, that as many as are baptised into Christ, are baptised into his Death? There is the Mystery and Symbol together, and declared to be perpetually united. All of us who were baptised into the one, were baptised into the other; not only into the Name of Christ, but into his Death also; But the meaning of this, as it is explained in the following words of St. Paul, makes much for our purpose. For to be bapitzed into his Death, signifies to be buried with him in Baptism; That as Christ risen from the Dead, we also should walk in newness of Life; that is the full Mystery of Baptism. For being baptised into his Death, or (which is all one in the next words) into the likeness of his Death, cannot go alone, if we be so planted into Christ, we shall be partakers of his Resurrection, and that is not instanced in precise reward, but in exact duty; for all this is nothing but Crucifixion of the old man, and destroying of the body of sin, that we no longer serve sin.  
And therefore it is, that Baptism is called, The answer of a good Conscience towards God, 1 Pet. 3.21. Which can by no means be applied to the Infant. And thereupon Dr Taylor again p. 244. That Baptism which saveth us, is not not only the washing with Water, of which only Children are capable; but the answer of a good Conscience towards God, of which they are not capable till the use of Reason, till they know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.  

Mr. Bax.  And Mr. Baxter very fully p. 156. If (saith he) according to the institution, the answer of a good Conscience must be joined with Baptism, for the attaining of its end, than we must admit of none that profess not the answer of a good Conscience; but the former; (saith he) is certain from the Text; for Baptism is said to save; that is its appointed Use; yet not the External washing, but the Answer of a good Conscience doth it. Therefore this is of a necessary injunction, and without it Baptism cannot attain its Ends: But it is to be administered, and received only in order to the attainment of its End; and theerefore never in a way, by which the end is apparently not attainable. What the answer of a good Conscience is, the common Expositions fully confirm, as I maintain.  
The Assemblies Annotations (saith he) recite both thus, viz. By the Answer of a good Conscience, we may understand that unfeigned Faith, whereof they made confession at their Baptism, and whereby their Consciences were purified, and whereby they received the Remission of their sins.  
The Fifth End of Baptism is to be a Sign to the Believer of the Covenant on God's part of washing away his sins by the Blood of Christ, 
Fifth end to be a sign of the Covenant on God's part.  to give Spiritual Life and Salvation, Act. 2.32, 3.3. Act. 22.16. 1 Pet. 3 21.  
To which truth Mr. Perkins sets his Seal. 
Mr. Perk.  We see (saith he) what is done in Baptism, the Covenant of Grace is solemnised between God and the Party baptised; and in this Covenant something belongs to God, and something to the Party baptised.  
And Bullinger 
Bullinger  upon Act. 2.38. That Baptism is an Agreement or Covenant of Grace which Christ enters into with us, when we are baptised, as well as a professing sign of our true Repentance.  
A Sixth End is, 
Si●th end to represent the union betwixt Christ & the Believer.  That it might be a signal Representation of a Believers union with Christ, called therefore a being baptised into Christ, and a putting on of Christ figured out by such an Union and Conjunction with the Element, as imports a being born thereof, and and being clothed therewith.  
Upon which (saith Dr. Taylor) Whoever are baptised into Christ, 
Dr. Tayl.  have put on Christ, have put on the new man. This whole Argument is the very words of St. Paul; The Major proposition is Dogmatically determined, Gal. 3.24. The Minor in Eph. 4.24. The Conclusion than is obvious, that they who are not form in Righteousness, and Holiness and Truth. (They who remaining in their incapacities, cannot walk in newness of Life, they have not been baptised into Christ; and then they have but one Member of the distinction used by St. Peter; they have that Baptism, which is the putting away the filth of the Flesh; but they have not that Baptism, which is the Answer of a good Conscience towards God, which is the only Baptism, that saveth. And this, saith he, is the Case of Children.  

Mr Bax.  And to this purpose also Mr. Baxter again p. 98. If it be the appointed use of all Christian Baptism to solemnize our Marriage with Christ, or to Seal or confirm our Union with him, or engrafting into him, then must we baptise none that profess not justifying ●aith, because this is necessarily prerequisite, and no other can pretend to union Marriage, or engrafting into Christ.  
Both the Antecedent and the Consequent are evident in Gal. 3 27, 28, 29. For as many of you, as have been baptised into Christ, have put on Christ, ye are all one in Christ Jesus; and if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and Heirs according to Promise. Here we see, that it is not an accidental or separable thing for Baptism to be our Visible entrance into Christ, Our putting him on, Our admittance by solemnisation into the State of God's Children, and Heirs according to Promise. For (as all own) if we be truly baptised, we are baptised into Christ, then are we Christ's, and have put on Christ, and are all one in Christ, and Abraham's Seed according to Promise.  
A seventh End of Baptism is, 
Seventh End entrance into the Visible Church.  that the Baptised person may orderly thereby have an entrance into the visible Church, and have a right given him to partake of all the Ordinances and Privileges thereof. For as Circumcision of old was the visible door of entrance into the Old testament-church, and so essentially necessary thereto, that without it none were esteemed either Church Members, or were to Partake either of the Passover, or of any of the Privileges thereof, all without, being called the Uncircumcision: So also was Baptism such a Door, and Visible entrance into the New-testament-church, that none were esteemed Members thereof, or did partake of its Ordinances before they were baptised, being so God's Hedge and Boundary, that others were esteemed without: And therefore as Christ had laid down the Order in the Commission, first to teach, then to Baptise, and then to teach them all things, viz. in the place of teaching his School or Church. So did they practise accordingly, as we read Act: 2.41, 42. Where after Peter had taught them, it is said, That they who gladly received his Word, were bapt zed, and the same day there was added unto them 3000. Souls, and they continued steadfastly in the Apostles Doctrine & fellowship, and breaking of Bread and Prayer: So that after Baptism, not before, the Believers were said to enjoy, and partake of all the Church Privileges, And which is Christ's directory and Standard for Rule and Order to the end of the world. The Church of Corinth were said 1 Cor. 11.2. to have kept the Ordinances, as they were delivered to them. And it was the Apostles joy and rejoicing to see the Order and Faith of the Saints, Col. 2.5.  
And therefore it is said 1 Cor. 12.13. That by one Spirit we are all baptised into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, Bond or Free, and have been all made to drink into one Spirit, viz.  
The same Spirit of Faith, Regeneration and Holiness, which gives right to Baptism, orderly lets into the Body and Church, and so admits also unto the Supper, which is the received sense of most interpreters upon the place.  
And by this Order believers were said to be baptised into Christ, and to be implanted together with him, Rom. 6 3 Gall 3.27.  
For as public Officers are invested into their trust by some external solemnity, that passeth upon them at the time of their instalment: And as the Husband and Wife enter into their Relation by some solemn act done at the time of their Marriage. Or as a Corporation by some public act done, doth receive its Members at their Enfranchisement; Even so according to the import of these Scriptures mentioned, do Men and Women receive that Relative being, which they have in Christ, and as Visible Members of that Spiritual corporation, wherein Christ is Head and Chief, from that solemn act of being baptised into him.  
And as the Officer is not invested with his Authority: Or Husband and Wife with that Power over each others Bodies, (as 1 Cor. 7.4.) nor any Members with the Immunities of the Corporation by any prequalifications, or actions preparatory thereto, 〈◊〉 that be acted and done by way of Solemnity, which immediately invests them with their several Respects and Capacities. In like manner m●n are to ●e esteemed capable of those privileges, which visibly do belong to the body of the Church, upon the account of any precedaneous Qualification or Action whatsoever, until first they have passed through those spiritual solemnities in Baptism, upon which they are invested with the denomination and visible privileges, which belong in common to the Members of Christ's Mystical body.  
Which Order of Christ hath had such a sanction upon it, that all, or for the most part all, that have professed Christianity, whether Papists, Prelatists, Presbyterians, or Independents have owned the same, not communicating in the Supper with any they judged unbaptised.  
In a word, Baptism hath been called of old amongst the Ancients, and not without Reason, Janna Sacramentorum, the Gate of the Sacraments, whereof they gave this Reason.  
In all respects the Order of the Mystery is kept, that first by Remission of sins a Medicine be prepared for their wounds, and then the Nourishment of the Heavenly Table be added. Ambrose. 
Ambrose   
Which Truth is further witnessed unto and confirmed by the following Testimonies, viz.  
Justin Martyr, 
Justin Martyr.  in secunda Apologiâ pro Christianis; speaking of the Lords Supper, to which the new baptised person is admitted, saith, This food we call the Eucharist, to which no man is admitted, but only he that believeth the truth of our Doctrine, being washed in the Laver of Regeneration for Remission of sins, etc.  
Vrsinus 
Vrsinus.  in his Catechism; Baptism is a Sacrament of entrance into the Church, whence it cometh, that the Supper is presented to none, except first baptised.  
The Assemblies Catechism. 
assemblies Catechism.  Baptism (say they) is a Sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Chri●t, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptised into the Visibit Church: But etc.  

Mr. Bax.  Mr. Baxter in his plain Scripture proof, p. 24. As a Soldier before Listing, and a King before Crowning and taking his Oath; so are we Church-Members before Baptism: But as every one that must ●e admitted solemnly into the Army, must be admitted by Listing, as the solemn engaging sign: So every one that hath right to be solemnly admitted into the Visible Church must ordinarily be admitted by Baptism; proved thus.  
If we have neither Precept nor Example in Scripture, since Christ ordained Baptism, of any other way of admiting Visible Members, but only by Baptism; then all that must be admitted Visible Members, must ordinarily be baptised.  
But since Baptism was instituted, we have no Precept or Example of admitting Visible Members any other way, but constant Precept, and Example for admittance this way.  
Therefore all that must be admitted Visible Members, must be baptised.  
I know not (saith he) what in show of Reason can be said to this by those that renounce not Scripture. For what man dare go in a way that hath neither Precept nor Example to warrant it from a way that hath a full current of both. Yet they that will admit Members into the Church without Baptism, do so.  
I had thought to have been larger upon this Point, and intended particularly to have answered a late piece of Mr. runions in contradiction hereto: But ●eing so well replied to by Mr. Paul, in his serious Reflections so lately Printed; I shall say thereto little more, than what you find in the Sixth Chapter, respecting the constitution of the Primative Churches.  
Now may it not be referred to the Judgement and Conscience of the considerate Impartial Reader, whether any but the believer can possibly reach, or attain these Spiritual ends mentioned? and how capable poor ignorant Babes are to answer any of them? and whether it is not contradictious to common sense and Experience for any to assert it? For what Repentance or Faith are they capable to profess? What present Regeneration can they evidence; What Testimony of a good Conscience can they give in striking, or keeping Covenant with God herein? And how can they embrace, or improve the Covenant on God's part for Pardon, Purging, Justification, Sanctification, and Salvation?  
And therefore is Mr. Faxter forced to confess in his plain Scripture proof, p. 301. That as to the Ends of Baptism they are rather to be fetched from the Aged, than Infants; and that because the aged 1. are the most fully capable Subjects. 2. The most Excellent and Eminent Subjects. 3. Of whom the Scripture fully speaks, etc. But on the contrary, as for Infant's Baptism be acknowledgeth in the same place, that the Scripture speaketh darkly of it: Yea, that it is so dark in the Scripture, that the Controversy is thereby become not only hard, but so hard, as he saith, he finds it.  
Wherein if he hath not said more in a few words for the baptising of Believers, and against that of Infants, than all his great book can answer: Let all the world judge, though he calls it in contradiction hereto, plain Scripture Proof for Infant's Church-Membership and Baptism.   

CHAP. V Wherein the Baptism of believers is proved to be the only Baptism from the New-testament-dispensation, so differing from that of the old.  
THe Old Testament Church, 
Fifthly, from the new Testament Dispensation.  we find, was national, consisting of the Natural and Fleshly Seed of Abraham: Therefore were Infants by the Ordinance of Circumcision added thereto: Wherein they had a worldly Sanctuary, Carnal Ordinances, a Temporary Priesthood, and multitude of Ceremonies.  
The New-testament-church was by Christ's appointment to be a separated people out of the Nations consisting only of the Spiritual Seed of Abraham; and therefore believers upon profession of Faith by the Ordinance of Baptism were added thereto, Acts 2.31, 1 Cor. 12.13. Wherein a● in the Spiritual house, the true Tabernacle, they partake of Spiritual Ordinances in Communion of Spiritual Members: And by an unchangeable Priesthood do offer Spiritual Sacrifices, and Worship God, as true Wroshippers in Spirit and Truth.  
And therefore upon this change you have John Baptist discharging that Privilege, (of Abraham's natural Seed) that admitted into the old Church, from any such Rite in the new, Mat. 3.9, etc. telling them in express terms, That now in Gospel days they must not say within themselves, That they have Abraham for their Father, viz. That they are the Children of a godly Parent, No, that which m●ght have served turn under Moses, will not a vail, nor must not be admitted now under Christ. Nothing now but fruits meet for Repentance give right to the Baptism of Repentance; and nothing short of the Spirits birth can orderly admit to Water-birth and Spiritual Ordinances. And the Genuine Reason Christ himself gave to that Doctor in Israel; (though yet, it seems, ignorant of the Mystery of the new birth, which only gives the right of admission into the New testament church) Because (saith he) that which is born of the flesh, is but flesh; Regeneration being not entailed to Generation.  
To which purpose therefore Dr. Owen 
Dr. Owen.  very excellently in his Catechism about Government, p. 106. Our Lord Jesus Christ hath laid down (saith he) as an Everlasting Rule, that unless a man be born again, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God, John 3.3. Requiring Regeneration as an indispensible condition in a Member of his Church, a Subject of his Kingdom: for his Temple is now to be built of Living Stones, 1 Pet. 2.5. Men Spiritually and savingly quickened from their death in sin, and by the Holy Ghost (whereof they are partakers) made a meet habitation for God, Eph. 2 21 22 1 Cor. 3.16. 2 Cor. 6.16. Which receiving Vital supplies from Christ its Head increaseth in faith and holiness, edifying itself in love. Thus far the Doctor.  
Under the Law, Ceremony, Shadow, Letter, and Carnal Seed suited to Carnal Ordinances: But when the substance and Spirit was come, (under the Gospel) then only a spiritual Seed as most meet and suitable, must attend the spiritual Worship, and spiritual Ordinances.  

Dr. Tayl.  And herein doth Dr. Taylor very well accommodate this Truth, P. 242. They (saith he) that baptise Children, make Baptism to be wholly an outward Duty, a Work of the Law, a Carnal Ordinance, it makes us adhere to the Letter without regard of the Spirit, to be satisfied with Shadows, to return to Bondage, to relinquish the mysteriousness, the substance and spirituality of the Gospel, which Argument is of s● much the more consideration; because under the Spiritual Covenant, or th● Gospel of Grace, if the Mystery go●● not before the Symbol; (which doe● when the Symbols are consignations o● Grace, as the Sacraments are) yet i● always accompanies it, but never follows in order of time. And this is cle● in the perpetual Analogy of Holy Scripture.   

CHAP. VI Wherein Believers Baptism is confirmed to be the only true Baptism, from the constitution of the Primitive Churches, who were form not of Ignorant Babes, but of professing Men and Women, that upon Baptism were joined together to observe all the Ordinances of Christ, which is also further evidenced by the Dedications of the Epistles to the Churches, as well as Contents of the same.  
THe Truth whereof appears not only from the Order directed unto in Christ's Commission, 
6. From the constitution of the Primitive Churches  which (as already observed) requires, that men be first taught in the Faith. 2. That then they be baptised into the Faith. And then thirdly, that they be edified or taught in the Faith, viz. in the place of teaching, the Church, or School of Christ. (The contemning which Order, as Mr. Baxter saith, is to contemn all Rules of Order.)  
Sect. 1 But also from the pattern and example, the Apostles gave in observation of the aforesaid direction in planting the New Testament Churches we read of. As first the Church of Jerusalem.  

Jerusalem.  Acts 2.41, 42. Then they that gladly received his Word were baptised, and the same day there were added to them 3000. Souls. (The (them) that they were added to, appear to be the Baptised Disciples mentioned Acts. 1.15, 21, 22.) And so they continued in the Apostles Doctrine, fellowship, breaking of Bread, and Prayers. Where you have the order fully observed; 1. Receiving or believing the Word. 2. Baptising. 3. Church fellowship in Doctrine, breaking Bread, and Prayer.  
And so in like manner you will find the selfsame order was observed in all the Churches: As,  
Secondly, The Church of Samaria. 
Samaria.   
Acts 8.12. Where it is said, that when the Samaritans believed Philp Preaching the things concerning the Kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus, they were baptised both Men and Women, (but not a Word of Children)  
Thirdly, The Church at Caesarea. 
Caesarea.   
Acts 10 47, 48. Where Peter upon Cornelius and his Companies believing and receiving the Holy Spirit) said, Can any man forbidden Water, that these should not be baptised, which have received the Holy Ghost, as well as We? And he commanded them to be baptised.  
Fourthly, The Church of Philippi. 
Philippi.   
Acts 16.14. It is said, That Lydia a Worshipper of God heard us, whose Heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things that were spoken by Paul, and was baptised, and her household.  
And Verse 32. They said unto the jailer, believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved: And they spoke unto him the Word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. 33. And he was baptised, he and all his straightway. 34. ●elieving in God with all his House.  
Where you have two Families bapti●ed, but no Child mentioned in either, but only such, who were capable to hear the Word of the Lord, and to believe the same.  
Fifthly, The Church at Coloss. 
Coloss.   
Col. 2.10, 11, 12. Where the Apostle asserts, that that Church at Coloss was buried with Christ in Baptism, wherein they were risen with him, through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.  
Which cannot be truly said of any but professed believers.  
Sixthly, Concerning the Church at Corinth, 
Corinth.  it is said.  
Acts 18.18. And Crisp●● the chief Ruler of the Synagogue believed on the Lord with all his House, and that many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed, and were baptised; and in 1 Cor. 1.13. Paul tells the Church at Corinth, That they were not baptised in his name. And in 1 Cor. 12.13. That by one Spirit they were all baptised into one Body, viz. That they were joined to the Church by baptism; of whom it is said, 1 Cor. 14.2 That they kept the Ordinances, as they were delivered to them.  
Seventhly, of the Church of Rome it is written.  
Rom. 6.3. Know ye not that so many of us as were baptised into Jesus Christ, were baptised into his Death. Therefore we are buried with him in Baptism into Death.  
Eighthly, of the Church at Galatia. 
Galatia.   
Gal. 3.26, 27. For ye are all the Children of God by Faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptised into Christ, have put on Christ.  
And lastly, of the Church at Ephesus 
Ephesus.  it is Recorded.  
Acts 9.1, 2, 3. That Paul having passed through the upper Coasts, came to Ephesus, and finding Disciples, said unto them, Have you received the Spirit since you believed; and they said, No &c. And he said, unto what were you baptised, etc.  
By which Scriptures it manifestly appeareth, that the New Testament Churches were form only of baptised believers, wherein we neither find one Ignorant Babe, nor one unbaptised person a Member.  
And that Infants have as little right to be admitted into the Church, and esteemed Members thereof, or to partake of the spiritual Ordinances therein, as they have to that initiating Ordinance Baptism. It may further appear, if you do but consider, how incongruous it is to Reason and sense to imagine, that little Children are any way concerned as Church-Members, either in the Dedications of the Epistles sent to the Churches, or in the Epistles themselves.  
Sect. 2 First, In the Dedications and Directions of the Epistles; as first, that to the Church of Rome, Rom. 1.7. Directed to the beloved of God, called to be Saints, and whose Faith was spoken of through the whole world.  
But can that be said of any Infant?  
And secondly those Epistles to the Corinthians, are they not also directed to those that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be Saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and theirs, enriched with all utterance and Knowledge, etc.  
But what Ignorant Babe could be concerned therein?  
And thirdly, that Epistle written to the Church at Ephesus; Is it not to the Faithful in Christ, the chosen, adopted, abounding in Wisdom and Prudence?  
But what poor silly Babe could be intended thereby?  
And Fourthly, In the Letter directed to the Church at Philippi. Is it not to all the Saints in Christ's Jesus, who have had their fellowship in the Gospel from the first day till then? Philip. 1.1.  
But how can that be said of any Child.  
And fifthly, those Epistles inscribed to the Church at Thessalonica, were they not to such as did abound in Love, Faith, Hope, Patience, that received the word in much affliction, and joy in the Holy Ghost, etc. 1 Thes. 1. 2 Thes. 1.3.  
But what Patience, Love, or Hope can be attributed to silly Children.  
And lastly, those seven Epistles written to the Asian Churches, wherein several Graces are commended, and s ns reproved and threatened, and every one that had an Ear commanded to hear what the Spirit said to these Churches.  
But how could there be one Child concerned therein?  
The Church of England 
Church of England.  in their 19th. Article, do acknowledge, that the Visible Church is a number of Christians by profession.  

Dr. Owen gives a description of a Gospel-Church.  Dr. Owen in his Catechism about New Testament Worship, P. 89. tells us, That a Gospel-Church is a society of Persons called our of the World, or their Natural worldly state by the administration of the Word and Spirit unto the obedience of the Faith, or the Knowledge and Worship of God in Christ joined together in an Holy band, or by special agreement, for the exercise of the communion of Saints in the due observation of all the Ordinances of the Gospel, Rom. 1.5, 6. 1 Cor. 1.2. 1 Cor. 14.15. Heb. 3.1. James 1.18. Rev. 1.20. 1 Pet. 2.5. Eph. 2.21, 22, 23. 2 Cor. 6.16, 17.  
And again in Page 106. As the Apostles in their Writings do ascribe unto all the Churches, and the Members of them, a Participation in this effectual Vocation, affirming, that they are Saints, Called, Sanctified, justified and Accepted with God in Christ; for which he again citys the foregoing Scriptures) so many of the Duties which are required of them in that Relation and condition are such, as none can perform to the Glory of God, their own benefit, and the edification of others, (the ●nds of all obedience) unless they are partakers of this effectual Calling, 1 Cor. 10.16, 17. 1 Cor. 12.12, Ephes. 4.16.  
Mr. Baxter in his 10th. Argument to Mr. Blake, 
Mr. ●ax.  hath these words very significant to our purpose, viz. Paul calleth all the baptised Church of Corinth justified: None that profess not a justified Faith, are called justified, therefore none such should be baptised. The Major is proved out of 1 Cor. 6.11. Ye are Washed, ye are Sanctified, ye are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.  
To which he adds, I confess it is sad, that good men should be so unfaithful to the Truth, which is so precious, and is not their own, and which they should do nothing against, but all they can for i●.  
Secondly, 
2. Nor in the Epistles themselves.  As Children are not concerned in the Dedications of the Epistles, so neither are they as Church-Members in the Epistles themselves, as may appear by a few instances, to which you may abundantly add in your reading the Epistles.  
The first we shall mention is that 1 Cor. 6.4. 
1 Cor. 6.4  If then you have Judgement of things pertaining to this Life, set them to judge that are least esteemed in the Church. And that he meant least esteemed for Wisdom and judgement, the fifth Verse explains.  
But Infants of 8 or 10 days old can neither judge nor speak, therefore we must necessarily conclude, there were no such Members in the Church of Corinth.  
2. Another you have in 1 Cor. 10.16, 17 compared with 11.28, 29. The Cup of blessing which webless is it not the Communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread which we break, is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ? For we being many are one Bread, and whosoever doth eat and drink unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, and eateth and drinketh Damnation to himself, not discerning the Lords body, etc. But poor Ignorant Babes without understanding cannot possibly either examine themselves, or have the least discerning of the Lords body, whether considered as Symbolically or Mystically represented in that Ordinance.  
Therefore were none such to be sound in the Church at Corinth, nor in any other Gospel-church, as Dr. Owen saith very well.  
Dr. Owen 
Dr. Owen  p. 103. As God hath appointed Saints to be the seal and subject of all his Ordinances, having granted the right of them to them alone, 1 Tim. 3.15. Instructing them with the exercise of that Authority, which he puts forth in the Rule of his Disciples in this world: He hath also appointed the most holy institution of his Supper to denote and express that Union and Communion, which the Members of each of these Churches have by his Ordinance among themselves, 1 Cor 10.7. The Cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the Communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the Communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread and one body, for we are all partakers of that one bread.  
How consonant, (by the way) and agreeable both to Rule, and Reason, and Righteousness doth it appear to be, to admit men upon profession of Faith to both Ordinances, keeping thereby the right Subjects, as well as to the due Order.  
But how Childishly ridiculous it was in those first inventors of Baptism for 600. years, so well to observe the Order, [viz. first to baptise and then to communicate] and yet so miserably to miss it in the Subjects, applying the Spiritual Ordinances to Ignorant Babes.  
And how much worse in the Protestant Reformers, that so lamentably miss it both in the due Order, and right Subjects also.  
Which the Prelate and Presbyter do in admitting Children to Baptism and Membership, but not to the Supper?  
And the Independent more in point of Order in admitting them to Baptism, but neither to Membership, nor the Supper.  
A third observable Passage we have in 1 Cor. 12 25, 26. 
1 Cor. 12.25, 26.  Where the Apostle exhorts, That there be no Schism in the body, but that the Members should have the same care one for another.  
But how ridiculous would this be to be applied to a little Ignorant careless Infant.  
A fourth considerable Instance may be fetched from 1 Thes. 5.2, 4. 
1 Thes. 5.2, 4.  Where the Apostle saith, That they all knew perfectly; that the Day of the Lord so cometh, as a Thief in the night. That he speaks of all is evident verse 4, 5. in these words. But ye, brethren are not in darkness, that that day should overtake You, as a Thief; Ye are all the Children of the Day, and of the Light, etc.  
But little Children that have no understanding, are no such Children of the Light, as to know perfectly, or in part the coming of the Day of God; For they know nothing at all of it: therefore no such Infants were Members of the Church at Thessalonica.  
And fifthly, another convincing Passage we have in Heb. 6.11, 12. 
Heb. 6.11, 12.  The Apostle thus exhorting; And we desire, that every one of you do show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope to the End, that ye be not slothful, but of them, who through Faith, and Patience inherit the Promises.  
But little Children can show no such diligence to the full assurance of hope to the end, neither can they show such diligence in following of them, who through Faith and Patience did inherit the Promises: For they have no understanding in Earthly things; How then can they understand Heavenly? John 3.12. Therefore no such Babes were Church-members in the Church of the Hebrews.  
And as a further proof against Infants Church-membership, 
3. From the Characters Christ gives his Disciples.  we may add the Character Christ gives of his Disciples, viz.  
John 8.31, 32. Then said Jesus to those Jews, which believed on him; If you continue in my Word, then are ye my Disciples indeed, and ye shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall make you free.  
And John 15.8. A new Commandment I give unto you, that you love one another, as I have loved you; That you also love one another: By this shall all men know that you are my Disciples. And again.  
John 15.1. Herein is my Father glorified, that you bear much Fruit; so shall you be my Disciples.;  
And again, Luke 14.27. And whosoever doth not bear his Cross, and come after me cannot be my Disciple  
And Verse 33. So likewise, whosoever he be of you, that forsaketh not all that he hath, cannot be my Disciple.  
But how absurd would it be to apply any of these Characters to little Ignorant Infants?  
And lastly, from that General Exhortation, that Christ gives to all his Disciples, Mark 13.37. Watch and Pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things, and to stand before the Son of Man, and what I say unto you, I say unto all, Watch.  
But how ridiculous would it be to include a little Babe herein?  
Which Argument about Church-membership, we shall conclude with those full words of Dr. Owen 
Dr. Owen  so much to the purpose, P. 107. viz.  
From all which it appears, who are the subject matter of these Churches of Christ, as also the means whereby they come to be so, namely, the Administration of the Spirit and Word of Christ. As also by the Gifts and Graces of the Spirit given to them, to make every one of them meet for, and useful in that place, which he holds in such Churches, as the Apostle discourseth at large, 1 Cor. 12.15, 16, 17, to 27. Col. 2.9. Ephes. 4.16. It being manifest (saith he) that no Ordinance of Christ is appointed to be observed by his Disciples; No Communication of Gifts of the Holy Ghost is promised to them; but with respect unto these Churches of his Institution;   

CHAP. VII. Wherein there is an account of some eminent Witness, that hath been born to Believers Baptism, in a brief History thereof; giving the Decrees of Counsels, and the Opinions of the Learned, (through out the Centuries) with the necessity of Instructing and Catechising not only the Children of Pagans, bu● of the Christians also in Order to it; with some remarkable Instances of the Children of Christians no● Baptised till Aged, Collected ●u● of several Authors, especially the famous Magdiburgensian History.  

CENTURY I.  
NOt further to mention the Elders and Fathers of the first Century all of them so fully, 
VII. The Testimony of Learned men in all Ages witnessing to it.  (as you have heard) confirming and establishing this great Truth; as Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, Barnabas, Timothy, Titus, Judas, etc. many of whose Authorities have been at large rehearsed; We shall proceed to give an Account here, of some Humane Authorities also, which we produce not for any Proof; but by way of Illustration on●y, and because they may be of weight with some; and whereby it may be manifest, that not only Scripture Authority, but even Antiquity itself, (which hath been so much boasted of) is altogether for Believers, and not fo● Infants Baptism.  
The Magdiburgenses in their excellent History, do tell us, that as to the business of Baptism in the first Century they find to have been after this manner, viz.  
First as to the Subjects of Baptism, 
The 1st. Subject of Baptism  they tell us, that in this Age they find they Baptised only the Adult or Aged, whether jews or Gentiles, whereof they say we have instances in the 2.8.10.16.19. Chapters of the Acts; but as to the baptising of Infants, they confess they read of no Example, Cent. 1. l. 2. 496.  
Secondly, as to the Administrators 
The 2. Administrator.  of Baptism, they say they find other Ministers of the Church besides the Apostles did baptise, which in after Ages came more especially to be fixed upon Bishops, though in Case of necessity, not only Laymen, but Women also were admitted to administer that Ordinance.  
Thirdly, 
The 3. Place.  As to the Place of Baptism, they find it was as occasion offered, where Rivers and Fountains, and other coveniencies for baptising were, and which was done as well privately, where only two Persons, Philip and the Eunuch, were as in a great Congregation, Acts 2.  
Neither do they find that the Water was in this Age first Consecrated before baptism, which with so much Ceremony was after enjoined to be in Fonts and Baptisterious fixed in the Temples.  
Fourthly, 
The 4. Time.  As to the Time when it was to be done. They say they find to be as any fit season, no certain Day or Feast being either by Christ or his Apostles, appropriated thereto, as after it was to Easter and Whitsen●ide,  
Fifthly, 
The 5. Manner.  As to the Manner of Baptising; It was by Dipping or Plunging in the Water into the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, which was (they say) so agreeable not only to the sense of the Word, which signifies Immersion in Water, but to the Allegory of Death, Burial, and Resurrection, to which the Apostle so properly alludes, Rom. 6. Col. 2. As also to the many Places where it is used for the washing away of sin, as 1 Pet. 3. Heb. 2.10 Eph. 5. Tit. 3. and in the 22. Acts, where they observe, that Ananias commands Paul to be Baptised, and to Wash away his sins, which said Custom of dipping the whole body in Water, was changed into sprinkling a little Water in the Face.  

The 6. Ceremony  Sixthly, As to the Ceremonies, they tell us, the Parties Baptised did freely come and offer themselves, professing their Faith, though not in any formal way of Confession, which after was enjoined, and that without any Gossips or Sureties, to confess or undertake for them, which after was required, both for the Adult, as for the Infant, neither were there any giving of Names in Baptising, no Excorismes, Chrysmes or anointings, no Consignations, Albes, Salt, Spittle, no Gifts given or received, no Confirmation or Bishoping, no giving of Meats, Milk or Honey, all which were after introduced and enjoined, as you'll hear Magdib. Cen. 1. l. 2. c. 6. p. 496. 497.   

CENTURY II.  
AS to Baptism in the second Century, they say, Cent. 2. c. 6. p. 109. That it doth not appear by any approved Authors, that there was any mutation or variation from the former; and in Confirmation thereof, Quote what justin Martyr, 
Justin Martyr.  saith in his second Apology to Anto● Pius the Emperor. Which because it is so considerable an Instance, I shall give it you at large, as I find it in the Apology itself in the words that Mr, Baxter himself hath rendered it in his Saints Rest, c. 8. Ser. 5. viz  
I will declare unto you how we offer up ourselves to God after that we are renowned through Christ Those amongst us that are Instructed in the Faith, and believe that which we teach them is true, being willing to live according to the same, we do admonish to fast and pray for the forgiveness of sins, and we also fast and pray with them; And when they are brought by us into the Water, and there as we were new born, are they also by new birth renewed; and then in calling upon God the Father, the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, they are washed in Water. Then we bring the Person thus washed and instructed to the Brethren; (as they are called) where the Assemblies are, that we may pray both for ourselves and the new illuminated Person, that we may be found by true Doctrine, and by good Works worthy observers and keepers of the Commandments, and that we may attain Eternal Life and Salvation. Then Bread and Wine being brought to the chief Brother, (so they call the chief Minister) he taketh it and offereth Praise and Thanksgiving to the Father, by the Name of the Son and Holy Spirit: And so awhile he celebrateth Thanksgiving; after Prayers and Thanksgiving, the whole Assembly saith, Amen.  
Thanksgiving being ended by the Precedent, (or chief Guide) and the consent of the whole People, the Deacons as we call them, do give to every one present, part of the Bread and Wine, over which Thanks was given, and they also suffer them to bring it to the absent.  
This Food we call the Eucharist; to which no man is admitted, but only he that believeth the truth of the Doctrine, being washed in the Laver of Regeneration for Remission of sins, and that so liveth as Christ hath taught. And this, saith Mr. Baxter, is you see no new way.  
This Justin Martyr is believed to have been converted to Christ within 30 years after the Apostle John, when it is credible also very many were living, who had been frequent Auditors of the Apostle, who was beheaded under Verus the Emperor.  
Now they that shall consider this description he makes of the Christian Baptism, and the manner that Christians were admitted after it into the Churches of Christ in those days, can hardly, I presume, pick out any good warranty for Infants Church-membership, or Baptism out of the same.   

CENTURY III.  
IN this Third Century, they say as to the Rites of Baptism in the Asiatic Churches, they have no Testimony as to any Alteration; but concerning the African Churches they give some account, and of the great corruptions creeping into the Church, respecting this Ordinance of Baptism at least in Opinion, (though as to practise, they say they cannot give any particular Instance) both as to subject, time, manner and ceremonies, Cent. 3. c. 6.123, 124, 125.  

Tertull  They tell us, That Tertullian in his Book de Baptismo, opposeth himself (by several Arguments at large, to some that asserted Infants Baptism, affirming, That the Adult were the only proper subjects of Baptism; because, saith he, fasting confession of sins, prayer, profession, renouncing the Devil and his Works is required from the Baptised.  

Mr. Bax.  Mr. Baxter is pleased to give us this farther account of Baptism in this Age, in his Saints Rest, Part 1. c. 8. Sect. 5 in these words, viz. That Tertullian, Origen, and Cyprian, who lived, saith he, in the second and third Centuries, do all of them affirm; that in the Primative times, none were baptised without an express covenanting, wherein they renounced the World, Flesh and Devil and engaged themselves to Christ, and promised to obey him.  
And again he is pleased to tell us in his defence of the Principles of Love, P. 7. in these words. That he knew that in the days of Tertullian, Nazianzen and Austin, Men had liberty to be baptised, or to bring their Children, when, and at what age they pleased, and that none were forced to go against their Consciences therein And that he knew not that our Rule or Religion is changed, or that we are grown any wiser or ●e●●● than they.  
Eusebius 
Eusebius  Lib. 6. Hist. Eccles. saith, That Origen was appointed by Demetrius, to be at Alexandria a Catichist, that is, a Teacher of those that were Disciples and Scholars in the faith, which Office before his time after the Apostles Plautius and Clemens did execute, whose Disciples he saith were Plutarch, ●erenus, Heraclus and Heron; and that a Woman after she was Baptised with Water, was as a Martyr put to Death, and Baptised with fire for Christ's sake; after Origen, Heracles; and after him D●onysius taught in the said School of Alexandria those that were to be instructed in the faith before Baptism. And again in Lib. 7. Chap. 8. There was with us a Brother which believed, who being present amongst those that were to be Baptised and heard how they were Questioned, and how they answered, came weeping to me, and desired of me to be cleansed, and washed by Christian Baptism.   

CENTURY IU.  
IN this Age they tell us, That it was the Universal practice to Baptise the Adult upon profession of Faith, and for which they give us several Authorities out of the learned Fathers and Councils at that time, some whereof you have as followeth.  

Athan.  Athanasius contra Arianos. Our Saviour, saith he, did not slightly command to Baptise. For first of all he said Teach, and then Baptise, that true Faith might come by teaching, and Baptism perfected by Faith.  
Hillary 
Hillary.  Lib. 2. de Trinitate. The Lord hath commanded to baptise upon the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, that is upon Confession of the beginners, the only begotten, and him that was given And farther, the said Hillary prayeth thus to God, O living Lord preserve my Faith, and the Testimony of my Conscience; so that I may always keep what I have confessed in the Sacrament of my Regeneration, when I was Baptised in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, namely, that I may worship thee O God our Father, with thy Son, and stir up thy Holy Spirit in me, which proceedeth or goeth out from thee.  
And again saith, That all the Eastern Churches did only Baptise the Adult.  
Basil 
Basil.  contra Eunomium Lib. 3. Must the faithful be sealed with Baptism, Faith must needs precede and go before. And in his Exhortation to Baptism, saith, that none were to be baptised but the Catachumen, and those that were duly instructed in the faith.  

Gregory Nazian.  Gregory Nazianzen in his Third Oration, saith, That the Baptised used in the first place to confess their Sins, and to renounce the Devil and all his Works before many Witnesses. And again, That none were baptised of old, but they that did so confess their sins, and how dangerous it was headily, and without due preparation to partake thereof.  
He therefore adviseth, That the Baptism of Infants be deferred till they could give an Account of ●hei● Faith, as Dr. Taylor, p 239.  
Ambrose 
Ambrose  saith in his Third Book de Sacramentis, c. 2. That the Baptised did not only make Confession of his Faith, but was to desire the same.  
And in his Second Book de ●piritu Sancto. In our Sacrament, saith he, there are three Questions propounded, and three Confessions made, without which none can be washed  
Arno●ius 
Arnobius  in Ps. 146 Thou art not first (saith he) baptised, and then beginnest first to affect and embrace the faith but when thou art to be baptised, thou signifiest unto the Priest what thy desire is, and makest thy confession with thy mo●th.  
Jerom 
Jerom.  upon Matthew saith, The Lord commanded his Apostles, that they ●●ould first Instruct and Teach all Nations, and afterwards should baptise those that were instructed in the Mysteries of the Faith; for it cannot be, saith he, that the Body should receive that Sacrament of Baptism, till the Soul have before received the true Faith.  
Jerom 
Jerom.  saith, That in the Eastern Churches, the Adul● were only Baptised in his Epistle against the Errors of John of Jerusalem. And again in his Epistle to Pamachius saith, That they are to be admitted to Baptism to whom it doth properly belong, viz. those only who have been Instructed in the Faith.   

Decrees of Counsels.  
IN the 4th. Council of Carthage it was determined, 
C. Carth.  That whoever was to be baptised, should give in his Name, and that then after due Examinations and Preparations Baptism was to be administered, Magd. Cent. 4 c. 6. 417.  

C. Laodi.  In the Council of Laodicea in their 46. Canon, it was determined, that the baptised should Rehearse the Articles of the Creed, Magd. Cent. 4. 418.  

C. Neo.  In the 6. Canon of the Council of Neocesaria, It is said, That Confession and free choice was necessary to Baptism, Mag. Cent. 4. 616.  
Grotius 
Grotius.  in his Annotations upon Mat. 19 saith. That the Canon of the Syn●● of Neocaesaria, held in the year 315. Determined, that a Woman with Child might be baptised, because the Baptism reached not the fruit of the Womb; because in the Confession made in Baptism each one's own free choice is showed; from which Canon, saith he, Balsamon and Zoncras do infer, that an Infant cannot be baptised, because it hath no power to confess or choose the Divine Baptism.  
Dr. Tailor 
Dr.   upon mentioning the Canon, p. 238. saith. It speaks Reason, and it intimates a practice, which was absolutely universal in the Church of interrogating the Catechemeni concerning the Articles of their Creed, which is one Argument, that either they did not admit Infants to Baptism, or that they did prevaricate egregiously in ask questions of them, who themselves knew were not capable of giving answers.  
And in farther assurance and confirmation of this great truth, you have most remarkable Instances of several of the Most eminent Persons of this Century, that were not baptised till aged, though the Offspring of believing Parents; viz. Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Ambrose, chrysostom, jerom, Austin, Nectarius, Constantine, Theodosius, etc. and for proof whereof take the following Authorities.  
Osiander Cent 4. l. 3. c. 42. 371. 
Basil baptised aged.  saith, That Basil the great Bishop of Caesaria, the Son of Basil Bishop of Nisen, and his Wife Eumele, whose Grandfather was a Martyr, under the persecution of Maximinus, was tenderly educated like a second Timothy under his gracious Mother, became a learned man, and great Preacher, and after Baptised in Jordan by Maximinus the Bishop, as he saith, is declared by Vincentius in speculo; and for which Story he also quotes Socrates, l. 4. c. 26. Sozam. l. 6. c. 34. Magd. Cent. 4. c. 10. p. 939.  

Gregory Nazian. baptised after 20. years old.  Osiander Cent 4. l. 3. c. 43. p. 380. Tells us, That Gregory Nazianzen was the Son of Gregory Bishop of Nazianzen, by his Wife Nonna, a very pious holy Woman, and instructed this her Son as Hannah of old did Samuel, who in the 20th. Year of his age was baptised.  
Hugo Grotius Anot. in Mat. 19.14. saith, It was no small Evidence that Baptism of Infants many hundred years was not ordinary in the Greek Church; because not only Constantine the great, 
Constantine baptised aged.  the Son of Helena, a zealous Christian was not baptised till aged: But also Gregory Nazianzen, who was the Son of a Christian Bishop, and brought up long by him, was not baptised till he came to years; as is, saith he, related in his Life.  
Paulinus in vita Ambrosi, saith, That Ambrose, 
Ambrose baptised after Bishop of Milan.  born of Christian Parents, his father's name was Ambrose, and his Mother's Marcelina, remained instructed in the Faith unbaptised, till he was chosen Bishop of Milan, as which time he received Baptism.  
Hugo Grotius farther upon Mot. 19 
Chr●sost. Baptised at 21.  tells us, That chrysostom was born of Christian Parents, and educated by Miletius a Bishop, was not baptised till past 21. years; who adds farther, That many of the Greeks in every age unto this day, do keep the custom of deferring the Baptism of little ones, till they could themselves make a Confession of their faith.  
Erasmus in Vita Hieronimi, 
Jerom Baptised in his 30. year.  Testifies, That Jerom, born in the City of Strydon of Christian Parents, and brought up in the Christian Religion, was baptised at Rome in the 30th. year of his age.  
Walafridus Strabo, who lived about 840. in his Book de Reb. Eccles Cap. 26. saith, That in the first times the Grace of Baptism was wont to be given to them only who were come to that integrity of mind and body, that they could know and understand what profit was to be gotten by Baptism, what was to be confessed and believed, 
Austin Baptised about the 30th. year of his Age.  what lastly was to be observed by them that are new born in Christ, and confirms it by Augustine's own Confession of himself, continuing a Catachumenus, long afore Baptised: But afterwards Christian's understanding Original sin, and lest their Children should perish without any means of Grace, had them, he saith, Baptised to the decree of the Council of Africa, and then adds, how Godfathers and Godmothers were invented, and the superstitious and impious consequent of it, etc.  
Nauclerus Generate. 14. An. 391. saith, Austin the Son of the virtuous Monica, being instructed in the faith, was baptised when he was about 30. years of age.  
Vossins' de Baptismo Pag. 106. saith, That Nectarius was made Bishop of Constantinople before he was baptised.  
Historia Tripartita Lib. 1. affirmeth, That Theodosius the Emperor, 
Theodosius baptised aged.  born in Spain, his Parents being both Christians, was even from his youth instructed and educated in the faith, who falling sick at Thessalonica, was by Achalio baptised, and thereupon recovered of his sickness.  
Mounsieur Daille, the learned French man, a great searcher into Antiquity, in his Book called theVse of the fathers, saith, In ancient times they often deferred the Baptism of Infants; as appeareth by the History of Constantine the great, Constantinus, Theodosi●s, Valentinian, Gracian, and in St. Ambrose, and also by the Orations of Greg. Nazianzen, and St. Basil on this subject, and some of the Fathers have been of opinion, that it is sit it should be deferred; but whence is it, saith he, that the very mentioning hereof is scarce to be endured at this day, Lib. 2. P. 149.  
Dr. Field 
Dr. Field.  on the Church, P. 729. saith, That very many that were born of Christian Parents, besides those that were converted from Paganism, put off their Baptism for a long time, insomuch that many were made Bishops before they were baptised.  
Beatus Rhenanus 
B. Rhen.  in Anot. sup. Tert. saith. That the old Custom was, that those that were come to their full growth, were baptised with the Bath of Regeneration, which Custom, saith he, was observed till the time of Charles the great, and Lodowick Emperors, as by the Statutes by the●● established appeared, etc.  
Mr. Den, 
Mr. Den.  besides the former Instances of the Children of Christian Parents not baptised till aged, adds, Pancrati●●, Pontius, Nazarius, Tecia, Laigerus, and Erasma Tusca.  

Dr. Tayl.  Dr. Jerom Taylor in his Lib Proph. P. 239. affirms out of an Antiquity, That the Parents of Austin, Jerom, and Ambrose, although Christians did not baptise their Children till they were 30. years of Age, and that it will be very considerable, in the example, and of great efficacy for destroying the supposed necessity of derivation of Infant's Baptism from the Apostles.  

Dr. B. Letter.  Dr. B. late Dr. of the Chair, a person of great learning and eminency, hath these words in a Letter I have seen in Print. viz. I do believe and know that there is neither Precept nor Example in Scripture for Pedobaptisme, nor any just evidence for it for above 200 years after Christ, that Tertullian condemns it as an unwarrantable Custom, and Nazianzen a good while after him dislikes it too, sure I am that in the primitive times they were Chatacumeni, then Illuminati or Baptizati; and that not only Pagans, and Children of Pagans converted, but Children of Christian Parents.  
The truth is, I do believe Pedobaptisme; how, or by whom I know not, came into the world in the second Century, and in the third and fourth began to be practised, though not generally, and defended as lawful from the Text, grossly misunderstood, Jo. 3.5, upon the like gross mistake of Jo. 6.53. they did for many Centuries both in the Greek and Latin Church Communicate Infants, and give them the Lords Supper, and I do confess they might do both as well as either: But although they baptised some Infants, and thought it lawful so to do; yet Austin was the first that ever said it was necessary; and farther saith.  
I have read what my learned and worthy friends Dr. Hamond, Mr. Baxter, and others say in defence of it, and I confess I wonder not a little, that men of such great parts should say so much to so little purpose; for I have not yet seen any thing like an Argument for it. Thus far Dr. B.   

CENTURY V.  
BElieve i● Baptism was asserted in this Age, and the grounds thereof by many of the learned writers, whereof you have the following Instances.  
chrysostom 
Chrysost.  saith, That the time of G●●ce on Conversion was the only fit 〈◊〉 for Baptism, which he saith, was the season the 3000. in the second Acts, and the 5000, afterwards were baptised, Acts 4.  
And again, In Baptism the Principal thing to be looked after, is the Spirit by which the Water is made effectual; for saith he, in the Apostles time the Baptism of Water, and the Baptism of the Spirit were different things, and done at different times, Magd. 5, Cent. 363.  
And again, As Isaac was brought forth by the Word of Promise, so must we be b●●● by the Word of God, which only makes Baptism powerful and effectual, 364.  
Austin 
Austin.  himself in his Book de fide & bono aper. Cap. 6 saith, That none without due. Examination both as to Doctrine and Conversation, aught to be admitted to Baptism, Cent. 5 p, 654.  
And again, That no ignorant or scandalous Person ought by any means without due Instruction and fruits of Repentance, to be admitted to Baptism, 654, 655.  
Augustine's Creed, and Chrysostom's Creed also were calculated for the Catachumeni, for their better instruction before Baptism, p 655.  
The names and qualities of several Adult persons that were baptised in this Age, are inserted p. 655.   

CENTURY. VI  
IN this Age the Adult upon profession of faith were baptised.  
Gregory 
Gregory.  Lib. 4 Cap. 26. saith, That a Sermon was used to be Preached to those that were to be baptised, and that the pomps of the Devil were used to be renounced before Baptism; and that the hearts of believers are through Grace cleansed thereby.  
Gregory, in Baptism the Elect receive the gift of the the Spirit, whereby also their understandings are enlightened in the Scripture, and that by faith in Baptism all sins are relaxed, Cent 6. 226, 227.  
Cassiodarus 
Cass●odor  calls Baptism the Divine fountain, wherein the faithful have the new Creature brought forth, Cent 6. p. 226.  
Olimpi●dorus 
Olimp.  saith. Our Spiritual life is one and the same effected with our spiritual death, for they who are born, are buried with Christ in Baptism, p. 226.   

CENTURY VII.  
THe Bracarens Council 
Brac. C.  in Spain decreed, That no Adult Person, but such who had been well instructed and Chatechised, and duly examined, should be baptised, Cent. 7. 146.  
The 6th Council of Constance 
C. of Con.  ordained, That none should receive Baptism without rehearsing the Creed, or Lords Prayer, 146.  
The Council of Tolletanus, 
C. of Tol.  in the 5th. Chapter saith, That by being dipped into Water, we do as it were descend into Hell, and by rising up out of the Water, we do witness a Resurrection.  
Paulinus Baptised in the River Trent in England, a great number both of men and women at noon day, Bead. l. 2. c. 16. Cent. 7. 145.   

CENTURY VIII.  
BEde saith, That men were first to be instructed into the knowledge of the Truth, then to be baptised as Christ hath taught, because without faith it was impossible to please God, Cent. 8. p 220.  
And again, as the body is visibly cleansed by Water, so the soul of the faithful is invisibly cleansed by Baptism,  
And again, only that kind of Baptism where the Spirit of the Lord regenerates is effectual, 223. And again, if the Word or Water be wanting, it is no Baptism, 218.  
And again upon Jo. 3. All those that came to the Apostles to be baptised were instructed and taught concerning the Sacraments of Baptism, than they received the holy administration thereof.  
Haimo 
Haimo.  in Postilla upon Mat. 28. Go and teach all Nations, Baptising them, &c Fol. 278. In this place, saith he, is set down a Rule how to baptise, that is, that teaching should go before Baptism; for he saith, Teach all Nations, and then he saith Baptism them; for he that is to be Baptised, must be first Instructed, that he first learn to believe that which in Baptism he shall receive; for as faith without works is dead, so works when they are not of faith, are nothing worth.   

CENTURY IX.  

Rabonus.  RAbonus Cap. 4. saith, That the Catechism which is the Doctrine of faith, must go before Baptism, to the intent that he that is to be Baptised, may first learn the mysteries of faith. And farther, he saith, the Lord Christ anointed the Eyes of him that was born blind, with Clay made of Spittle, before he sent him to the Water of Shiloah, to signify, that he that is to be Baptised, must first be instructed in the faith concerning the incarnation of Christ, when he doth believe, than he is to be admitted to Baptism, to the intent that he may know what the Grace is which he receiveth in Baptism, and whom he afterwards in duty ought, and is bound to serve.  
Albinus 
Albinus.  saith, Three things are visible in Baptism, viz. the Body, the Water, and the Administrator, and three things are invisilbe, the Soul, Faith, and the Spirit of God, which being all joined by the word, they are effectual in that Sacrament, Cent. 8. 225.  
Damascenus, 
Damas'.  We are buried with the Lord in Baptism, as saith the Apostle, p. 220.  
Rabonus 
Rabonus.  again saith, That the Adult were first to be instructed in the faith, and duly examined before they were baptised: And that as Noah and his family were saved by Wood and Water, so the faithful are saved by Baptism, and the Cros●, Cent. 8. p. 144.  
Remigius saith in 22. 
Remig.  That faith is the principal thing in Baptism; for without it, it is impossible to please God, p. 145.  
Walafrid Strabo, 
Walafrid Strabo.  who lived about 840. in his Book de Reb. Eccles. Cap. 26, saith, That in the first times, the Grace of Baptism was wont to be given to them only, who were come to that integrity of mind and body, that they could know and understand what profit was to be gotten by Baptism, what is to be confessed and believed, what lastly is to be observed by them that are new born in Christ; and confirms it by Augustine's own confession of himself, continuing a Chatachnmenus long before Baptism. But afterwards understanding Original sin, and lest their Children should perish without any means of Grace, had them, he saith, baptised according to the Council of Africa, etc.   

CENTURY X.  

Auslbert.  AVslbertus saith, That the faithful are born not of blood, but of God, viz. of the Word of God Preached, and of the Baptism of God duly administered, by which Sacraments saith he, God's Children are begotten. Cent. 10 p. 186  

Smarag.  Smaragdo on Mat 28. First men are to be taught in the faith, then after to be baptised therein; for it is not enough that the body is baptised, but that the Soul first by faith receive the truth thereof, p. 187.  

Theophi.  Theophilact saith, Whoever are truly baptised into Christ, have put on Christ, p. 189.   

CENTURY XI.  
ANselme saith, That believers are baptised into the death of Christ, that believing his death, and conforming thereto, may as dying with him, live also with him, Cent. 11. p. 169.  

Anselme.  And again, The Baptism of Christ is the washing in Water into the Word of life, take away either Water or Word, Baptism ceaseth, p. 116.  
And again, Whoever is baptised, hath Heaven opened to him, and knows God is there above ready to receive him, which as by the Steps of a Ladder he must from his Baptism ascend to him, for as Solomon saith, The way of life is above to the wise, p. 160, 170.  
Algerus 
Algerus.  saith, As Water extinguisheth, cleanseth and whitneth above other Liquors, so in Baptismal Water fleshly lusts are quenched, sin both Original and Actual washed away, and white Innocency thereby begotten; and so whilst the Image of the Heavenly father is reform, the Sons of Adoption are begotten.   

CENTURY XII.  
RVpertus 
Rupertus  saith, That they who do believe and make confession thereof, are to be Baptised, Cent. 12. p. 597.  
And again in his 4th Book of Divine Offices, Cap. 18. saith, That in former times the Custom of the primitive Churches was, that they administered not the Sacrament of Regeneration, but only at the feast of Easter and Pentecost, and all the Children of the Church, which throughout the whole year through the Word were moved, when Easter came, gave up their names, and were the following days till Pentecost instructed in the Rules of faith, rehearsing the same and by their Baptism, and dying thus with Christ, risen again with him.  
Johannes Bohemius 
Bohemius  Lib. 2. de Gent. moribus, It was in times past, saith he, the Custom to administer Baptism only to those that were instructed in the faith, and seven times in the week before Easter and Pentecost Catechised, but afterwards when it was thought and adjudged needful to Eternal life to be baptizeed. It was ordained, that new born Children should be baptised, and Godfathers were appointed, who should make Confession, and renounce the Devil on their behalf.  
Rupertus 
Rupertus  again saith, That many who are baptised with Water, are not renewed in the Spirit of their minds, have not put off the old man, and his deeds, as if he was drowned in the Water, and the new man really put on, in his 3. Book upon the second of John.  
And again, That the visible Baptism of Water may confer, but that in which the virtue of Baptism doth consist we cannot, p 598.  
Peter Lombard 
P. Lumb.  saith, That the Reason why Baptism was instituted was, that the mind might be changed, that the man, who by sin was made old, by Grace might be renewed. And that Believers, who are baptised in faith, receive both the Sacrament and the thing; but they who have not faith, may receive the Sacrament, but not the thing intended in the Sacrament, p. 529.  
Albertus Magnus 
Albert. Magnus.  saith, That the Laver of Regeneration is not proper; but to the Illuminated and Called, who can draw virtue from the Death and Resurrection of Christ, Cent. 13. 413.  
And again, That Baptism is Christ's Seal, wherewith he seals Believers, and that where Regeneration is, there the sanctifying power of the Spirit operates with the Water, 414.  
And again, That Baptism works to Salvation in those that are Regenerate, but not in those that are not Regenerate, p. 425.  
Thomas Aquinus 
Th. Aqui  saith, That in Baptism God works inwardly, as he dispenseth outwardly, there is not only a consignation of the Soul, but the Body, because the whole man by Baptism is dedicated to God for by Baptism we die to the life of sin, and begin to live a new life of Grace, d. 424.  
And again, In Baptism there is a four fold purification, viz. ●y the Word, by the Spirit, by the Blood of Christ, and by baptismal Grace, viz. Repentance, Faith, and Mortification fetched from Christ's Death, p. 425.  
Alexander, Bonaventure, Aegedius, and other learned men of this Age, spoke also after the same manner in ●ustification of Believers Baptism.   

CENTURY 14, 15, 16, 17.  
THough the Magdiburge●stan History reach no farther than the end of the 13th. Century, yet we do find, than both the Principal and practice thereof, was owned by many of the learned downwards in the rest of the Centuries.  
Ludovicus Vives 
L. Vives.  saith, That they continued to baptise the Adult, even in Italy in his days, in his Comment upon August, l. 1. c. 26.  

Bellarm.  And Bellarmine himself tells us in his Book de bon. Operib l. 2. c. 17. That amongst the Lutherans the Custom of Baptising the Catachumen, and absolving the penitent at Easter is abolished, whereas amongst the Catholics; (but especially in the City of Rome) there is no year wherein great multitudes are not baptised, whereby a relic and footstep of Truth may appear even in Rome itself.  
Grotius 
Grotius.  saith, That in every age many of the Greeks unto this day keep the Custom of deferring the Baptism to little ones, till they could themselves make a Confession of their faith; and the Armenians are confessed by Heylin in his Microcos. 573. to defer Baptism of Children, till they be of grown years.  
Zwinglius 
Zwingli.  in his Book of Articles, Art. 18. In the old time saith the Children were openly instructed, who when they came to understanding, were called Catachumen, that is, such as are instructed in the Word of Salvation, and when they had imprinted the faith in their Hearts, and made confession thereof with their mouths, they were admitted to Baptism, and this Custom, saith he, of teaching, I wish it were in use in our time.  
Luther, 
Luther.  In times past it was thus, saith he, that the Sacrament of Baptism was administered to none; except it were to those that acknowledged and confessed their faith, & knew how to rehearse the same  
Bullinger in his house Book, 48. Sermon, 
Bulling.  upon these words, God hath not sent me to Baptise, but Preach the Gospel, saith, This must not slightly be understood, as if he were not sent to to baptise at all, but that teaching should go before Baptism, for the Lord commanded his Apostles both to Preach, and also to administer the Sacraments.  
Erasmus 
Erasmus  paraphraseth, that upon those words in Mat, 28. When you have taught them the Word of God if they then believe you, and receive it, if they begin to repent themselves of their former life, and are ready and willing to embrace the Doctrine of the Gospel, then let them be baptised. with Water in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, that they may be marked with his Mark, and written amongst the number of those which trust, that are through the merits of his death freed and washed from their sins, and received to be Children of God  
Ludovicus Vives in his Comment aforesaid, 
L. Vives.  l. 1. c. 27. None, saith ●e, were baptised of old, but those that are of Age, who did not only understand what the Mystery of the Water mean, but desired the same, the perfect Image whereof we have yet in our Infant's Baptism; for it is asked of the Infant, Wilt thou be baptised, for whom the sureties answer, I will.  
Melancton upon 1 Cor. 11. In times past, saith he, those in the Church that had Repent them, were baptised, 
Melanc.  and was instead of an Absolution, wherefore Repentance must not be separate from Baptism; for Baptism is a Sacramental sign of Repentance.  
Beza 
Beza.  upon 1 Cor. 7.14. saith, That to permit all Children to be Baptised, was unheard of in the primimitive Church, whereas every one ought to be instructed in the Faith, before he were admitted to Baptism.  
Bucer 
Bucer.  in his Book entitled, The Ground, Work, and Cause, saith, That in the Congregation of God, Confession of sins is always first, the which in times past went before Baptism; For commonly Children were baptised when they came to their understanding, and that in the beginning of the Church no man was Baptised, and received into the Congregation; but those that through hearing the Word, wholly gave over, and submitted themselves to Christ.  
Chamier 
Chamier.  Tom. 4. l. 5. c. 15. Ser. 19 saith Who seethe not that the Custom of the scrutiny of the Baptised, was not in that time, when scarce the 1000 Person was Baptised before he came to Age, and was diligently exercised in Catechism.  

Dr Ham  Dr. Hamond in his Chat. Lib. 1. l. 3, p 23. saith, That all men were instructed in the Fundamentals of faith anciently before they were permitted te be baptised.  
Dr. Field 
Dr. Field  on the Church, p. 729. saith, That very many that were born of Christian Parents, besides those that were converted from Paganism, put off their Baptism for a long time, insomuch that many were made Bishops before they were baptised.  

Ch. Cate.  The Doctrine of the Church of England held forth in their public Catechism, gives Testimony to this Truth, where it is asserted, That Repentance whereby we forsake sin, and faith whereby we steadfastly believe the promises are required in every one that is to be baptised, confessing also that Children can neither repent nor believe. Which though they would salve by saying they do both by their Sureties; upon which invention they lay the stress of the whole; for if there be no warranty for Sureties in the Case, they have in these few words given up the Controversy. For they grant that Faith and Repentance are requisite to qualify to Baptism, and ingeniously acknowledge, that Children are not capable of either; but that they do repent and believe by their sureties; which how Consonant to Reason, Rule, and Righteousness, l●t all the upright judge; and concerning which Practice take the judgement of Dr. Taylor, Bishop of Down, 
Dr. Tayl.  p. 239. of his Lib. of Pro.  
I know, saith he, God might if he would have appointed Godfathers, to give answer in behalf of Children, and to be fiduciors for them, but we cannot find any authority or ground that he hath, and if he had, that it is to be supposed he would have given them Commission to have transacted the solemnity with better Circumstances, and given Answers with more truth; for the Question is asked of believing in the present, and if the Godfathers answer in the name of the Child, I do believe, it is notorious they speak false and ridiculous, for the In●ant is not capable of believing, and if he were, he were also capable of discenting; and how then do they know his mind; and therefore, said he, Tertullian and Gregory Nazianzen gave advice, that the Baptism of Infants should be deferred till they could give an account of their own faith.  
How this invention of Gossips came in, and by what Pope it was instituted, and how they were required in the Baptism of Bells and Churches, as well as Infants, you will hear farther in the other Historical Part. We shall now conclude this Chapter with that wonderful Testimony given by M●. Baxter, in his 20th. Argument to Mr. Blake in these words.  

Mr. Bax.  Here note (saith he) speaking of the Eunuches not being admitted 〈◊〉 Baptism, till he made a profession of his Faith, first that Baptism as received, is the Seal of our Faith, (how much soever denied by Mr. Blake) as it is the Seal of God's Promise; secondly, That the constant order is that Baptism follow Faith; thirdly, That it is 〈◊〉 better than an impious profanation of it, if it go without Faith, that is firs● if the Party seek it without the presence of Faith, secondly if the Pastor administer is without the profession of Faith.  
Thus you see by plentiful Evidence, that the Lord hath not left himself without witness hereto from men, and that in several Ages not only before, but since the Antichristian darkness took place; but that which is most to be admired and adored in this Providence is, that much of this blessed Testimony for Truth, hath proceeded from the Pens of some of its chiefest Adversaries, whereby the Wisdom and Power of God hath much appeared, who cannot only out of the mouths of Babes and Sucklings, but out of the very mouths of Enemies also, create and perfect his own praise. And make even their own Tongues to fall upon themselves, for what is esteemed better Evidence and Testimony amongst men, than the confession of Parties themselves.  
But it may be Objected, Object. that however you improve many of these say of the Pedobaptists to justify your way, and condemn theirs; yet they have another meaning, which will well enough reconcile such Principles to their Practice of baptising Infants, and whereby you will be found mistaken in in the supposed advantage; for is it to be thought possible that such pious, wise and learned men, should so positively contradict themselves, as you seem to make them do?  
Answ. To which I answer, That whatever their meaning may be, yet their word and reasons appear substantial Arguments for the Baptists, and full and clear Evidence against themselves; for is not the Commission itself fully owned, the Order of it, and Practice upon it, viz. That Persons ought first to be taught in the faith, before they are to be baptised into the same, and that none in the Apostles times, and for some Ages after were otherwise baptised; and that it is ridiculous, yea profane for any otherwise to practice, and that there was neither Precept nor Example for the baptising of Infants, who as confessed are so capable either of themselves, or any for them to answer the great ends thereof: but owned to be a practice taken up, and enjoined several Ages after, as many of the forecited Pedobaptists, both Papists and Protestants, have confessed, and will more fully and particularly appear in the next part, And what is or can be said more by the Baptists themselves, in confirmation of of their way and Practice.  
Thus we have dispatched the first part and may it not now be recommended to the Conscience of the impartial unprejudiced Reader, whether this first assertion, [viz That Believers Baptism is only to be esteemed Christ's Ordinance of Baptism] is not substantially made good, not only from clear and undeniable Scripture, and Reason: But from most pregnant Authohities of learned men, and most of them parties themselves.    
End of the first Part.   

Infant's Baptism Disproved. The Second Part disproves Infant's Baptism under this Head, viz. That the Baptising of Infants is no Ordinance of Jesus Christ, which is made good in the seven following Chapters.  

CHAP. I. Wherein the Scriptures total silence about Infant's Baptism is observed, with the necessity of Scripture-warranty to authorise every Ordinance, and that by the confession of Parties themselves.  
IF Infant's Baptism had been any Appointment or Ordinance of Jesus Christ, 
No Scripture for Baptising Infants.  there would have been some Precept, Command, or Example in the Scripture to warrant the same; but in as much as the Scripture is so wholly silent therein, there being not one syllable to be found in all the New Testament about any such practice, it may well be concluded to be no Ordinance of Jesus Christ; for where the Scripture hath no tongue, we ought to have no ear according to that known Maxim, To practise any thing in the Worship of God, as an Ordinance of his, without an Institution, aught to be esteemed Will-worship and Idolatry.  
And that there is neither Precept or Example for any such thing as Infant's Baptism in the Scripture, 
The Parties themselves owning it.  we have the ingenuous confession of Parties themselves, viz.  

Magdib.  The Magdiburgenses, in Cent. 1. L. 2. p. 496. do say, That concerning the baptising of the Adult, both Jews and Gentiles, we have sufficient proof from Acts 2.8.10.16. chapters; but as to the baptising of Infants, they can meet with no Example in the Scriptures.  

Luther.  Luther in Pestle. saith, Young Children hear not, nor understand the Word of God, out of which Faith cometh, and therefore if the Commandment be followed, Children ought not to le baptised. And again;  
In his Epistle of Anabaptism, saith, We cannot prove, by any place of Scripture, that Children do believe; neither do the Scriptures clearly, and plainly, with these or the like words, say, Baptise your Children, for they believe; wherefore we must needs yield to those that drive us to the Letter, because we find it no where written.  
Erasmus 
Erasmus.  in his Book of the Union of the Church, saith, It is not where expressed in the Apostolical Writings, that they baptised Children.  
And again, upon Rom. 6. Baptising of young Infants was not in use, saith he, in St. Paul 's time. And again;  
In his 4th Book, De Ratione Concio. saith, That they are not to be condemned that doubt whether children's Baptism was ordained by the Apostles.  
Calvin, 
Calvin.  in his 4th Book of Institutes, Chap. 16. confesseth, That it is not where expressly mentioned by the Evangelists, that any one Child was by the Apostl's hands baptised.  
Bucer 
Bucer.  upon Mat. saith, That Christ no where commanded to baptise Infants.  
Staphilus 
Staphilus  in Epitome saith, That young Children should be baptised, is not expressed in the holy Scriptures.  
Choelens', 
Choelens'.  De Bapt. Parvulorum, saith, That Jesus took a Child, and placed him in the midst of them; what Child was it? I think it was not a young or newborn Child, and that the same was not baptised.  
For Infants were not in those days baptised, but such as being come to their full growth, confessed their sins.  
Melancthon, 
Melanct.  in his Treatise concerning the Doctrine of Anabaptists, writeth, That there is no plain Commandment in the holy Scriptures, that Children should be baptised.  
Zwinglius, 
Zwing.  In his Book of the Movers of Sedition, speaking of baptising of Children, So it is, saith he, That there is no plain words of the Scripture, whereby the same is commanded.  
These latter Quotations from the German Doctors, you have in an old Dutch Author, called, A very plain and well-grounded Treatise concerning Baptism. Englished 1618.  
Mr. Daniel Rogers, 
Mr. Rogers.  in his Treatise about Baptism, Part 29, confesseth himself to be unconvinced by demonstration of Scripture for it.  
Mr. Baxter 
Mr. Baxter.  himself, that wrote that Book called, Plain Scripture-proof for Infant's Church-Membership and Baptism; yet in contradiction thereto, in the same Book, p. 3. confesseth, That Infant's Baptism is not plainly determined in the Scriptures.  
And again, in the Defence of the Principles of Love, in the Epistle, saith, That he having had more invitation to study the Point throughly, and to treat of it largely, than most that are offended herein, that they must give him leave to say, that he knoweth it to be a very difficult Point.  
Dr. Tailor, 
Dr. Taylor.  Lib. Proph. p. 239, saith, It is against the perpetual Analogy of Christ's Doctrine to baptise Infants; for besides that, Christ never gave any Precept to baptise them; nor ever himself, nor his Apostles (that appears) did baptise any of them: All that either he or his Apostles said concerning it, requires such previous dispositions to Baptism, of which Infants are not capable, and those are Faith and Repentance. And not to instance in those innumerable places that require Faith before Baptism, there needs no more but this one of our Blessed Saviour. He that believes, and is baptised, shall be saved; but he that believeth not, shall be condemned. Plainly thus, Faith and Baptism will bring a man to Heaven; but if he hath no Faith, Baptism shall do him no good; so that if Baptism be necessary, so is Faith much more, for the want of Faith dawns absolutely; it is not said so of the want of Baptism.;  

The necessity of Scripture Authority to warrant every Ordinance.  Thus you have it acknowledged by Adversaries themselves, that there is neither Precept, Precedent, or Example in Scripture for baptising of Infants.  
And in the next place you have it further owned, That there is a necessity for Scripture-Authority to warrant every Ordinance and Practice in Divine Worship, viz.  
Luther 
Luther.  upon Gal. 1.9. saith, There ought not other Doctrine to be delivered, or heard, in the Church, besides the pure Word of God, that is, the holy Scriptures; let other Teachers and Hearers, with their Doctrines, be accursed.  
Calvin, 
Calvin.  Lib 4. Inst. Cap. 8. Serm. 8. Let this be a firm Axiom, saith he, That nothing is to be accounted the Word and Will of God, to which place should be given in the Church; but that which is first contained in the Law and the Prophets, and after in the Apostolical Writings.  
Basil, 
Basil.  in his Sermon de Fide, saith, That it would be an Argument of Infidelity, and a most certain sign of pride, if any man should reject things written, and should introduce things not written.  
Austin 
Austin.  himself saith, Detrabe Verbum, quid est Aqua nisi Aqua? Take away the Word, what is the Water but pl●●n Water? If the Word of Instituti●● be wanting, what doth the Element of Water signify?  
Theophilact, 
Theophil  Lib. 2. Paschal. It is, saith he the part of a Diabolical Spirit, to think any thing Divine, without the Authority of the holy Scriptures.  
Tertul. 
Tertu.  Contra Hermog. I do adore, saith he, the fullness of the Scripture; Let Hermogines show that it is written, if it be not written, Let him fear the we destined to those who add or detract.  
And Mr. Ball, 
Mr. Ball.  very excellently to to this purpose, in his Answer to the New-England Elders, p. 38, 39 saying, We must for every Ordinance look to the Institution, and neither stretch it wider, nor draw it narrower than the Lord hath made it; for he is the Institutor of the Sacraments, according to his own good pleasure, and it is our parts to learn of him, both to whom, how, and for what end the Sacraments are to be administered, in all which we must affirm nothing but what God hath taught us, and as he hath taught us.  

The sixth Article of the Church of England  The sixth Article of the Church of England, saith very fully to this Point, That the Holy Scriptures do contain all things necessary to Salvation, so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required by any man that it should be believed as an Article of Faith, or be thought requisite and necessary to Salvation.  
We shall conclude this Chapter with that notable Observation that Bellarmine makes in the Case, upon the Anabaptists calling for plain Scripture-proof for the Baptising of Infants, from them who so exactly require it from others, and will not in any other case admit the omission thereof; in his Book De Bapt. Lib. 1. 
Bellarm.  c. 8. where he saith, That though the Argument of the Anabaptists, from defect of Command or Example, have great force against the Lutherans, forasmuch as they use that Principle every where, viz. That the Rite which is not in Scripture, having no Command or Example there, is to be rejected. Yet is it of no force against Catholics, who conclude that Apostolical Tradition is of no less Authority with us than the Scripture, for the Apostl's speak with the same Spirit, with which they did write. But that this of baptising of Infants is an Apostolical Tradition, we know whence we know the Apostolic Scripture to be the Apostolic Scripture, viz. from the Testimonies of the Ancient Church.  
Objection The Objection that is usually brought under this Head is, That there is no express Command or Example for women's receiving the Lord's Supper; yet who doubts of a good ground from consequential Scripture for their so doing.  
Answer. In Answer whereto, you'll find there is both Example and Command for the Practice, viz.  
1. From Example, Acts 1.14. where we read that Mary and other Women were gathered together, and that these Women, together with the rest of the Disciples, were all together in one place, and continued steadfastly in the Apostl's Doctrine and Fellowship, and breaking of Bread and Prayers, Chap. 2.42 44. it being expressly said, That all that believed were together.  
2. It appears from command, 1 Cor. 11.28. Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat; the Greek word signifieth a Man or a Woman, the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a word of the Common Gender, as appears 1 Tim. 2.4, 5. There is one Mediator betwixt God, and Man, and Woman; there is the same word used Gal. 3.28. There is neither Male nor Fem●le, but ye are all one in Christ: Let but as good proof appear for Infant's Baptism and it shall suffice.   

CHAP. II. Wherein by an Historical Account of Infant's Baptism in its Rise and Establishment, viz. when, by whom, and to what ends instituted, it doth appear, that there was no authentic Practice thereof for 300, nor any humane Authority enjoining it till 400 years after Christ. Together with an account also of its growth, and how, and by what lying Authorities it was; with many superstitious Rites, founded upon Apostolical Tradition; with the impious and ridiculous fooleries added to it in every Age.  
FRom the learned Authorities before given, we have gained thus much; That as there was no Precept in Scripture for the baptising of Infants, so neither was there the least Practice to be found thereof in the Apostl's days, as was so ingenuously before confessed by the Magdiburgenses, Luther, Calvin, Erasmus, Rogers, etc.  
Secondly, That the approved Practice, and known Custom of the Primitive Church was to baptise the Adult, as all Ages acknowledge, and only they (at least) for the first Ages, as so fully attested by Eusebius, Beatus Rhenanus, Lud. Vives, Bullinger, Haimo, the Neocaesarian Council, etc.  
Thirdly, That not only the Children of Pagans were as the Catachumen, to be instructed and taught in the Faith, in order to their Baptism; but the Children of the Christians also, as those famous Instances given from the Fourth Century, by Field, Naucler, Daille, Grotius, Walafrid Strabo, Taylor, and others.  
Fourthly, The next thing we shall make appear is, that as there was no Scripture-Authority to enforce it, so there was no Humane-Authority to enjoin it till above 400 years after Christ, though to justify that injunction, Apostolical-Tradition, to supply the want of Scripture-Institution was pretended; whereof you have by the way this following account out of the three first Centuries.  

CENT. I.  
The first and most ancient pretended Authority that hath been urged to prove Infant's Baptism to be an Apostostolical Tradition, 
The first pretended prooff for Apostolical Tradition, is Dionysius the Areopagite.  is that of Dionysius the Areopagite, Paul's Convert at Athens, who flourished, as is supposed, about the 70th year of this Century: Who (as the Story tells us) after his converse with Paul, was sent by Clement, Bishop of Rome, to preach the Gospel in the West with Saturninus, Lucianus, Rusticus, and others; and that his Lot was to go into France, where he Preached, and wrought many Miracles, and was afterwards martyred at Paris; And that he wrote a multitude of Books, as enumerated by Suidas and others, and amongst them, that famous Piece, called his Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, which tells us of the several Orders and Dignities of the Clergy; Rites, Services, and Sacraments of the Church; and among them, acquaints us of the baptising of Infants, which he tells us he received from his Prefectors, as an Ancient Apostolical Tradition; with the additional Rites belonging thereto of Consecration, Consignation, Confirmation, Chrism, Exorcism, which he affirms were all in use in the Apostl's time: As Magdiburg. Cent. 1. p. 625. which was, they tell us, also learnedly refuted by Erasmus, etc. especially by Laurentius Valla, who observeth, that none of either the Greek or Latin Fathers, or Church-Historians do so much as mention him, or any of his Works. Neither Eusebius, Origen, Chrysostom, Epiphanius, or Gregory. Nor that Jerom, who gave a Catalogue of all the eminent Writers, takes the least notice of him; and how ridiculous and contradictious his lying Stories are about Monkery and the Clergy, and all the Romish Ceremonies about Baptism, that had no footing in the World, for several Ages after, and that the Learned in his days supposed these Books fathered upon Dionysius in this Age, were done by one Apollinarius, several Ages after, as the Magdib. Cent. 1. p. 616.   

CENT. II.  
As a further proof of Infant's Baptism, and the several Rites annexed thereto, we have more Authorities fathered upon, and pretended to be fetched from this second Century, of which the Magdiburg. do give us the account, viz.  
First, 
The second proof is from Just. Martyr's Responses  The Responses fathered upon Justin Martyr, the 56 whereof, propounds the different condition of those Children who die baptised and unbaptised, and in others, affirm that Gossips, Oil, and Consignation, were then used in Baptism, which they renounce as spurious, upon many considerations, Cent. 2. p. 111.  
Secondly, 
Third P. Clement.  That of Pope Clement's appointing Oil in Baptism, and also that he in his fourth Decretal Epistle affirms, that after Baptism there should be Consignation, viz. a signing with the sign of the Cross, and Confirmation, viz. a laying on of hands for the sevenfold Spirit.  
A third is that of Pope Hyginus his appointing of Gossips, or Sureties, 
Fourth P Hyginus  both in Baptism and Consecration; which Decree of Pope Hyginus, we have word for word out of Gratian L. Osiander, Cent. 2. Lib. 2. cap. 5. viz. In Catechism, Baptism, and Confirmation, let there be a Gossip if necessity require.  

5th P. Victor.  A fourth is that of Pope Victor, who is said to confine the Catholic celebration of Baptism to Easter, except some urgent necessity intervene; and that they should baptise in Fonts as well as Rivers.  

6th P. Pius.  A fifth is that of Pope Pius (who was much about Justin's time) his Consecrating Baptisterions, or Fonts to baptise in.  
But how feigned and fabulous these are, you have at large hereafter.   

CENT. III.  
In this Century we have two other famous Testimonies, that are much leaned upon by all sorts to prove Infant's Baptism to be an Apostolical Tradition.  

7 Origen.  The first is that of Origen, who in his Homilies upon Levit. and the Romans, is said to affirm, That the baptising of Infants was a Tradition of the Apostles, and according to the usage of the Church, Century 3. p. 124.  
The second is that of Cyprian, 
8 Cyprian  in an Epistle said to be writ to one Fidus a Priest, who herein is supposed to deliver it to be his, and the Opinion of 66 Bishops, that Children should be baptised at any time in opposition to Fidus his confining it to the eighth day, after the manner of Circumcision; both which Authorities you have at large examined afterwards.  
Tertullian in this Century, gave several Arguments against Infant's Baptism, whereof you have a particular accounted hereafter.  
Many were the corruptions about Baptism, 
The Corruptions about Baptism creeping in in this Age.  that in this Age were creeping in, as the confining Baptism ordinarily to be performed by a Bishop, Mag. Cent. 3. p. 123. Limiting the time to Easter and Whitsuntide 129. altering the Form from Dipping to Sprinkling; and the place from Rivers and Fountains, to Baptisterious; with divers superstitious Rites, as p. 125, 126. Though they tell us with all, p. 125. That they do not find, by any Authentic Testimony, that any one person was actually baptised in this manner and form this Age, whereby it may be conjectured that their corruptions were more in the Notion than Practice, which though afterwards c●me all of them to be in use.   

CENT. iv  
By the Decrees that passed in several Councils in this Age, viz. that of Carthage, Neocasaria, Laodicea, etc. holding out the necessity of Confession and Profession before Baptism, already in the former History mentioned; As also by those famous Instances of so many of the eminent Persons of this Century, born of Christian Parents, that were not baptised till aged, before expressed; It doth manifestly appear, that Infant's Baptism was neither esteemed an Apostolical Tradition, nor so much as in use the greatest part of this Century, either in the Latin or Greek Church.  

In the latter end of the fourth Century, Infant's Baptism practised.  It is true, towards the latter end of this Century, it is said, That in some parts of Africa they did baptise Children, as Magdiburg. Cent. 4. p. 415.  
And that some of the Greek Church did begin to approve it also.  
Greg. Nazianzen (who by Perkins is placed 380.) is said, in his fortieth Oration, to admit Infants to be baptised in case of necessity, being in danger of death, that they may not miss, as he says, of the common Grace; but gives his Opinion of others, that they should stay longer that they might be instructed, and so their Minds and Bodies might be sanctified.  
Jerom that by Helvicus is placed ten years after him 390, is said to incline to it also after Origen and Cyprian.  
Many are the corruptions fetched from this and that former Age, 
Lying forgeries about the baptism of Constantine by the Papists.  and not a few of them fathered upon Constantine in his Baptism, which they say was done at Rome, in a Baptisterion, by P. Silvester, and administered with all the Romish Rites of Consecration, Consignation, Chrysm, Exorcism, Albes, Rings, Donation, etc. how Constantine was first miraculously cured thereby of his Leprosy, and the great Donation he gave the See Apostolic, and the acknowledgement to their Universal Bishopric; all held forth in an Edict, said to be writ with Constantine's own hand, and fairly kept in the Vatican Library, writ in Letters of Gold, as saith Du Plessis, in his Mystery of Iniquity; yet all a notorious forgery and cheat, Constantine being Baptised at Nicomedia, and not at Rome, and not by P. Silvester, who was dead fifteen years before; neither had Constantine any such Leprosy, or miraculous Cure, nor gave any such Donation or Acknowledgement to the Romish See, as you have at large evidenced by the Magdiburg. Cent. 4. p. 568.  
And concerning which Osiander saith, Cent. 4. c. 38. Which foolish and impudent Fable is by many Learned Men refuted, viz. Marsilius, Patavinus, La●r. Valla, Cardinal Casanus, and Aeneas Silvius, after Pope Pius the Second.  
The working of the Mystery of Iniquity, did, as the Magdiburgenses tell us, strongly begin to act in many Particulars, viz. Not only in the corrupting the Rites and true form of Baptism, but by those superstitious and sumptuous Ceremonies that were used in the Dedication, 
Bapt. of Churches.  Consecration, or Baptising of Churches, viz. either such Idol- Temples that were given by the Emperors to Christian Service, or such new ones that were now erected, as Cent. 4. p. 76, 497, 499, 520.  
The superstitious Collection and Exposure of the Relics 
Relics.  of Saints for Adoration, p. 499.  
The inclination to prohibit Marriage, 
Priest's Marriage.  as appeared by the Council of Nice, where it was only checked by the famous Paphnutius, p. 1088.  
The distinction in point of Sanctification, 
Distinction betwixt Laymen and Clergy began.  now made betwixt Laymen and Clergymen, the one reputed Spiritual, the other Carnal.  
And it was in this Age, as appears by the Decrees of P. Silverster, Julius, and Sericius, 
Priests appointed to Marry folks.  that all Marriages must pass the Benediction of a Priest, and to be esteemed little less than Sacrilege to omit it; of which, in the former Centuries no mention is made, Magd. Cent. 4. c. 6. p. 482.— and for which they quote Gigas and Luitpraud.   

CENT. V  
This was the Age wherein Infant's Baptism did receive its Sanction by the Decrees of Popes and Councils, 
Infant's Baptism first enjoined in the Militan Council.  and as absolutely necessary was enjoined and imposed by Anathemas, never till then, concerning which, Dr. Taylor in his Lib. o Prophecy, p. 237. gives us a true, brief, & notable account, which you may please to receive in his own words; And the truth of the business is, (saith he) as there was no command of Scripture to oblige Children to the susception of it, so the necessity of Paedobaptism was not determined in the Church till the Canon that was made in the Milevitan Council, a Provincial in Africa, Never till then. I grant, saith he, it was practised in Africa before that time, and they, or some of them, thought well of it; and though that is no argument for us to think so, yet none of them did ever pretend it to be necessary, none to have been a Precept of the Gospel. 
Austin the first that ever preached it necessary. ☞  St. Austin was the first that ever preached it to be necessary, and it was in his heat and anger against Pelagius, who had so warmed and chafed him, that made him innovate herein.  
This Milevitan or Militan Council, was celebrated by 92 Bishops, Anselm the Pop's Legate, and Austin presiding in the fifth year of Arcadius, and first of Pope Innocentius, in the year 402, as Magdiburg. Cent. 5. p. 835.  
The occasion of the Council, is expressed to be about the difference that had happened betwixt Pelagius and Coelestius, Austin and others, respecting Original sin, baptising of Children, etc.  
The Constitutions and Decrees of the said Council are at large expressed by the Magdiburg. out of the Book of Decretals, and among other Canons, made in this Council, we find this, viz.  
That it is Our Will, 
The Canon of the Milevitan Council about Infant's Baptism.  That all that affirm that Young Children receive everlasting Life, albeit they be not by the Sacrament of Grace or Baptism renewed; And that will not that young Children, which are new born from their Mother's Womb, shall be baptised to the taking away Original Sin.  
That they be Anathematised.  
Which with the rest of the Decrees was transmitted to Rome to Pope Innocentius for his Apostolic confirmation in their large Letters, p. 841. 
P Innocent the first ratifies it.   
And which with a ready mind he performs accordingly by his Decretal Epistle, expressed at large p. 845.  
Afterwards the fifth General Council at Carthage, in the year 416, did Decree to the same purpose in these words.  

The Canon of the 5th Council of Carthage.  We will, That whoever denies that little Children by Baptism are freed from Perdition, and eternally saved,  
That they be accursed.  
Which was also by Austin, and seventy Bishops in their Letter, transmitted to the same Pope Innocent for his further ratification, 
Confirmed by Pope Innocent.  and accordingly received the same in his Decretal Epistle at large, p. 822, 825. Inscribing their Letters thus, The Fathers of the Council to Innocent the Pope and High Priest, styling him Most Holy Father—  
And that Pope Innocentius in these African Councils, was the first that ever enjoined the necessity of this practice is further confirmed to us;  
By Wilfrid Strabo, 
Wilfrid Strabo.  as before, who tells us, That Children were baptised, according to the Decree of the Council of Carthage, for the taking away of original sin, which aforetime was not practised.  
Luther 
Luther.  saith, It was not determined till Pope Innocentius.  
And Grotius 
Grotius.  in his Annotations, Mat. 19 saith, It was not enjoined till before that Council of Carthage.  
Which Canons of Pope Innocentius were afterwards confirmed by Pope Zosimus his Successor, and afterwards by Pope Boniface that succeeded Zosimus, as appears in Cod. Can. cap. 110. Aff. cap. 77. & de Consecrat. distinct.  
The Opinions of the Doctors of this Age, in confirmation hereof, 
The Doct. of this Age approving Infants Baptism.  we find to be as followeth.  
chrysostom saith, 
Chrysost.  That Infants ought to be baptised, as universally received by the Catholic Church to take away Original Sin.  
And again, that which the Holy Church throughout the World, unanimously teacheth and practiseth about the baptising of Children, ought not carelessly to be slighted, Mag. Cent. 5. p. 375.  
Austin 
Austin.  was as a great Patron, so a great Defender of Infant's Baptism, in his contests both against the Donatists, and the Pelagians, and the Coelestians, whereof you have some Instances.  
In his Sermon, De Baptismo Parvulorum, against the Pelagians, chap. 14. saith, That Children should be baptised, because of Original Sin, and that without which they could never be regenerated or saved, Mag. Cent. 5, 377, 378, 379.  
And in his third Book of , Cap. 23. saith, Infants may be baptised by the Faith of another, and that the Faith of the Party that offers and dedicates the Child to Baptism, profits the Child therein, as the Church (he saith) wholesomely appoints: For if the Faith of the Widow profited to the raising of the dead Child, much more may the Faith of another profit the young Child, p. 516.  
And again, in his Fourth Book against the Donatists, Cap. 23. Infants, saith he, are to be baptised, who can neither believe with their Hearts to Justification, nor confess with their Mouths to Salvation, p. 516.  
This Controversy he managed with much furious Zeal against the Pelagians in the African Councils; And so inordinate was he herein, that in his 23d Epist. to Boniface, he holds forth such a certainty of Regeneration by it, that he not only puts Regeneration for Baptism, but also makes no Question of the Regeneration of Infants, 
Baptism to cure Diseases.  though they that brought them, did not bring them with that Faith that they might be regenerated, but only to procure health to their Bodies; a custom, it seems, they had to bring persons to be baptised for Cure.  
Justifying thereby such a profane Use thereof, as that of Athanasius, 
A Schoolboy baptised in sport, confirmed by a Bishop.  who baptised a Boy in sport, (playing the Bishop amongst his Schoolfellows) which was confirmed notwithstanding to be good Baptism by the Bishop of Alexandria.  
And again, in his 7th Tom. Lib. 1. c. 27. asserts to the same purpose, That all baptised Infants are Believers, and that the unbaptised are Unbelievers, saying, Who knows not that to Infants to believe, is to be baptised, not to believe is not to be baptised.  
All the foolish ridiculous Ceremonies, called the Romish Baptismal Rites, before mentioned, were owned and practised by Austin and others in this Century, with this addition, viz.  
That the Lord's Supper was given to the baptised Infants, 
Lord's Supper given to Infants.  as Austin in his 107 Epistle saith, where he holds a like necessity of their receiving that Sacrament with that of Baptism from Joh. 6.53. wherein he was also so earnest, that he boldly saith, in vain do we promise Infant's Salvation without it. Thus far Austin.  
In the next place before we leave this Century, 
The Character of Pope Innocent 1.  I think it will not be amiss to give some little account of this Pope Innocenitus (our first confirmer and imposer of Infant's Baptism) of whom it may s● truly be said that he was one that changed Times and Laws, and that sat himself in the Temple of God as God. As we find it recorded by the Magdiburg: Cen. 5. page. 1228. viz.  

He set up the Universal Bishopric.  That he most strenuously laboured for the Universal Bishopric and Supremacy over all Churches, as appears (say they) in all his Epistles designing to bring the Determiation of all Principal Ecclesiastical Causes into that See, especially in his Epistle to Victoricum and Decentium whereby say they it was manifest that the mystery of Iniquity 2 Thes. 2. did gradually get Ground and increase.  
Who was (say they) a great Establisher of humane Traditions, 
Gave Divine honour to the Popedom.  and who blasphemously attributed divine Honour to the Popedom, as appears in that Epistle to Victoricum.  
It was he that made Confirmation a Sacrament, 
made Confirm. a Sacrament.  and confined it only to the Bishops to lay hands on Baptised Infants 1230.  
It was he also forbade Priests Marriages 1231. 
Forbade Marriage.  and Damned the Nuns if they married; That also forbade Marriage to any that by due Divorce put away their Wives; that also instituted many of the Jewish and Pagan Laws, as appears say they in his Book de Pontiff.  
And it was he that to witness his Supremacy did excommunicate the Emperor Arcadius and the Empress Eudoxia and all his ecclesiastics that had their hands in the Banishing of John Chrysostom 662. 663. 
Excommunicated the Emp. Arcadius, etc.   
It was he that first appointed that the Eucharist should be given to Young Children so soon as they were baptised; 
Ordained the Eucharist to Children after Bapt.  a Cust●m that continued several Hundred Years after  
And as head of the Antichristian race was the first saith Socrates Lib. 7.19. 
Expelled the Novatians.  That expelled the Novations from Rome that famous worthy Church and People. Concerning whom we shall conclude with what the Magdiburgs say in their Epistle to this 5. Cent. To Ericus King of Sweden.  
That it might then be understood that Rome that had heretofore Governed the world, was now made the very Seat of Antichrist. And again that the Spirit of Antichrist did then manifestly begin to spread itself by the Bishop of Rome lifting up himself in Supremacy above all other Bishops and Churches.  
And this was that Innocent who was the first great Patron and Imposer of this Innovation: and was it not excellent Service think you, for Austin to play the Game into the hand of such a vile Wretch.   

CENT. VI  
The Council of Gerunden in Spain held about 520. Ordained,  

Gerunden Canon.  That young Children from their Mother's womb be baptised.  
The Council of Bracarense 572, and the Council of Vivense ordained the very same, Vossus de Bapt. 179.  

Tee Maris Canon.  The Council of Marisconenses held 580. Ordained.  
That the Baptism of Ehildrens should be at Easter except necessity hindered. Magd. Cent. 6. 613.  

P. Greg. Decretal.  Pope Greg. the Great, Lib 3. Ep. 4. add Boniface-dist. 4 de Consec. Let all young Children be Baptised as they ought to be according to the Tradition of the Fathers.  
Who gave Instruction to his Legate Austin to give Christendom to Children when he sent him into Britain which you may Read at large in the Book of Martyrs.  
Justinian the Emperor, who reigned 530, Ordained, 
The Decree of the Emperor Justinion.  That Children should be admitted to Baptism, and that those that were come to their full growth shall be taught before they be baptised. Novel Institute. 444.  
Justinus the Emperor who Reigned 570. Ordained, That it seemed him good, that when the Samaritans that desire the unspotted Baptism, that they for the space of two years together be Instructed in the Faith and the holy Scriptures and that upon their Repentance they be admitted thereto. But as concerning the Children which in regard of their years cannot Receive Divine Doctrine, they shall without delay be made worthy, or partakers of Baptism.  
That Gossips were appointed to all that were Baptised, as saith Paulus Diaconus. Lib. 16 in Justiniano.  
And that it was the Custom when the Children of Princes and Potentates were Baptised, that Bishops should be the Gossips. Magd. Cent. 6. 332.  
Maxentius 
Maxentius.  saith, that Children are not only adopted into a State of Sonship, but have the Remission of all Sin by Baptism. Cent. 6. p. 227.  
All the forementioned Superstitions of the Romish Baptismal Rites were in use in this Age, with this addition.  

Ridiculous Ceremonies.  That lighted Tapors were to be put into the hands of the Baptised p. 332.  
The Temples or Churches, Altars and Relics in their Dedications were christened by Sprinkling the Water of Conjuration upon them. p. 369.  

The Uncleanness and Murders found in Monastries.  In this Cent we meet with a dreadful piece of Infant's Baptism viz. the Heads of 6000 Infants that had been murdered and buried in a Warren near a Monastery, as Testified by Udulricus to P. Nicolas, Cent. 6. p. 388.   

CENT. 7.  

Canon of Toletan.  The Council of Toletanus instituted, That Infants without natural capacity should be baptised, and that none should deny Baptism to them at their peril.  
The Council of Constance Ordained the same. Mag. Cent. 7. p. 146. 
Canon of Const.   
Isidorus 
Isidorus.  saith, That if Children were not baptised, and so thereby renewed, and Original Sin washed away, they were in a state of damnation. p. 98.  
To the former, ridiculous Ceremonies now in use, were added, That the names of Saints departed, or Relations, should be given to the Baptised at their Baptism.  
That none should be admitted to be Gossips without rehearsing the Lords-Prayer and the Creed.  
And that none of the Gossips might marry together, 
Gossip's must not marry together.  because of the spiritual Affinity and Relation they had contracted at the Font. p. 147.  
At the Consecration and Dedication of Temples, the names of some Angel or Saint departed was to be given to them.  
A Child that died unbaptised this Age, was taken up and Christened, 
A dead child christened.  and had his Father's name given him. Magd. cent. 7. p.   

CENT. 8.  
Carolus Magnus declares, 
Decree of the Emp. Charles the Great. Daniel.  That Baptism should be administered to Infants as well as to the Adult. Cent. 8. p. 219.  
Daniel in his Epistle to Boniface concludes, that Infants should be baptised. p. 347.  
Bede also concludes for the baptising of Infants. p. 218.  
To all the former continued Superstitions there were added,  

Superstitious rites  1. That the Administration be in the Latin tongue p.. 384.  
2. That Salt be used in Baptism. Aponius, lib. 1. p. 349.  
3. That the Hair of the Baptised be cut. p. 350.  
4. That some Gift was to be given in Baptism, which was to be called Deodans. p. 349.  

Temples baptizd in the name of the Trinity.  5. That Temples should be consecrated in the name of the Trinity. p. 336.  
Bells were posited in Temples in this Age. p. 342.   

CENT. 9  
Sericius 
Sericius.  at large demonstrates, That according to the Custom of the Church little ignorant Babes should be baptised: for which he citys the Decrees of the African Council by Pope Innocent; another of Pope Leo's; and another of Pope Gregory's at large. Cent. 9 p. 140, 141.  
Gizelbert 
Gizelbert.  saith, That after Baptism neither Original nor Actual Sin Remaineth. Who also calleth Marriage a Sacrament. p. 171.  
To the former filthy Customs this Age added, That in Exorcism the Head, 
Impious Customs.  Ears, and Nose should be salted and anointed before Baptism. p. 235.  
To the former christening of Temples, they added the pouring out of Oil, and anointing with holy Chrism, singing jacob's words, This is no other than the House of God; how dreadful is this place! according to the 24th Canon of Aquensis. Cent. 9 p. 229.   

CENT. 10.  
Smaragdus 
Smaragdus.  saith, That little Infants are to be baptised, because it is said, Suffer little Children to come unto me, and forbidden them not, etc. Hence (saith he) the Holy Mother the Church doth beget the Innocent Infant into a holy and pure state by the grace of Baptism. Cent. 10. p. 188.  
Zonara's saith, That the Infants as well as the Adult were to be baptised. p. 292.  
To the former wicked Customs they now added,  
1. 
Wicked Additions  That the Water of Baptism should on Easter-day be consecrated after this manner; viz. The Priest's hand should be stretched over the Water, as Moses his hand was over the Sea. 2. That he should blow upon it. 3. Hold a burning Taper over it, to answer the Type of the fiery Pillar. 4. That as they entered the Red-Sea by Night; so should Baptism be administered in the Evening. p. 239.  
The Gossips were to put on White Garments as well as the Priests and the Baptised. p. 299.  
And as a further addition to Church-Christening, the Bishop was before the Water was brought to him to strike the Earth, and then to pour down a great deal of Water, and then to name the Church.  
And further; It was in this Age that Bells began also to be Christened, which from henceforward was most religiously observed.  

Bells first baptised by P. John  Pope John the 14th was the first that baptised Bells, who christened the great Bell of the Church of Lateran, calling it John: which was done to drive away evil Spirits, and to prevent any ill accident that might happen by Lightning and Tempest. Magd. cent. 10. p. 295.  
Vossius 
Vossius.  in his Book de Bapt. p. 158. tells us, That though the more prudent did call this Baptising or Christening of Bell's Consecration, yet that they had most of the Baptismal Rites and Ceremonies, both Godfathers and Godmothers, sprinkling, Anointing, giving of Names, and great Donations; and that the silly Women used to bring Presents of Coral, Linen, and other things; and that they had a Superstitious Conceit, that the sprinkling of that Baptismal Water procured Health to the Sick.  
Vossius also informeth us in the said Book from good Authority, 
The abominable custom to baptise naked for 7 or 800 years.  That from Austin till Bernard's time, seven or eight hundred years, the custom was to baptise naked both Men, Women, and Children, with the Reasons usually given by the Ancients for the same, viz. That they might therein be as in the state of Innocency; and be as naked in their second, as in their first birth; And as they expected to be in Heaven and therein no otherwise than Christ was upon the Cross, which you may read at large in page 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36. quoting these several Authorities to justify it, viz. Cyril Heir. Cat. Mystag. 11. Amphilochius in vita St. Basil, Chrysost. Tom. 6. c. 11. Elias Cretenses in Orat. 4. Naz. Zeno Varonenses, Anselm on Mat. 3. Ambros. Serm. 10. Bernard. Serm. 46. de Pauper. Greg. Mag. tom. 2. col. 269. Alcuinus in divin. off. cap. 19 Chrys. ep. ad Innocent, etc.  
So, just was it was it with God to leave men that went a whoring after their own Inventions [forsaking the Word of God, to embrace the Traditions of man] to such unseemly and unnatural practices.  

Mr. Baxter shameful ssander fixed upon the Anabaptists.  Yet is not Mr. Baxter ashamed to fix such an abominable slander upon the Baptists of this our Age of baptising naked (which it seems was so long the real practice of the Pedobaptists) and about which he spends three whole pages in his Scripture-proof, viz. 136, 137, 138. to aggravate the heinousness of that their custom (which he is pleased to father upon them). And though I am persuaded he cannot but be convinced that the thing is most notoriously false, and brought forth by him rather out of prejudice (not to say malice) rather than any proof or good testimony he ever received thereof. Yet have I never heard that he hath done himself his injured neighbours, and the abused world that right, as to own his great weakness & sinful shortness therein, in any of the many Editions of that Piece, which I humbly conceive as well deserved a Recantation as some other things he has judged worthy thereof.   

CENT II.  
Anselm 
Anselm.  asserts that Children should be Baptised, and gives these Reasons:  
1st. That the Devil by the faith of the Parent may be cast out of the Children in Baptism; as the Woman of Canaan in the 15. Mat. v. 21. had the Devil cast out of her Daughter. p. 171.  
2ly. That they may thereby be freed from Original sin, and be rendered Saints and holy ones by Baptism as they are owned to be, 1 Cor. 7. p. 171.  
3ly. That they may die to sin: for they that are Baptised into Christ are so, being Baptised into his Death; which he says is without exception: for whosoever is Baptised into Christ, is Baptised into his Death.  
Meginhardus 
Meginhardus.  saith, if little Infants or weak ones be brought to Baptism, let them answer for them that bring them, and then let hands be laid upon them with holy Chrism; 
☜  and so let the Eucharist be Communicated to them. p. 168.  
Ivo saith, that the Infants as well as the Adult are to be Baptised, because of the Faith of the Sacrament; p. 260.  
The Latins in this age did Rebaptise the Greeks who dssowned their Baptism. p. 263. And the Greeks did excommunicate the Latins for renouncing theirs. p. 401.  
To the former Superstitious Rites, they added, That Salt should be put into the mouth of the Baptised. p. 261.  
And to the Christening of Churches, that Salt should also be mixed with the Water of Execration.  

Waldenses witness against Infant Bapt.  The Waldenses did appear this Age to witness against the Romish Superstitions, and amongst the rest that of the Real Presence in the Eucharist, and Baptising of Infants: which you have at large hereafter, with the opposition and persecution they met with for the same. They were called B●ringarians, from Beringarius one of their chief Leaders.   

CENT. 12.  
Peter Lombard 
Peter Lombard.  saith, That to the baptising the Adult, their proper faith is required; but to the baptising an Infant the faith of others sufficeth. Cent. 12. p. 418.  
And] again, Children are to be baptised, because they are thereby cleansed from original sin. p. 596.  
Bernard 
Bernard.  saith, That without Baptism Children cannot be saved. p. 604.  
And again, As Children of old were circumcised without or against their wills for their Salvation; so may they now be baptised. p. 599.  
Peter Cluniacenses 
Peter Cluniacenses.  writing against Peter Bruis, one of the Waldensian Barbes who denied Infants Baptism, saith, Lib. 1. Ep. 2. They who are not baptised with Christ's Baptism, cannot be Christians: And shall the Children of the Jews be saved with the Sacrament of Circumcision, and shall not the Children of Christians be saved with the Sacrament of Baptism? p. 599.  
Heldigard 
Heldigard  saith, That as our little Children that are not capable to feed themselves, have others to feed them to keep them from temporal death; So is it with them in Baptism, who being neither capable to believe or profess, have spiritual helps provided for them, that they may not want that spiritual food that may preserve them from eternal death. p. 602.  
Alexander 
Alexand.  the 3d, in his Decretals, L. 3. Tit. 40. c. 2. saith, They who have any doubt concerning their Baptism, may be baptised with these words, [If thou art baptised, I do not baptise thee; but if thou be'st not, I do baptise thee in the Name of etc.  
The former ridiculous Rites were this Age observed with this Addition.  
Bernard saith, To the Dedication or right-Christning of Churches, there must be Aspersion, Inunction, Illumination, 
☞  Benediction, & Nomination. p. 861.  
And that if the Temple should come to be polluted by the Priests committing Adultery in it, The sprinkling it afresh with Holy-Water cleanseth it again. Alex. 3. L. 5. Decret.  

When Marriage prohibited.  The certain times wherein Marriages were prohibited was from Septuagesima to Easter, from R●gation to Whits●ntide, from Advent to Epiphany: Which were done by the Edict of Pope Clement, as saith Gigas. p. 919.  
The Waldenses were in this Age great Witnesses to the baptising of Believers, 
Petro Brusians' writ against Infant's Baptism.  and as great opposers of Infant's Baptism, called by the name of Petrobrusians, Apostolici & Henerici; and for which they were great Sufferers, is hereafter. p. 844, 845, 846.   

CENT. 13.  
Thomas Aquinas 
Tho. Aqui.  saith, Children are to be baptised not in their own proper faith, but in the faith of the Church. p. 419.  
And again, That they may be freed from Original Sin and Condemnation. p. 422.  
Alexander saith, Baptism conferrs grace to little ones, not only purging them from Original Sin, but by the Merits of Christ's Suffering, the faith of the Surety, but by the virtue of the Sacrament. p. 426.  
Bonaventure 
Bonavent.  saith, If Children die that are baptised before they come to years of discretion, they so receive grace by the faith of another, that by Christ's merit they shall be saved, which (he saith) is denied by certain cursed Heretics. p. 419.  
Concurring hereto are several other Doctors of this Age, as Hugo, p. 544. Gulielmo, p. 419. Albert, and the Decree of the Neomansian Synod, 594. the Synod of Coloniae, 938, 944. but let these already mentioned suffice.  
Tho. Aquinas saith, Though a Priest be the proper Administrator of Baptism, yet, in case of necessity, not only a Deacon, but a Lay person, yea a Woman; nay, an Heretic or Pagan may baptise, so be it the true form of the Church be observed, and intent thereby what the Church intends. p. 419.  

An Exposition of many of their ridiculous Customs. Gulielm.  All the Abominable Rites , were in this Age observed with this following Exposition upon them:  
Gulielm. saith, That the matter of the Sacrament of Confirmation is oil-olive mixed with Balsam, and incorporated upon the fire, called Chrysm, and which can only be done by the hands of a Bishop. The form of which Sacrament, he saith, is this, viz. I sign thee with the sign of the Cross, & confirm thee with the Crysm of Salvation in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Amen. And which only a Bishop can administer. p. 417.  
By Exorcism the Devil is blown away. Hugo.  
Albertus 
Albertus.  saith, By blowing in Execration the power of the Devil is expelled; and being signed upon the breast and forehead with the sign of the Cross, he is driven not only from the heart, but more visibly from the outward man. And that the Salt is to be put into the mouth, the better to endue with spiritual savour and wisdom; And that the ears and nose is to be anointed with spittle, that grace and discretion from God may be conferred, which because the spittle descends from the Head that is thereby signified. And that the Breast must be anointed to prepare the Heart for God; and the Shoulders anointed to be enabled to bear God's burden.  
After Baptism the Neck must be anointed with Chrism, that the mind may be better disposed for God and holy contemplation, which by Chrism is signified being made of shining Oil and healing sovereign Balsam. They must be endued with white Garments, to hold forth that Innocency which is received in Baptism; as well as the Glory which they are to partake of at the Resurrection. And a burning Taper put into the hand that the Word of God may be a light to his Feet.  
Gulielmus saith, That as to the form of Baptism the Virgin Mary, 
A blasphemous addition.  is to be added to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, viz. I Baptise thee in the name of the Omnipotent, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and the blessed Virgin Mary, 419.  
Thom. saith there are seven Sacraments; 
7 Sacraments.  viz. Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extream-Vnction, Order, and Matrimony. Two whereof, viz. Baptism, and the Eucharist were instituted by Christ, and the other five by the Apostles, as Alexander. 406.  
Which seven Sacraments were after confirmed by the Council of Trent, with Anathema to those who should deny them.  

When and by whom Tyths first granted.  Pope Gregory X. was the first in Anno 1271. granted Tithes to the Churches. Those that opposed and witnessed against Infant's Baptism and other Popish Superstitions in this Age, were the Albigenses and Aumionenses, Magdeburg. Cent. 13. P. 554, etc.   

CENT. 14, 15, 16, 17.  
That the Baptising of Infants, with all the Rites and Ceremonies, still continued, especially in the Romish Church, we need not question, when we read the Canons of the Council of Trent, which was called on purpose as to establish their old Superstitions and Idolatries, so to suppress the Light and Truth that especially did shine in the Empire: In which Council, which ended 1564. we have the following Canons. 
The Canons of the Council of Trent about Inf. Bapt.   
In the 5th Session about Original Sin in the 4th Canon,  
It was Decreed, That they who shall deny Baptism to young Children from their Mother's Womb, for the taking away Original Sin.  
Let them be accursed. Os. 16 Cent. c. 60, 380.  
In the 7th Session about Baptism, in the 13 Canon,  
It was Decreed, That whosoever puts not young baptised Children amongst the faithful, or saith they must be re-baptised at the years of discretion, or that it is better to omit their vaptism till then,  
Let them be accursed.  
And in the 14 Canon It was decreed, That whosoever shall say, that baptised Children, when they come to Age, ought not to be enjoined to ratify the promise made in their name, but to be left to their will if they refuse, Not compelling them to Christian life, but denying them other Ordinances,  
Let them be accursed.  
In the 3 Canons about Confirmation, it was Decreed,  
That whosoever said, It was an idle Ceremony not a Sacrament properly, or that it was formerly used, that Children might give an account of their faith. 2. That to give virtue to Chrism, was t● wrong the Holy Spirit. 3. Tha● every simple Priest is the ordinary Minister for confirmation and not th● Bishop only.  
Let them be accursed. Os. 16 Cent. pag. 417.  
And as a standing Rule to justify themselves in their Determinations they conclude and Decree,  

A blasphemous Decree.  That their Traditions should b● observed Pari Pietatis affectu, with the same pious affection with the Holy Scriptures.  

Charl. V his Interim.  In that Instrument, called the Interim, That Decretal of Charles the Fifth, made till the Counsels Canon● could be perfected, it was determined,  
That young Children by the faith and confession of the Sureties, should be Baptised.  
And that all Ancient Ceremonies that pertained to the Sacrament 〈◊〉 Baptism, should be continued, as Exorcism, Chrism, etc. Osiander p. 482.  
Among the many Antichristian oppressions the Princes of Germany exhibited to the Pope from their Convention of Norimberg, they complained o● that of baptising Bells, wherein they say, The Suffragans have invented, 
Baptising of Bells complained of by the Princes of Germany  that no other but only themselves, may Baptise Bells for the Lay-people, Whereby the simple people, upon their affirmation, do believe, That such Bells so baptised, will drive away evil Spirits and Tempests: Whereupon a great number of Godfathers are appointed, especially such as are rich, which at the time of the baptising holding the Rope wherewithal the Bell is tied, the Suffragan speaking before them, as is accustomed in the baptising of young Children, they altogether do answer, and give the name to the Bell; the Bell having a new name put upon it, as is accustomed to be done to the Christians, after this they go to sumptuous Feasts, whereunto also the Gossips are bidden, that thereby they may give the greater reward to the Suffragans, their chaplains and Mi●●sters; whereby it happeneth ofttimes, that even in a small Village an hundred Florins are consumed, in such Cristening; which is not only superstitious, but contrary to Christian Religion, a seducing of the simple People, and mere Extortion. Wherefore such wicked unlawful things are to be abolished. Fox's Acts and Monum. 990. Pius the Fifth baptised the Duke of Alva 's Standard; 
Standard Baptised.  and called it Margaret. Dr. Morison de Depra. Bel. p. 24.  
The Germane Protestants about Infants-Baptism.  

Luther August. Confession.  The Lutherans in their Augustan Confession made 1530. do declare,  
That Baptism is necessary to Salvation. That God's Grace is conferred thereby. That Children ought to be baptised, who by Baptism are dedicated and received into the grace and favour of God: condemning the Anabaptists, who deny Baptism to Children, and who affirm that Children without Baptism may be saved, Osiand. 16 Cent. p. 153.  
In the Smalkald Articles 1536. the Lutherans say,  

In the Smalkald Articles.  Concerning Infants we teach, that they are to be baptised; For inasmuch as they do belong to the promised Redemption made by jesus Ehrist, the Church ought to baptise and to declare the promise to them. Osiand. Cent. 16. p. 278.  
In the Conference betwixt the Calvinists and Lutherans at Mumpelgartens. 1529. 
In the Conference at Mumpelgart.   
It was agreed, that Baptism came in the room of Circumcision, and that the Children of the Christians are to be Baptised. Osiand. Cent. 16. 1020.  
Though about the Ground of Baptising them they differed; The Lutherans affirming, that they had a proper and peculiar Faith to entitle them thereto. The Calvinists asserting they had none, but aught to be baptised by virtue of the Faith of the Parent in Covenant.  
In the Book of Concord, 
In the Book of Concord.  1580. by the Lutherans.  
They agree that the Tenets of the Anabaptists are to be renounced, that say, Infants are not to be baptised, because they have no use of reason. Osiand. 16 Cent. p. 254.  
The English Protestants about Infants Baptism.  
In the Reformation begun in Edward the Sixth time, 
In the English Liturgy.  about 1549 the Form of Worship and Administration of the Sacraments, with all their Rites and Ceremonies, were held forth in the English Liturgy, as it was translated out of the Latin Mass-Book, concerning which we have this account from Mr. Fox in his Martyrology, p. 1499.  
That in the Rising in Devonshire, upon the translating the Latin Mass-Book into English, the King writes after this manner to quiet them, viz.  

The English Service translated out of the Latin Mass-Book.  As for the Service in the English Tongue, perhaps it seemeth to you as New Service, when indeed it is no other but the Old; the self same words in English which were in Latin, saving a few things taken out, so fond, that it hath been a shame to have heard them in English; as all they can judge that list to repeat the truth: And if it was good in Latin, it remaineth good in English, for nothing is altered, but to speak with knowledge what was spoken with ignorance, etc.  
Wherein the Time, Order, Manner and Ceremony of Baptising of Infants, is directed and enjoined, with all the Rites appertaining thereto.  
In the said Service-Book in the Rubric before the Catechism it is said, That Children being baptised, have all things necessary for their Salvation, and be undoubtedly saved. And therefore after Baptism the Priest must say, We yield thee hearty thanks, that it hath pleased thee to regenerate this Infant with thy Holy Spirit. And the Child is afterwards to be instructed, when he comes to understanding, to say, That therein he was made a Member of Christ, and a Child of God, and an Inheritor of the Kingdom of Heaven. Just comporting length and breadth with Pope Innocents' first Canons.  
In the 27th. Article of the Church of England, 
27. Article of the Church ● England.  it is said, That the Baptising of young Children, is in any wise to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable to the Institution of Christ, made in Q. Eliz. time, 1562.  
In the Scotch Service-Book, 
Scotch Service-Book.  imposed in the beginning of the late War, it is said, That as oft as new Water is put into the Font, the Priest shall say, Sanctify this Fountain of Baptism, Oh thou which art the Sanctifier of all things.  
The Directory, 
Directory  in the Parliaments time, leaves out Gossips, and signing with the Sign of the Cross, changes the Fonts into Basins. And the Parliaments Ordinance May 2. 1648. made it Imprisonment to affirm, Infant's Baptism unlawful, and that such should be Baptised again. Mr. Marshal informs us, out of Phocius, p. 3334 That some of the Greek Churches have Laws, That whatsoever baptised Person refused to bring their Children, and Wives too, to be baptised, should be Anathamatised, and punished also.  

The wicked Decree of Zurick.  At Zurick, as Dr. Featly tells us out of Gassius, p. 68 The Senate made an Act, That if any presumed to Rebaptize viz. to baptise any that had been baptised in their Infancy, That they should be drowned; and that at Vienna, many for Baptising such were so tied together in Chains, that they drew the other after him in the River, wherein they were all drowned.  
And that at Roplestein, the Lords of that place Decreed, that such should be burnt with a hot Iron, and bear the base Brands of those Lords, in whose Lands they had so offended.  
And p. 182. out of Ponton Catalogue. through Germany, Alsatia, and Swedeland many Thousands of this Sect, who defiled their first Baptism by a second, were baptised the third time in their wn Blood.    

CHAP. III. Wherein the Erroneous Grounds both as to fabulous Traditions, and mistaken Scriptures, upon which Infants Baptism hath been both formerly and laterly founded, is made manifest.  
THe First and Principal Ground that hath been asserted for this practice, hath been Ecclesiastical and Apostolical Tradition; or however (as hath been said) the Scripture is so silent in the Case, yet the clear, full and uninterrupted Tradition of the Church, makes up that defect, to which the Church of Rome and some others have adhered.  
Though many Protestants, since the Reformation, have chose to fly to some Consequential Arguments deduced, as they suppose from the Scriptures to justify the same.  
Both which in this Chapter are brought forth, and duly weighed in the Balance of Truth.  
The First we shall examine is the point of Tradition, and therein do these two things, Show that it hath primarily been asserted to be the ground thereof. Secondly, The insufficiency of the Authorities that have been urged to prove the same. 
Tradition the principal ground of Infant's Baptism.   
That Tradition hath principally been leaned upon, as the main ground of the Practice, you have the following Instances.  
Austin 
Austin.  tells us, That the Custom of our Mother the Church in Baptising little Infants, is not to be despised, nor to be judged superfluous, nor to be believed at all, unless it were an Apostolical Tradition. Lib. 10. de Gen. c. 23.  
And again in his 4th Book against the Donatists, 24 Chap. saith, That if there be any that do inquire for a Divine Authority for the Baptising of Children, Let them that know what the Universal Church holds, nor was instituted in Councils, but always retained, is most rightly believed to have been delivered by no other than Apostolical Authority.  

Chrysost.  Chrysostom saith, That Infants ought to be baptised, as universally received by the Catholic Church, to take away Original Sin. Mag. Cent. 4.  
Bellarmine, Tom. 1. L. 4. c. 2. saith, That the Baptism of Infants is an Apostolical Tradition not written; because, saith he, it is not written in any Apostolical Book though written, he saith, in the Books of almost all the Ancients.  
And which Tradition of the Apostles, saith he, is of no less Authority with us, than the Scriptures.  
In the Council of Trent, 
Council of Trent.  after they had in the 5th and 7th Sessions made those Canons about Infants-Baptism, before mentioned, do conclude, That their Traditions, touching the same, should be received, Pari Pietatis affectu, with the same pious affection with the Holy Scriptures, as you have it, p. 144.  
In the Council of Basil, 
Council of Basil.  in the Oration of the Cardinal of Ragusi, It is asserted, That in the beginning of this Sacrament of Baptism, they only were to be baptised, who could by themselves answer Interrogatories concerning their Faith; And that it was not where read in the Canon of Scripture, that a newborn Infant was baptised, who could neither believe with the Heart to Justification, nor confess with the Mouth to Salvation. Yet nevertheless, saith he, the Church hath appointed it.  
Eckius 
Eck us.  against the Lutherans writes, That the Ordinance concerning the Baptism of Children is without Scripture, and is found to be only a Custom of the Church. And in his Enchiridion calleth it a Commandment and Ordinance of Man, and that it is not to be proved out of the Holy Scriptures.  
A great Papist, lately in London, going to a Dispute about Infants-Baptism, told his friend, He was going to hear a Miracle, viz. Infant's Baptism to be proved by Scripture.  
And the Ground and Reason why they do so firmly own this Truth to the Protestants upon that subject, is but the better to enforce and introduce their many other Traditions, there being nothing else for that.  
But whereas some object, That Bellarmine and others do also bring Scripture for it, Becan. 
Becon.  Lib. 1. c. 2. Sec. 24. answers, That some things may be proved out of Scripture, when the Church's sense is first heard about the Interpretation thereof, for so, he saith, it is concerning Infant's Baptism, which is proved from John 3.5. Except a man be born of Water and the Spirit, etc. But the sense whereby to prove it, it only manifest by Tradition. And it is confirmed in the Canon Law and Schoolmen, That Infants-Baptism was not reckoned perfect, till the Bishop laid on hands, which was called Confirmation, viz. of the imperfect Baptism in Infancy: and therefore saith Caistans 
Caistans.  secundum Jewel, That an Infant wanting Instruction in the Faith, hath not perfect Baptism, Tom. prec. p. 86. Dr. Field, 
Dr. Field.  Lib. 4. P. 375. saith, That Infants-Baptism is therefore called a Tradition, because it is not expressly delivered in the Scriptures, that the Apostles did baptise Infants, or that they should do so.  
The Oxford Divines 
Oxford Divines.  in a full Convocation, Jan. 1647. say, That without the consentaneous judgement and practice of the Universal Church, they should be at a l●ss, when they are called upon for proof in the point of Baptising Infants, Mr. Tombs.  
Dr. Prideaux 
Dr. Prid●.  Controu. Theol. Sec. 392. Infant's Baptism (saith he) rests upon no other Divine right than Episcopacy, viz. Diocesan Episcopacy, in use in these Nations.  
Mr. Baxter 
Mr. Baxter.  in Defence of the Principles of Love, p. 7. saith, That the Anabaptists are Godly men, that differ from us in a Point so difficult, that many of the Papists and Prelatists have maintained, That it is not determined in Scripture, but dependeth upon the Tradition of the Church. (Though, he saith, he is of another mind himself.)  
To which many more might be added, to prove to you, That Apostolical Tradition, for want of Scripture, hath been urged as the principal and first ground of this Practice. And not only for this, but for all other Rites and Ceremonies, as well those that have been already declared; as Chrism, Exorcism, Consignation, and innumerable more, as those that have not yet been heard of or declared: for as a late learned. Author excellently observes, That the Papists, 
Dr. Owen  in point of Tradition, do herein very much exceed the Jews, those old Tradition- mongers, who so made void the Law of God in their days by it. For they tell us plainly, that now their whole Oral Law is written, and that they have no reserve of Authentic Traditions not yet decla●r'd: But here the Romanists, saith he, fail us, for although, they have given us heaps upon heaps of their Traditions, yet they plead that they have still an inexhaustible treasure of them laid up in their Church-stores, & ● breast of their Holy Father, to be drawn forth at all times, as occasion shall require. And which Principle hath been the means of their Apostasy, and is the great Engine, whereby they are rendered incurable therein. Dr. Owen his Proleg. P. 67.  
Dr. Tailor, 
D. Tailor  P. 237. argues so fully and strenuously upon this point of Tradition, that I cannot pass him by, who saith, Tradition by all means must supply the place of Scripture, and there is pretended a Tradition Apostolical, that Infants were baptised. But at this (saith he) we are not much moved, For we who rely upon the written Word of God, as sufficient to establish all true Religion, do not value the allegation of Tradition: And however the world goes, none of the Reformed Churches can pretend this Argument for this Opinion: Because they who reject Tradition, when it is against them, must not pretend it in the least for them; but if we allow the Topick to be good, yet how will it be verified? For so far as can yet appear, it relies wholly upon the Testimony of Origen, for from him Austin had it. Now a Tradition Apostolical, if it be not consigned with a fuller testimony than of one person, whom all other Ages have condemned of many Errors, and who's, works, saith Erasmus, are so spurious that he that reads them is uncertain, whether he read Origen or Ruffinus. Therefore will obtain so little reputation amongst those, who know that things have upon greater Authority, been pretended to be received from the Apostles, but falsely; that it will be a great Argument, that he is ridiculous and weak, that shall be determined by so weak Probation in matters of so great concernment. But besides that the Tradition cannot be proved to be Apostolical, we have very good evidence from Antiquity, That it was the Opinion of the Primitive Church, That Infants ought not to be Baptised, which, saith he, is clear in the Canon of the Council of Neocaesarca, which he mentions at large in the original Greek; Determining that none ought to be baptised, without giving an account of their Faith, and desiring the same. 
That tie Traditons for Inf. Bapt. are fabulous.  Thus far Dr. Taylor.  
In the next place we shall give you some account of the insufficiency and weakness, if not the wickedness of those first Authorities, that have been leaned upon to prove this Practice to be an Apostolical Tradition, and which appearing fabulous, all others depending upon the same, necessarily fall to the ground; whereof you have four or five of the principal of them, and which may be useful to the Protestants, whatever they are to the Papists, viz.  
The first and earliest we meet with to prove Infants-Baptism to be an Apostolical Tradition, is that of Dyonisius the Ar●opagite, mentioned already P. 109. & quoted by Bellarmin, Tom. 3. Lib. 8. Cassander in his Book de Bapt. and many other learned Papists, for Authentic proof that Infants-Baptism was Apostolical, out of his Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, etc. But that this was a piece of Forgery put upon the world, may yet further more fully appear to you in that which followeth, viz.  
This Dionysius the Areopagite living at Athens, 
Dionysius Areopag.  who some will have to be Bishop of Corinth, though Eusebius calls him Bishop of Athens (for you must know, according to Eusebius and Dorotheus, all men of Name in the New Testament, must be Bishops of some place or other, and therefore they can tell you, not only the Names of the seventy Disciples, but what Bishoprics each did belong unto.) Now this Person being an Athenian, must be supposed to be a learned Greek Philosopher, and therefore upon none more fitly in this Age could be fathered all those Philosophical Tracts that are put upon him; and amongst which you have two of most eminency, viz. his Hierarchy of Angels, wherein you have the Orders, Ranks, Dignities, Names, and Offices of the Angels and Archangels (a profound piece no doubt.)  
The other his Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, wherein the Consecrations, Orders, Offices and Ranks of the Inferior Angels, viz. the Priests, Friars, Monks, Bishops, Archbishops, and Popes are methodically treated and handled, as also divers Rites and Ceremonies discussed, amongst which that of Infants-Baptism is asserted to be an ancient Apostolical Tradition, which he declares he received from his Prafectors, together with various Ceremonies, that according to like Apostolic Authority, are confirmed as an Appendix thereto, viz. Gossips, or Sureties; Chrism, or the Anointing Cream; Exorcism or Sufflation, viz. a blowing used in Baptism, whereby the Devil was to be blown away; Consignation, or the signing the baptised with the Sign of the Cross; Confirmation, or Bishoping the Baptised Children, afterwards, to complete his imperfect Baptism by laying on of Hands, Albes or white Garments for the Baptised, Baptisterions, or large Fonts to be placed in the Temples, Altars also for the Eucharist, and several other things, which he affirms to have been in use in the Apostles days.  
And this is one of the first Authorities that Father Bellarmine and others of them give us, for the proof of this Apostolical Institution, and which must be received with equal Authority to the Holy Scriptures (and a very convincing one no doubt) concerning which, though if there was nothing but the bare Repetition thereof, it may sufficiently detect the Cheat; the lies being so gross, so ill made, and laid together, that every common understanding may easily perceive the juggle; For how absurdly ridiculous is it to say, that Paul or his Praefectors should acquaint him, that it was an ancient Apostolical Tradition; if it had been true, Paul might have told him it had been new, but by no means in those days an old Apostolical Tradition. And to tell the world of Baptisterions and Altars in Temples, when no such things as Temples for Christian Worship, for above 200. years after. And also of those other impious fooleries, that were not known nor heard of for some Ages after, so strangely, by God's Providence, were they infatuated, to come forth with such ridiculous madness to detect their own folly: And to testify that this was to be that Interest that should appear with all deceivableness of Unrighteousness.  
Which horrid Cheat you have very convincingly discovered and detected by many Learned Men; & besides those already mentioned Page. 110 in the first Chapter, You have he Magdiburgenses, Cent. 1. L. 2. p. 625, 626. and Cent. 4. p. 420, 554, and 1129. Also by Perkins, Reynolds, Rivet, proving by many Arguments it was wholly spurious and supposititious, and that it could not, from many considerations, be written by the ingenuous Contriver, till the fourth or fifth Century, that none of the Church-writer, in those times took any notice of it, and that Austin himself went not higher than Origen, And which wretched Forgery is excellently detected in 39 Arguments by the Learned daily, a late renowned Protestant-writer in France, in his Book called de Scriptis.  
A Second Proof leaned upon to verify the truth of its Apostolicalness, is that of Justin 
Justin.  Martyrs 
Martyr.  Responses, 
Responses.  especially to the 56 Questions before mentioned, Page 111. and Chap. 2. which many of the aforesaid Authors do learnedly detect to be spurious also, as Perkins, Rivet and others, yea and many of the very Papists themselves do disown the same as ridiculous, forasmuch as Origen and the Manichees are mentioned therein, that were not in being for so long time after. And concerning which Responses, 
M. Baxter  Mr. Baxter himself, in his plain Scripture proof, P. 155. is pleased to tell us, That as to that of Justin Martyrs to the 56th Question, He would not insist upon it, because though the place be most express for Infant's Baptism, (for when the Friars hand was in, he could do it to a hairs breadth) and the Book ancient, yet that it was either spurious or interpolate.  
A Third ancient Proof urged in Confirmation hereof, is the Decretals and Institutions of several Popes in this 2d Cent. viz. Pope Clement 
P. Clem.  for Chrysm, Consignation, and Confirmation. Secondly, Pope Hyginus 
P. Huginus.  for Gossips, Chrysm, and Dedication of Churches, upon whose Authority Mr. Baxter lays so much stress, that he Prints it in the front of his Scripture-proofs, amongst other of the Ancients, and boastingly calls for as good proof from Antiquity against Infants-baptisme, concluding that Gossips could not be but for Infants-baptism: Though the words out of Gracian, as L. Osiander gives them, are otherwise, Cent. 2. L. 2. C. 5. viz. In Catechism, in Baptism, and in Confirmation, if necessity require, there may be one Surety, (or Gossip, as usually rendered) Infants being not so much as mentioned, having it seems Gossips (as hereafter you will find) in other Rites, as well as in Baptism; and for Men and Women, as well as Children.  
Thirdly, Pope Victor 
P. Victor.  for confining Baptism to Easter. Fourthly, Pope Pius 
P. Pius.  for Baptisteri●ns; The spuriousnes of all which Decretals is learnedly by Osiander, Perkins, Rivet, etc. detected. And to whom I shall add what I find in Mr. Fox 
Mr. Fox.  in his Martyrology, Vol. 1. P. 75. who speaking of these Decretals, saith judiciously, if not prophetically, viz. Most lamentable it is, that the falsifying of such trifling Traditions, under the false pretences of Antiquity, either was begun in the Church to deceive the People, or that it hath remained so long undetected: For (saith he) I think the Church of God will never be perfectly reform, before these Decretal Constitutions and Epistles, which have so long put on the vizard of Antiquity, shall be fully detected, and appear in their colours, wherein they were first painted.  
And concerning which the Magdiburgenses 
Magdib.  very excellently, Cent. 2. p. 111. That if it should be taken for granted, that all this was true, as is expressed in these Decretals of these Roman Bishops, then what could be more certain than that even now the Mystery of Iniquity began to work in the Church of Rome, in their so corrupting and contaminating the simple Form of Baptism, concerning which nothing is so much as mentioned of in any other Church.  
The next Testimony that is alleged for Authentic proof in the Case, is that of Origen in the Third Century, 
Origen's Testimony examined.  and of which there is so much stress laid by Austin and others, for from him, saith Dr. Taylor, he only had his proof of Apostolic Tradition, for as yet, it seems, the former Testimonies had not seen the Sun; his words are these, taken out of his fifth Book in his Homilies upon the sixth Chap. of the Rom. viz. The Church received a Tradition from the Apostles, to give Baptism to Children.  
But whether this Testimony ought any more to be regarded than the former, let these following Considerations determine:  

1. Origen a single Testimony.  And first it is to be considered, that if this was Origen's own, as it is asserted out of his supposed Homilies upon Leu. & the Rom. (it being mentioned in both) yet that is but one single Testimony in the Case, as Dr. Tayler well observes before, and that against so much positive witness to the contrary, who with one mouth do testify, that none but the Adult were either in the Apostles times, or the next Centuries after, baptised.  

2. Origen very corrupt.  Secondly, His writings, or at least those that are fathered upon him, are so notoriously corrupt and erroneous, as the Magdiburgenses do affirm in Cent. 3. P. 262, 263, etc. and whereof they give several instances, viz. That he was not only very Heretical and blasphemous about Christ, asserting two Christ's, and denying his Godhead, who was (as Epiphanius saith) the very Head of the Arrians; but as Jerome saith, holding very desperately about the Spirit, and very corruptly about Angels, Devils, Creation, Providence, Original Sin, Church-Government, and the Resurrection, a fearful Allegoriser of Scripture, but desperately Erroneous about Baptism itself, viz. First, That the very Act itself of Baptising in Water, merits the Spirit. Secondly, That in that very Act, all Sin is taken away. Thirdly, That it enables to keep the whole Law. Fourthly, That there is to be a Baptism after the Resurrection, to purge away Sin: And that the Baptised aught to be signed with the Sign of the Cross: And upon the 5th of Math. saith, Peter by promise aught to be the Foundation of the Church: and upon Luke 17. That Peter was the Prince of the Apostles. Whose Writings therefore, (for a great part of them) for their Corruption, were impugned and rejected by Jerome and others; yea, and not only by several of the Greek Fathers, as Alexandrinus, Epiphanius, Theophilus, Cyrenus and others, but by some Greek Councils too, as appears by the Magd. Eusebius, and others: So that we may say of Origen, if these indeed were his own, as the Magdiburgens. say of the former Decretals, That they bespoke him an early Factor for Antichrist, and that the Mystery of Iniquity did work strongly in him; But what appears in the next Consideration, may give us to hope better of him.  

Origen's Homeiys upon Leu. and Rom. spurious.  But Thirdly, and more especially, It is to be observed, That many of Origen's Works fell into ill hands, and particularly those Homilies of Levit. and the Romans, if indeed there were any such, which Mr. Perkins and others doubt, because no Greek Copies thereof have been extant, and of which Vossius in his Book De Baptis. saith, Sed de Origene minus laborabimus, quia quae citabimus Graece non extant. There being only a corrupt Latin piece, called a Translation of Ruffinus, who ingenuously confesseth, that he took so much liberty in his Translation, as to add and alter at his pleasure; which gives Erasmus so much occasion to say, That you know not when you read Origen, and when Ruffinus. And therefore are those Homilies rejected as spurious, and put by Perkins and others amongst his counterfeit Works: And well they may, if you consider the Story the Magdiburgs tell us of this Ruffinus, and his way of Translation and Writing, of which, I shall take the freedom to give you a brief account, as I find it in Cent. 4. cap. 10. p. 1201, etc. That you may better understand what trade was driven of this kind, and what fine Merchants we have to deal with about this Romish trash.  
This Ruffinus, you must know, 
Th● History of ●uffinus and his Forgeries.  lived about the latter end of the 4. Century, who was an Italian M●nk of Aquila, a wicked, though witty, learned Man, who went away with a famous Roman Courtesan into Asia, and sojourned at Jerusalem with her above thirty years; at first a great friend and companion of Jerome's, but afterwards when Jerome discovered his wickedness, especially in his abusing Origen's Works, many whereof he translated out of Greek into Latin, sophisticating them at his pleasure, and for which, and for several bastardy pieces he brought forth, Jerome, Anastasius, and others writ several pieces to detect and reprove him. Several corrupt Heretical Treatises he wrote, and fathered upon others, viz. One containing divers corrupt Tenants of Origen, he fathered upon Pamphilia a Martyr, who lived about the Third Century, the better to put it off in the Martyr's name; Another Book of one Xystus a Pythagorean, which he fathered upon a Roman Bishop and Martyr; several Homilies upon I shua, which he fathered upon another eminent Person; A Book of the Lives of the Monks of Basil, a feigned piece; and another Book of Monks, innumerating a Multitude, as Jerome saith, that ●ever were, and fathering Origen's Errors upon those that were. He made a corrupt, vicious Translation of Josephus, as discovered by Gallenius that w●s more faithful therein; he added two lying pieces to the History of Eusebius from Constantine to the Death of Theodosius, which Socrates reproves; and he wrote another frivolous Book of jacob's blessing the Patriarches, and an Explanation thereof.  
By whose Impostures of this kind, you may discern what stuff was forged at the Antichristian Anvil, and particularly what Credit is to be given to this Man's Works.  
Another Traditional Testimony, greatly boasted of, is that of Cyprian, 
Cyprians Evidence tried.  about the middle of the third Century, in that his Epistle, said to be writ to one Fidus a Priest, wherein he declares his own and the judgement, as 'tis said, of Sixty six African Bishops, That Children should be baptised, as well before as after the vl day, with the Reasons and Grounds thereof, as at large expressed in the Epistle, viz. From the extent of God's Grace and Salvation tendered to all, even the greatest of Sinners, therefore that Children should be baptised. Concerning which testimony of Cyprian, there are these things to be considered.  
First, That he doth not urge the Practice of it from any Apostolical Tradition or Prece●t, but fr●m his own and Bishop's Arguments (such as they are) to enforce the same: And truly, if he had asserted it to have been an Apostolical Tradition, his word would not sooner have been taken, than when he tells us that Chrism was so.  
Secondly, Because there is good ground to question, whether this was Cyprian's and sixty six Bishops, Conclusion. First, Because we meet with no such Council, neither can it appear where it was held: and if Austin's Argument  be good to prove it an Apostolical Tradition, because no Council had determined it, it concludes against any such Council. Secondly, That the grounds upon which the Conclusion is grounded, are so weak and frivolous. Thirdly, Because it was a Doctrine so much contradicted by his great Master Tertullian, whom he so much reverenced. And therefore if you will believe Baronius, Tom. 1. p 415. Cyprian was not for Infants-Baptism, as Mr. Blackwood observes. Fourthly, Because other things have been fathered upon him, which were not his, as a piece called, De Cardinalibus Operibus Christi, by an Abbot in France, as daily demonstrates in his Book De Scriptis. p. 466. c. 39 L. 2.  

Cyprian  But if his own, there is as little cause to receive it as other corrupt and Antichristian Tenants, 
very corrupt.  that are found in his Writings, and said to be his, viz. That the Church of Rome is the Mother Church. That there ought to be one High Priest over the Church: And the Principle Church is Peters-chair, from whence the Unity of the Priesthood ariseth; And that upon Peter the Church is founded, with much more such stuff, which the Magdiburgenses have collected out of his Book, called De Ordine in Ecclesia, Cent. 3. c. 4. p. 84. A violent impugner of Priests Marriages, p. 86. In his Sermon of Alms concludes, That Sins committed after Baptism were done away by Alms and good Works, p. 80. And again, That as Water extinguisheth Fire, so doth Alms extinguish Sin, p. 81.  
And concerning Baptism itself very absurdly corrupt, Saying, That the Water ought first to be Consecrated by a Priest, to make it more efficacious to take away Sin. That the Person baptising conferred the Holy Spirit, and the baptised was inwardly sanctified thereby. That Chrism, or anointing the baptised, was absolutely necessary, page 82.  
That Exorcisms were also necessary to drive away the Devil; That Baptism should be done in Temples, and that the Kiss should be given by the Priest to the Baptised Infant, and that Sprinkling might serve instead of Dipping, p. 125.  
By all which you may understand, that either Cyprian had been vilely Ruffined, and these things Fathered upon him, or that he himself was a notable Factor for Antichrist, and that in him the Mystery of Iniquity did very strongly work.  
But we would rather believe, That these things were foisted into his Writings by that villainous cursed Generation, that so horribly abused the Writings of most of the ancient Writers, as appears by the Index Expurgatorius, and who durst venture upon any Forgery, how impious soever, for the benefit of the Holy Church, witness that impudent Fable, as Osiander calls it, of the Baptism of Constantine, before mentioned, in the fourth Century, in the first Chap. 2. Part.  
Thus you have the Principal Authorities urged for Apostolical Tradition, proved forged and fabulous; and what doth more refute that fond conceit of the uninterrupted Tradition, so much boasted of, to prove this Practice, than the Testimony Justin Martyr gives, That the Believers were in his days the only subjects of Baptism. And the witness Tertull, gives against Infants-Bapt. in the third Century, & the advice that Nazianzen gives to defer it; The Decrees of so many Councils to that purpose, and especially so many eminent Christians in the fourth Century that did not baptise their Children, till they could give an account of their Faith, as hath been before so learnedly observed by daily, Grotius, Dr. B. Dr. Tailor and others, and which I humbly conceive, are unanswerable Arguments against it.  
But 'tis said, Object. That by Tertullia's opposing it, it may seem that there were some that practised it in the third Century, and can it be supposed that any did so, except it had been warranted by such Apostolical Tradition?  
It is granted, 
Answer.  Tertullian did oppose it. But who it was that asserted it, and whether upon any such account, as supposed, is not mentioned; if any do affirm, it will be on their part to prove the one and the other, The Magdiburgenses and others, as you have heard, do tell us, That they meet with no instance of any that either practised this or any other of these Inventions fathered also upon Apostolical Tradition, as Chrism, Exorcism, Consignation, etc. in that Age. But 'tis said, If they did, it would demonstrate, especially in the practice of the latter, That the Mystery of Iniquity did then begin to work, in so corrupting that Ordinance of Christ, and had they not as good ground to do the one as the other?  
Whereby that word of Prophecy 2 Thes. 3. concerning the taking place of that Mystery of Iniquity was so much fulfilled, which was to come on with all Deceivableness of Unrighteousness, and with strong Delusions to believe Lies; and which in nothing more appears than in this very thing, having not only forged so many Lies about it, but imposed their Lies to be believed by others. As their Forefathers, the Priests of old, that hired the Soldiers to tell a Lie about the Body of Christ, and then imposed, that their Lie to be believed, to delude others, Mat. 28.12, 13, 14, 15. The consideration whereof may, I hope, be of use to Protestants, though as to the hardened and deluded Papists they are, as well observed before, utterly incurable herein.  
In the next place we come to examine the Scripture-grounds urged for the practice, and to evince, 
Scripture grounds for Infant's Baptism examined.  That they have been no less mistaken in their Scriptural, than in their Ecclesiastical Authorities to found it upon, whereof we shall give you an account of some of the principal, and leave you to judge of the rest.  
The First we shall mention, is that which was called (of old) the Scripture-Canon for Infants-Baptism, and upon which much stress hath been laid since to prove the same, viz. Mat. 19.14. 
Mat. 19.14.  Suffer little Children to come to me, and forbidden them not, for to such belongs the Kingdom of Heaven. But may we not well say, How doth Baptism come to be concerned in this Text, except it can be made out, That blessing was baptising. 
D. Tailor  And to which Dr. Tailor hath spoken so fully for us, that I need say no more, p. 230. Who saith. From the Action of Christ's blessing Infants, to infer, that they were baptised, proves nothing so much, as that there is a want of better Arguments: For the Conclusion would, with more probability, be derived thus; Christ blessed Children, and so dismissed them, but baptised them not, therefore Infants are not to be baptised. But let this be as weak as its enemy, Yet that Christ did not baptise them, is an Argument sufficient, that he hath other ways of bringing them to Heaven than by Baptism; He passed an Act of Grace upon them by Benediction and Imposition of Hands. And therefore, although neither Infants, nor any Man, in puris Naturalibus, can attain to a supernatural end, without the addition of some Instrument, or means of Gods appointing, ordinarily and regularly, yet where God hath not appointed a Rule, nor an Order, as in the Case of Infants, we contend he hath not, the Argument is invalid.  
And as we are sure God hath not commanded Infants to be baptised, so we are sure God will do them no injustice, nor damn them for what they cannot help; viz. If the Parent baptise them not.  
Many 1000 ways there are, by which God can bring any reasonable soul to him, but nothing is more unreasonable than because he hath tied all men of years and discretion to this way, Therefore we of our own heads shall carry Infants to him that way, without his direction: The conceit is poor and low, and the action consequent to it, is bold and venturous. Let him do what he pleases with Infants, we must not.  
A Second Scripture that hath been much leaned upon, is that of Joh. 3.5. 
Joh. 3.5.  Except a man be born of Water and the Spirit, he can in no wise enter into the Kingdom of God. From whence it is concluded, that there is no other way to regenerate and save Infants, and add them to the Church, but by Baptism; and therefore have they baptised them, as the Canons and Decretals of Popes, and the Opinions of the Ancients do demonstrate.  
But the Consequences drawn from hence, to infer the Baptising and Saving of Infants, savours of so much Ignorance and Popish Darkness, that we need say little to it; for since the Reformation, most of the Protestants have protested against this as erroneous; Yet for the sake of others that yet cleave to it, saying, That in Analogy hereto, Children are hereby made Members of Christ, Children of God, and Inheritors of the Kingdom of Heaven, I shall refer them to Bishop Tailor for Solution, whose words will have more weight than any thing I can say in the Case, who in p. 231. Calls such a sense of the words, a prevaricating of Christ's Precepts. For, saith he, the Water and Spirit in this place, signify the same thing, and by Water is meant the effect of the Spirit, cleansing and purifying the Soul, as it appears in its parallel place of Christ's Bap izing with the Spirit and with Fire: For although this was literally fulfilled in the day of Pentecost, yet morally there is more in it, for it is the Sign of the effect of the Holy Ghost and his productions upon the Soul: And you may as well conclude, that Infants must also pass through the Fire, as through the Water. And that we may not think this a trick to elude the pressure of this place, Peter saith the same thing. For where he had said, That Baptism saves us, he adds by way of Explication (not the washing away of the filth of the Flesh, but the answer of a good Conscience towards God,) plainly saying, That it is not Water, or the purifying of the Body, but the cleansing of the Spirit that doth that which is supposed to be the Effect of Baptism.  
But to suppose it meant External Baptism, yet this no more infers a necessity of Infant's Baptism, than the other words of Christ infer a necssity to give them the holy Communion: Joh. 6.53. Except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his Blood, you have no life in you. And yet we do not think these words a sufficient Argument to Communicate them. If men therefore will do us justice; either let them give both Sacraments to Infants, as some Ages of the Church did, or neither. For the wit of man is not able to show a disparity in the Sanction, or in the Energy of its expression. And therefore they were honest that understood the Obligation to be parallel, and performed it accordingly; and yet because we say they were deceived in one instance, and yet the Obligation (all the world cannot reasonably say but) is the same, they are honest and as reasonable that do neither: And sure the Ancient Church did, with an equal opinion of Necessity, give them the Communion, and yet men now adays do not, Why should men be more burdened with a prejudice and a name of obliquity, for not giving the Infants one Sacrament more than you are disliked, for not affording them the other? And farther, p. 242. If we must suppose Grace to be effected by the external work of the Sacrament alone, how doth this differ from the Opus operatum of the Papists, save that it is worse; for they say the Sacrament do●h not produce its effects, but in a Suscipient disposed by all Requisi es and due Preparatives of Piety, Faith, and Repentance; though in a subject so disposed, they say, the Sacrament by its own virtue doth it. But this opinion says, it doth it of itself, without the help, or so much as the coexistence of any condition, but the mere reception.  

M. Baxter  Mr. Baxter to this point, p. 306. of his plain Scripture-proof, That Baptism in itself can work no such Cause, for the Water is not a subject capable of receiving Grace, or of conveying it to the Soul, it cannot approach or touch the Soul, nor infuse Grace into it if it could.  
Amesius in Bel. Enervat. Tom. 3. L. 2. c. 3. Outward Baptism, saith he, cannot be a Physical Instrument of the infusing of Grace, because it hath it not in any wise in itself.  

Zwingli.  Zwinglius denieth Baptism of itself worketh any Grace, or pardoneth Sin, or reneweth, as Tom. 2. p. 119, 120, 121.  
Dr. Owen 
Dr. Owen.  in his Theolog. l. 6 ch. 5. p. 477. upon the point, saith, That the Father of lies himself could not easilier have invented a more pernicious Opinion, or which might pour in a more deadly poison into the minds of Sinners.  
A Third Scripture insisted on, is the Commission itself, Mark 16.16, He that believeth, and is baptised, shall be saved. 
Mar. 16.16  But Infants are Believers, Therefore according to the Commission, they are to be baptised. In wh●ch though all Parties agree, yet how they do believe, and what faith this is, there is great confusion and contradiction.  
Viz. The Ancients said they had the Faith of the Sacrament, as Austin: The Papists the Faith of the Church; as Tho. Aquinas, which is entailed to all within the Pale thereof. The Lutherans say, they have a proper Faith, which they hotly descended at the Conference with the Calvinists at Montpelgart, and therefore Baptise all whether the Parents be good or ba●. The Calvinists say, they have an imputative Faith from the Parent in Covenant, as Musculus, Oecolampadius and others at that Conference maintained, and therefore baptise only the Children of Believers.  
The Prelatic Protestants affirm, they have the Faith of the Gossip or Surety, but none of their own, as the Com. Catechism tells us: Most of the Non Conformists do agree with the Calvinists, that it is an imputative Faith from the Parent, or Proparent in Covenant. Mr. Baxter in his Right to Sacraments, as before, saith, They have a Justifying, and Mr. Blake his opposite allows but a Dogmatical Faith; some say it is a Physical, some a Metaphysical, and some a Hyperphysical Faith; some saying, as before, that Baptism is an Instrument to convey real Grace to Infants; some say to all, as Mr. Bedford and others; some only to the Elect, as Dr. Burgos: And thus you see they are not agreed in their Verdict, nor who shall speak for them. But for an Answer hereto, I shall again refer you to Dr. Tayler, 
D. Tailor  p. 240. speaking so much my mind, and the truth herein, saith he, Whether Infants have Faith or no, is a Question to be disputed by persons that care not how much they say, and how little they prove.  
First. Personal and Actual Faith they have none, for they have no acts of Understanding; and besides, how can any man know that they have, since he never saw any sign of it, neither was he told so by any that cold tell? Secondly, Some say they have Imputative, but then so let the Sacrament be too, that is, if they have the Parent's faith or the Churches, than so let Baptism be imputed also by derivation from them, and as in their Mother's Womb, and while they hang on their Mother's Breasts, they live upon their Mother's Nourishment: So they may upon the Baptism of their Parents, or their Mother the Church: For since Faith is necessary to the susception of Baptism (and they themselves confess it by striving to find out new kinds of Faith to daub the matter up) such as the Faith, such must be the Sacrament: for there is no proportion between an actual Sacrament, and an imputative Faith; this being in immediate and necessary order to that. And whatsoever can be said to take off from the necessity of Actual Faith, all that and much more may be said to excuse from the actual susception of Baptism. The first of these devices was that of Luther and his Scholars; the second of Calvin and his, and yet there is a third Device, which the Church of Rome teaches, and that is, that Infants have habitual Faith; but who told them so? How can they prove it? What Revelation or Reason teacheth any such thing? Are they by this habit so much as disposed to an actual Belief, without a new Master? Can an Infant, sent into a Mahometan Province be more confident for Christianity, when he comes to be a Man, than if he had not been baptised? Are there any Acts precedent, concomitant, or consequent to this pretended Habit? This strange Invention is absolutely without Art, without Scripture, Reason, or Authority; But the Men are to be excused unless there were a better.  
To which, saith he, this Consideration may be added, That if Baptism be necessary to the Salvation of Infants (as the Fathers of old, and the Church of Roms and England since) upon whom is the imposition laid? To whom is the Command given? To the Parents, or the Children? Not to the Parents, for then God hath put the Salvation of innocent Babes into the Power of others, and Infants may be damned for their Father's carelessness or malice. It follows that it is not necessary at all to be done to them, to whom it cannot be prescribed as a Law, and in whose behalf it cannot be reasonably entrusted to others, with the appendent necessity; and if it be not necessary, it is certain it is not reasonable, and most certain it is no where in terms prescribed; and therefore it is presumed that Baptism ought to be understood and administered according as other Precepts are with reference to the capacity of the subject, and the reasonableness of the thing.  
And again to this purpose, p. 242. And if any Man runs for succour to that exploded Cresphugeton, that Infants have Faith, or any other inspired Habit, of I know not what or how; we desire no more advantage in the world, than that they are constrained to answer without Revelation, against Reason, common Sense, and all the Experience in the World.  
The Argum. from federal Holiness examined. 
4. Argum. From Federal Holiness examined.   
The other Scriptures we shall speak to, are those that are supposed to hold cut a Covenant-Right to the Children of Believers, and from whence Arguments are drawn for the Baptising of them, which are principally, 1 Cor. 7.14. Gen. 17.7. compared Rom. 4.11. and Acts 2.39. From whence it is asserted, That the Children of Believers being a holy Seed, and in Covenant, that to them therefore belong the Seals of the Covenant, which we shall examine with care and circumspection; so much stress being laid thereon. And as previous to our Answer thereto, shall in the fir place take notice, that this way of arguing hath been the new way, which since the Reformation hath been taken up to prove Infants-Baptism by.  

Antiquity of the Argum. from Federal Holiness.  For when the unsoundness and rotteness of the ancient ground of Infants-Baptisme appeared, they being loath to part with the Tradition, endeavoured to build it upon this new Foundation; for when it was discovered that Infants might be saved without Baptism, and that they were not damned if they died without it, and that the Sacrament did not give Grace by the bare work done, nor took not away Original Sin, it was high time to lay a new Foundation for it, or else it would have fallen, therefore is this new way of Covenant-Holiness found out, upon which our Congregational-Men, especially both in Old as well as New-England seem to go, of which Zwinglius about 120 years since, forasmuch as I can learn, was the first Founder, wherein he was singular from all that went before him. And which he seems himself to own in his Book of Baptism, Tom. 2. Fol. 57 Saying, That all those who have from the Apostles times written of Baptism, have not in a few things erred from the scope; he having it seems, found out a way freer from Error and Exception, than all the Tracts of the Ancients.  
Having observed to you the Antiquity of this new Foundation, we shall in the next place weigh and consider the Arguments themselves.  
The First and chiefest is from 1 Cor. 7.14. Else were your Children unclean, 
The Arguments from Foederal-holiness examined. 1 Cor. 7.4.  but now are they holy. From whence this Argument is raised,  
That they who are holy with a Covenant-holiness, may be baptised: But the Infants of Believers are holy with a Covenant-holiness, for it is said in the Text, but now are they holy; therefore they may be baptised.  
In which Argument we have these two things asserted, but not at all proved. First, that the holiness in the Text is a federal, or Covenant holiness. Secondly, That Federal or Covenant holiness qualifies Infants for Baptism. Both which are positively denied upon the following Grounds.  
First, Because the Holiness in the Text, be it what it will, whether Moral, Federal, or Matrimonial, is neither here, or elsewhere, assigned to be a ground of baptising Children upon; it being only the ground laid down in the Institution that can warrant the same.  
The Female, as well as the Male Children, under the Law, had all of them a Legal or Federal Holiness, yet must none of them be Circumcised, because God had not so ordained; And for twenty Generations before the Law, Circumcision was neither administered to Male or Female for the like Reason. It being Gods Word only, not our Reason, or the Inventions or Persuasions of Learned Men that can warrant our practice in God's Ordinances. That Profession of Faith and Repentance is a substantial ground to Baptise upon, is undeniably proved from Scripture, and consented to by themselves. But that foederal Holiness, or any other Qualification in Infants, is any Scriptural ground for the same, is yet to be proved, this Text being altogether silent herein.  
But Secondly. If it should be granted that Federal Holiness was a ground to baptise Children upon under the Gospel, as it was to circumcise them under the Law, which must not be owned by any means. Yet from substantial Arguments it will appear, that no such Holiness is intended here.  
First, 
No such Federal Holiness in the N. T.  Because there is no such Holiness in the New Testament, as a federal Holiness belonging to Children, That because the Parents are Believers, and in the New Covenant, their Natural Seed must therefore be so esteemed, and have the like right thereby to the Evangelical, as the Children under the Law had to the Legal Ordinances; which, as no where to be found, so not to be admitted upon the following Considerations.  
1. Because it contradicts the Gospel Dispensation as before.  
2. Because such apprehensions intails Grace to Nature, Regeneration to Generation; in contradiction to that of our Saviour, John 3. That which is born of the flesh, is fl●sh. And that we are all the Children of wrath by Nature, Eph. 2.  
3. Because it contradicts all the experience, both of former and latter times, wherein Godly Men have had Wicked Children, and wicked Men good Children; as Abraham had an Ishmael, Isaac an Esau, David an Absolom; and on the contrary wicked Ahaz begat good Hezekiah, wicked Abia good Asa, wicked Amon good Josia.  
4. Because it necessitates an owning the Doctrine of Falling from Grace.  

2. The Text intends an other Holiness, viz Matrimonial.  Secondly, Because the Text intends another Holiness, viz. A Civil or Matrimonial Holiness in opposition to Fornication, Uncleanness, Bastardy. And which doth fully appear,  
First, From the Scope of the place; The Question propounded by the Believing Corinthians for Solution was, 
1. From the scope of the place.  Whether their new Spiritual Relation to Christ, in the Gospel, did not dissolve their Carnal Relation entered into in Unbelief; and whether they could, without defilement, maintain their Converse without Sin any more than they could in Ezra and Nehemiah's time?  
To which the Apostle replies, That the Civil Relation, before orderly entered into, was clean now, as before; The unbelieving Husband is as much clean and sanctified to his believing Wife; and that she might as freely converse with ●im in the Conjugal State now as before the Spiritual difference happened betwixt them. For Religion breaks no Bands nor Civil Contracts, They being as true Man and Wife as before the Marriage, as Honourable as before. And therefore the Apostle adviseth that they should abide in the state and Calling, Religion findeth them in, Ver. 20. And that by no means the believer should departed, and upon that account break the Relation, but that he should maintain his Civil, in expectation of gaining her over to a spiritual Relation. And in confirmation hereof brings an Argument ab absurdo; for otherwise the Children that they had together would be unclean, viz. if they should departed from their Relations from the unlawfulness of the Marriage, and uncleanness of the bed, what would they make their Children but Bastards, or unclean. But in as much as they had no question of their legitimacy or holiness; neither had they any cause to scruple the other. And farther also, the believer had the least ground to doubt hereof, because to him all lawful things are clean, whether Husband, Wife, Child, Estate, etc. which is all the Holiness I conceive can be meant in the Text agreeable to the Holiness, 1 Thes. 4.3, 4. & Mal. 2.15. the Bastard being amongst the unclean and unholy, Deut. 32.2. as Mr. Calvin upon Mal. 2.15. saith wtll, namely.  

Calvin.  Wherefore hath God made one? to wit seeking a Seed of God, a Seed of God is here taken for Legitimate, as the Hebrews do name that Divine, which is pure from any fault or spot, therefore he sought a Seed of God, that is appointed Marriage from whence should be born a Legitimate and pure Offspring; secretly therefore doth the Prophet here show, that they are all Bastards that shall be born by Polygamy; because they neither can, nor aught to be accounted legitimate but they who are begotten according to God's institution; but where the Husband violates the faith given to the Wife, and taketh to himself another, as he perverts the order of Marriage; so also he cannot be a lawful father; thus Calvin.  

2. The holiness the same spoken to be in the unbeliever.  A second Argument, why it is a Holiness of this kind, and not such a faederal Holiness as suggested; because the Holiness of the Children is of no other nature, then that spoke of the unbelieving Parent in the Text, and if one will entitle to the Ordinance so the other.  
A third is from the consideration that Children in the Text, is not to be limited to Infants, or such Children that they might have since the Religious difference happened, 
3. Children not to be taken for Infants only.  but of grown Children; for a Man's Child is his Child whilst he lives, through 30, 40, or 50, years old; and we suppose it would be as absurd to say, a Heathenish Son should be baptised upon a faederal Holiness, as to say the unbelieving Parent should so be.  
A fourth Argument, 
4. Ber. it cannot be known.  why this cannot be a new Covenant-holiness that must qualify and entitle to Baptism; first, because that cannot be known; for if the Parent professing faith be a Hypocrite, and not in Covenant themselves, then may you baptise a wrong subject as well as a right one.  
And secondly, such an absurdity would follow, that no unbelievers Child is in Covenant or Elect, which is notoriously false; for as before Hezekiah was the Son of wicked Ahaz, and Asa of Abia, and Josia the Son of wicked Amon.  
Thirdly from the concurrent Testimony and Confession of many learned Commentators, 
3. From the confession of Commentators upon the place.  and parties themselves.  
Austin 
Austin.  a great asserter of Infant's Baptism, as before, saith hereupon. It is to be held without doubting, whatsoever that Sanctification was, it was not of power to make Christians, and remit sins.  
Jerom saith, Because of God's appointment, Marriage is Holy.  
Ambrose 
Ambrose  thus upon the place; The Children are Holy, because they are born of lawful Marriage.  

Melanc.  Melancton in his Commentary upon the place thus. Therefore Paul answers, that the Marriages are not to be pulled asunder, for their unlike opinions of God; if the impious Person do not cast away the other, and for comfort he adds as a Reason, The unbelieving Husband is sanctified by the believing Wife; meat is sanctified, for that which is Holy in use, that is granted to believers from God; so here he speaks the use of Marriage to be Holy, and to be granted of God, things prohibited under the Law, as Swine's flesh, and a Woman in her pollution were called unclean. The Connexion of the Argument is this, If the use of Marriage should not please God, your Children would be Bastards, and so unclean: But your Children are not Bastards, therefore the use of Marriage pleaseth God, and how Bastards were unclean in a peculiar manner, the Law shows, Deut. 23.  
Musculus in his Comment upon the place, confesseth, 
Muscul.  That he had abused formerly that place against the Anabaptists, but found it impertinent to that purpose.  
Camerareus in his Commentary up- the place, saith, 
Camera.  (For the unbelieving Husband hath been sanctified an unusual change of the Tense, that is) sanctified in the lawful use of Marriage; for without this, saith he, it would be that their Children should be unclean, that is infamous, and not Legitimate; who so are Holy, that is during the Marriage, are without all blot of ignominy.  
Erasmus upon the place, saith thus. 
Erasm.  Infants born of such Parents, as the one, being a Christian, the other not, are holy legitimately; for the conversion of either Wife or Husband doth not dissolve the Marriage which was made, when both were in unbelief.  
And to which we might add many more; for as a learned searcher into this Controversy affirmeth, that all the ancients went this way, and that none ever affirmed this new way of faederal Holiness till the Controversy of Anabaptists in Germany arose, Mr. Tombs in his Examen 82.  
Object. But you give another sense of the word Holy then is to be found in Scripture; for no where is Holy the same with Legitimate, but throughout the Bible (yea in 600. places saith Mr. Sydnam, and Mr. Baxter again and again) Holiness is taken for a separation to God, but never in a common sense.  
Answ. To which I answer first, That suppose it was so, that the word in all places but this should have another sense, it followeth not but it may have this sense properly enough here, the scope of the place leading to it. As for Example, the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signifying authority or power in all other places; yet in the 1 Cor. 1115. is rendered a ●ail: So the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that generally; and in most other places is translated to bless, doth in Job 1.5, 11. & 2.9. signify a quite contrary sense, namely to Curse, and of which we might give you many Instances, but let one more serve for all in the very word itself, viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which generally signifieth Holiness; yet in Deut. 23.17. Hosea 4.14. 2 Kings 23.17. is rendered Whoredom or Sodomy.  
And secondly, neither are we to seek of some parallel place. where the word Holy signifieth this sort of Holiness, viz. Matrimonial or Conjugal Holiness, Mal. 2.15. a Holy Seed, viz. a Legitimate Seed, as Calvin and Camer, and others enlarge upon it in opposition to Bastardy or unholy; for so were Bastards to be esteemed, Deut. 23.17. And so 1 Thes. 4.3, 4, 5. This is the will of God, even your sanctification, that you should abstain from fornication, that every one should know how possess his Vessel in sanctification and honour, as 'tis said of the Young men, 1 Sam. 21.5. and not in the lust of Concupiscence, etc. Where Holiness is put in opposition to uncleanness and fornication.  
But Thirdly, neither can Matrimonial Holiness be said not to be a separation to God; for it is no other than a setting apart according to God's Ordinance, and which is called honourable, (or in this sense holy) and that too all whereby Men and Women are dedicated and devoted to each other by mutual solemn contract, according to God's Institution, that of two they may be made one, and fill up a Relation to the Holy ends God appointed, viz. to prevent uncleanness for mutual help and propagation: And though we do not call a Marriage a Sacrament with the Papists, yet we own it an honourable and holy state, God's Ordinance having made it so.  
Object. But this seems to be a sense contrary to the express words; for is it not said that the unbelieving Husband is sanctified by the Wife, which is a sanctification derived from the Believer.  
Answ. To which I Answer, that the word [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] translated [by] should be rendered [to] as it is Gal. 1.16, [to me] 2. P. 2.5. [to faith] Acts 4.12. [to men] which the scope overrules, and which must needs be so here, which Mr. Marshal grants Tombs Ex. P. 79. for in no sense can it be sanctified by her: for he is not spiritually sanctified, being as yet an unbeliever; and one Argument therefore of the Wives remaining to endeavour to convert him: Neither can it be a faederal Holiness; for that by this Argument would entitle him to Baptism as well as the Children; nor can it be proper to say, the unbeliever is sanctified in a Matrimonial sanctification by his believing Wife for that is only so by God's appointment; therefore must it necessarily be to the Wife, viz. to her use and lawful enjoyment, as Food and Raiment, and all God's blessings are, it being not as [Mr. Marshal grants] a Holiness of State, but of use, and therefore she did not sin in continuing in the station and place Religion found her, which is the Answer to the Scruple.  
But is it not said, Object 3 now are your Children holy? implying some present alteration for good to them, upon the change of the state of the Parent, which did not belong to them before.  
Answ. To which Beza's sense of the words may be a very proper Answer, viz. That the word (is not to be understood an Adverb of Time, but a Conjunction that is wont to be used in the assumptions of Arguments; and so the sense is [but now] that is, for as much as the unbelieving Husband is sanctified to the Wife, your Children are holy, that is lawfully begotten and born.  
Therefore notwithstanding your difference in Religion, that although he be an Idolater, and you a Christian, yet the civil state lawfully entered into before this alteration may be conversed in without sin: For if the Believer should departed, and break the Relation, it was either for the defect of the first Band or Tie, or for unequal yoking with Infidels, as in Ezra s time. But as to the latter, there being no such Law to the Gentiles to put away Wives and Children upon that account. And to the former you having no doubt of the Legitimacy of your Children, but take it for granted they are Holy, neither need you doubt of your lawful Marriage state, your new Relations infringing neither: Therefore from the Holiness both of Bed and Birth continue together, and let not the believing Husband put away his unbelieving Wife; not let not the believing Wife departed from her unbelieving Husband, which is all the Holiness that is found in this Text, and no such thing as a faederal Holiness, Though if there was, it would be no ground to Baptise an Infant upon, as before:   

The Arguments from Circumcision Examined.  
Another, and none of the least Arguments that is urged to prove Infant's Baptism by, is from pretended Consequences, from the Covenant made with Abraham, Gen. 17.  
From whence it is thus argued.  
THose to whom the Gospel Covenant belonged, 
The Argument from Circumcision  to them the Seal thereof appertained; but to Believers and their Seed, the Gospel Covenant belonged; as Gen. 17.7. I'll be a God to thee, and to thy Seed; and Acts 2.39. The Promise is to you and your Children.  
Therefore to them the Seal thereof Circumcision so called, Rom. 4.11. did appertain, Gen. 17.10. For the Foederati were to be Signati, those in the Covenant were to have the Seal thereof. And therefore by Consequence it naturally followeth; That if Circumcision, the Seal of the Gospel Covenant belonged to the Seed of Believers under the Law, then doth the Gospel Seal, Baptism, much more appertain to the Seed of Believers under the Gospel, which comes in the Place, Room, and Use of Circumcision, otherwise the privilege under the Gospel, would be less than that of the Law; should Children be denied such a benefit.  
Answer. That this is fallacious, and false reasoning, (and that there is ●o natural Consequence at all from this Scripture, to infer the Baptising of Infants; nor any ground to build the Gospel-Ordinance Baptism, upon the command of the Legal-Ordinance Circumcision) may fully appear by examining the following particulars, which are begged, but not proved in the Argument.  
1. Whether Circumcision, called here the Gospel Seal, did of old belong to all in Gospel-Covenant.  
2. Whether the new (or Gospel) Covenant, and that mentioned Gen 17. be one and the same.  
3. Whether the Seed mentioned was Abraham's Natural or Spiritual Seed.  
4. Whether Circumcision was a Seal of the new Covenant to the Children under the Law.  
5. Whether Circumcision was administered to Believers as Believers, and to their Seed only.  
6. Whether Baptism did succeed in the Place, Room and Use of circumcision.  
7. Whetheo the not baptising Infants makes the privileges under the Gospel, less than the Circumcising them under the Law.  
To the first, 
Circumcision, not the Seal of the Gospel Covenant to all Believers.  Whether Circumcision called the Gospel-Seal did belong of old to all in Gospel-Covenant.  
'Tis answered, that the contrary doth manifestly appear upon a double account; 1. Because some that were in the Gospel-Covenant were not Sealed; and 2dly. some that were out of the Covenant were Sealed therewith.  
1. 
1. Many in Covenant not Sealed with it.  There were many persons in Covenant that were not Circumcised, that were Foederati, but not Signati; as for instance, all the Believers from Adam to Abraham, who received no such Seal; nor 2dly. did any of the Believers out of Abraham's Family, as Lot, Melchisedeck. Job, that we read of, received any such Seal; neither 3dly. did any of the believing Families in any Age receive it.  

2. Many out of the Covenant they were Sealed.  And 2dly. there were some to whom the Covenant did not belong, that received that called the Seal of Circumcision: For of Ishmael God had said, that this Covenant was not to be established with him, but with Isaak, and yet he was Circumcised, Gen. 17.20, 21, 25. Gal. 4.29.30. And the same may be said of Esau, Rom. 9.10, 11, 12.13. And as to all the Strangers in Abraham's House, or bought with Money in Israel, that were Circumcised, it may well be doubted whether the New Covenant Promises did belong to them.  

2. The Covenant in Gen. 17 a mixed Covenant as the Seed was.  To the second, Whether the Ne● Covenant, and that mentioned in Gen. 17. be the same.  
In answer whereto it must be understood, That as Abraham by Promise stood in a double Capacity, viz. The Father of a Nation, viz. the Natural Israelites; so to be also a Father of many Nations, comprehending the Spiritual Israel, whether Jews or Gentiles throughout the world; and so accordingly the Promises were of two sorts, sometimes respecting his Natural Seed, whether Domestic or National, who were Typical of the Spirtual, as the Birth of Isaac, the deliverance of his Posterity out of Egypt, the possessing of the Land of Canaan, with many outward Temporal Blessings, and benefits annexed thereto, as Gen. 15.13, 18.17.8.15, 16. Acts 7.3, 4, 5, 6.  
And others again respecting in a peculiar manner the Spiritual Seed, the Family, of the faithful, viz. the Elect, of whom through Christ he was Father, and which are Evangelical, and in an especial manner belonging to the new Covenant, as Gen. 12.3.18.18. In thee shall all Nations be blessed, which is called a Gospel-promise, Gal. 3.8, 9 so Gen. 15.5. So shall thy Seed be, Gen. 17.5. A Father of many Nations. And Verse the 8th. To be his God, and the God of his Seed. And therefore must the mind of Wisdom rightly distinguish, and truly apply the Promises that are many times so mixed, that the one may be taken for the other, and sure I am, much of the mistake and error lies here in this very thing, by applying that to the one, which belongs to the other.  

3. The Seed in the 7th. Verse the Spiritual Seed only.  But 3dly. What Seed of Abraham is it to whom the Promise doth belong? In the 7th. Verse, Whether the Natural or Spiritual, and who those Children of Promise, Acts 2.39.  
To the clearing the first, namely, That of the Seed, Verse the 7th. I shall refer you to the Exposition itself, the Scripture hath given us hereof, with the concurring sense of many judicious Expositors, and all of them parties themselves.  
1. The Scriptures expounding this Text are Gal. 3.16. 
Gal. 3.16  Now to Abraham and his Seed were the Promises made; he saith not to Seeds as of many, but as of one, and to thy Seed which is Christ; And therefore saith Ver. 29. If you be Christ's, then are you Abraham's Seed & Heirs according to Promise, and farther, Rom. 9.7, 8. 
Ro. 9.7, 8  Neither because they are the Seed of Abraham are they all Children, but in Isaac shall thy Seed be called; that is, they which are the Children of the Flesh. These are not the Children of God; but the Children of the Promise are counted for the Seed. And Rom. 4. 13, 14. 
Rom. 4.13, 14.  For the promise that he should be the Heir of the World, was not to Abraham, or to his Seed through the Law, but through the Righteousness of faith; for if they which are of the Law be Heirs, faith is made void, and the Promise made of none effect.  
Which so fully confirms the Seed here mentioned, to whom the Promise belonged, not to be the Carnal but Spiritual Seed, and in farther confirmation thereof, you have these following Authors, and all of them Paedobaptists, viz.  
Calvin 
Calvin,  upon Gen. 17.7. saith, That it is manifest that the Promise understood of Spiritual blessing, pertaineth not to the Carnal Seed of Abraham, but to the Spiritual; as the Apostle himself saith, Rom. 4. & 9 Chap. For if you understand the Carnal Seed, (saith he) than that Promise will belong to none of the Gentiles. but to those alone who are begotten of Abraham, and Isaac according to the Flesh, Estius Ann. Gen. 17.7.  
Ainsworth on Gen. 12.7. 
Ainsw.  [thy Seed] That is, all the Children of Promise, (the Elect) who only are counted Abraham's Seed, Rom. 9.7, 8. And in Christ are Heirs by Promise, as well the Gentiles as the Jews.  
Dr. Owen 
Dr. Owen  in his Book called the Doctrine of Saints perseverance, in Chap. 4. arguing from the Covenant of Grace, to prove the unchangableness of the love of God, gins with Gen. 17.7. saying, That the effectual dispensation of the Grace of the Covenant is peculiar t● them only, who are the Children of Promise; the Remnant of Abraham according to Election, with all that in al● Nations were to be blessed by him and his Seed Jesus Christ; Ishmael though Circumcised, was to be put out; and not to be Heir with Isaac, and a little after he writes thus; what blessing then was here made over to Abraham. All the blessings saith he that from God are conveyed in and by his seed Jesus Christ, i● whom both he and we are blessed, are wrapped therein, what they are, the Apostle tells you, Eph. 1.13. They are all Spiritual blessings, if perseverance, if the continuance of the love and favour of God towards us be a Spiritual blessing, both Abraham and all his Spiritual Seed, all faithful ones, throughout the world are blessed with it in Jesus Christ, and if Gods continuing to be a God to them for ever, will enforce this blessing, (being but the same thing in another expression) it is here likewise asserted.  
Amesius 
Amesius.  de Praedest. Chap, 8. Ser. 6. saith, There are many of the Seed of Abraham, to whom the word of Promise doth not belong, as Ishmael and Ishmaelites. But if so, there be many of the Seed of Abraham; to whom the word of Promise doth not belong: Then the rejection of many Jews who are of the Seed of Abraham doth not make void the word of Promise. From whence may we not safely conclude, that if the natural Posterity of Abraham, were not within the Covenant of Grace by virtue of the Promise, Gen. 17.7, Then much less are our natural Posterity; but the former is true, Rom. 9.6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. so is the latter.  
To which we might add divers others, but let these suffice.  
And from the contrary persuasion what dismal Consequences would arise. 
The evil Consequences of the contrary:  For if God made his Covenant of Grace with the Posterity of Believers, as this Doctrine asserts. Then all the Posterity of Believers should certainly have Crace bestowed upon them; for it is the Covenant of God which doth convey Grace, Rom. 4.16. 2 Cor, ● 30. None missing of Grace from Go● faithfulness, which Mr. Blake doth 〈◊〉 confidently affirm, 
Mr. Bla.  P. 6. saying, Th● Christianity is hereditary, that as t● Children of a Noble man is Noble, t● Child of a Free man Free, of a Turk Turk, and of a Jew a Jew; so the Chi● of a Christian is a Christian, in contradiction not only of Scripture, whic● saith, we are Children of wrath b● Nature, but of all former and latter experience.  
Then would Grace be a Birth, Privilege, and Regeneration (as before tied to Generation, contrary to J● 3.3. & Jo. 1.12, 13.  
Then must all the Posterity of Believers be saved, without you will necessitate the Doctrine to be true, th● men may fall from Grace.  
Then must we tie up and confine th● Grace of God's Covenant to the Children of Believers only, and then wha● hope for the Children of unbelievers contrary to the Experience of all Age● For was not Grace extended to th● Gentiles, who were not the Children o● Believers when the natural Branche● the Children of believing Abraham were ●ut off.  
Then is the Covenant of Grace itself overthrown, concluding an Interest without faith, Rom. 4.14. deriving a Ti●le by natural Generation.  
And as to the other Scripture of the 2. Acts 38, 39 
Act. 2.38. answ.  urged as a Parallel to the other. It is so indeed, rightly understood, but not at all in the sense supposed.  
For first it is to be observed, that the promise there made, is the giving the Spirit, called the promise of the Father, prophesied of by Joel 2.28. and doth follow the receiving of Christ in the Gospel, Eph. 1.13. Gal. 3.14. and the obeying his commands, Acts 5.32. Therefore in the 38. Ver. Peter exhorts them to Repentance, and faith in order to the receiving of it; because the Promise is to them and their Children, viz. to the Jews, and to them that are afar off to the Gentiles also, e●even as many of both as the Lord should call, therefore the Promise is not made but upon condition of Calling, and Faith, and Baptism.  
Secondly, It is remarkable that the Apostle doth first exhort to Repentance, then to Baptism, showing the order that Christ had directed to in the Commission; neither is the Promis● mentioned, as though of itself it gave right to Baptism without Repentance but as a Motive why they should repent and be baptised, that they might also as others had done, before the● Eyes be made partakers of the Hol● Spirit, which the Prophets had foretold, and Christ had promised, where in Infants [neither capable of Faith▪ Repentance and Calling] are not concerned in the Text, and by Childr●● spoken of are no other meant, than th● posterily of, the Jews, for who know not that they are so called, and that m● Child is my Child, though 40. or 50 years old; upon which Text Dr. Hamond in his Resolution concerning Infa●● Baptism, 
Dr. Ham  Sect. 81. hath to this purpose. In the next place, saith he, 〈◊〉 attempted the disproving of all Arguments brought in defence of Pedobaptis● from Peter's words, Acts 2.39. T● which saith the Dr. I answer, That 〈◊〉 any have made use of that unconcludent Argument, I have nothing to say in defence of them; I think the practice is founded upon better Basis than so, and the word Children there is really the posterity of the Jews, and not particularly their Infant Children.  
And Dr. Talor upon this Scripture, 
Dr. Tal.  Page 233. saith, That the words mentioned in St. Peter's Sermon, (which are the only Records of the Promise) are interpreted upon a weak mistake. The Promise belongs to you and your Children, therefore Infants are actually receptive of it in that capacity; that is, the Argument, but the Reason of it is not yet discovered, nor ever will; for [to you and your Children] is to you and your Posterity, to you and your Children, when they are of the same capacity, in which you are receptive of the Promise. But he that whenever the word [Children] is used in Scripture, shall by [Children] understand Infants, must needs believe, that in all Israel there were no men but all were Infants, and if that had been true, it had been the greater wonder they should overcome the Anakims, and beat the King of Moab, and march so far, and discourse so well; for they were all called the Children of Israel.  
The fourth thing to be inquired into, is, Whether Circumcision was a Seal of the new Covenant to the Believers, and their Seed?  
To which I answer in the Negative, that it was neither a Seal to them, 
Circumcision only a Seal to Abraham not to Believers, nor their Seed.  not much less a Seal to them of the new Covenant. It is true, it was a Seal, Confirmation, or Ratification of the faith that Abraham had long before he was Circumcised; but so could it, not be said of any Infant that had no faith. It was a Sign put into the Flesh of the Infant; but a Sign and Seal only to Abraham witnessing to him that he not only had a justifying faith, but to the truth of the Promises, viz. That he should be the father of many Nations, Gen. 12.23. 2dly. The father of the faithful, Rom 4.11. Heir of the World, Rom. 4.13. That in hi● all the Families of the Earth should 〈◊〉 blessed, viz. in Christ proceeding fro● him which was no ways true of any Infant that ever was Circumcised; for none had before their Circumcision such a faith, that entitled them to such singular Promises; the scope in that place in the 4. Rom. being to show, That Abraham himself was not justified by Works, no not by Circumcision, but by faith which he had, long before he was Circumcised, and so but a Seal or Confirmation of that faith which he had before, and to assure him of the truth of those special Promises, made to him and his Seed both Carnal and Spiritual.  
And to which purpose you have both chrysostom and Theophylact, 
Chrysost. and The.  as Mr. Lawr. P. 168. viz. It was called a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith; because it was given to Abraham as a Seal and Testimony of that Righteousness, which he had acquired by faith: Now this seems to be the privilege of Abraham alone, and not to be transferred to others, as if Circumcision in whom ever it was, were a Testimony of Divine Righteousness; for as it was the privilege of Abraham, that he should be the Father of all the faithful, as well Circumcised as uncircumcised, being already the father of all uncircumcised, having faith in Uncircumcision, he received first the sign of Circumcision, that he might be the father of the Circumcised. Now because he had this privilege, in respect of the Righteousness which he had acquired by faith, therefore the sign of Circumcision was to him a Seal of the Righteousness of faith: But to the rest of the Jews it was a sign that they were Abraham 's Seed; but not a Seal of the Righteousness of faith, as all the Jews also were not the fathers of many Nations.  
Secondly, Much less was Circumcision a Seal of the new Testament, as before; for nothing is a Seal thereof, but the Holy Spirit, Eph. 1.13.4.30.  
Thirdly, Neither is Baptism more than Circumcision called a Seal; It i● called a Figure, 1 Pet. 3.21. And 〈◊〉 is a sign as before: But a sign and figure proper only to men of understanding, representing Spiritual things and Mysteries: And not as Circumcision, which was a sign not improper for Infants; because it left a signal impression in their flesh to be remembered all their days, but so cannot Baptism be to any Infants.  

5. Circumcision not administered only to believers & their seed  The fifth thing to be examined it, Whether Circumcision was administered to Believers as Believers, and to their See● after them; as such, to which Baptism was to Correspond.  
It is answered by no means; for it was an Ordinance, which by the institution belonged to all the natural Lineage, and posterity of Abraham good or bad, without any such limitation, as was put upon Baptism, If thou believest with all thy Heart thou mayst, Acts 8. or any such qualification to an Infant capable to receive it, that he should have a believing Parent; but will you deny Abraham to be a believing Parent? and was not he a Father to them all? What then! he was a public common Father, which reaches not the case in hand; for he was no such father to them; neither have they any other in his stead, therefore the Analogy holds not; yet if they had would it avail? for that Privilege would not stand the natural Children of Abraham in any stead to admit them to Baptism; which though they claimed upon that account, Mat. 3. John rejects them upon it calling them a Generation of Vipers, bidding them bring forth fruits meet for Repentance, and which only would give them admittance to the Baptism of Repentance, and that it was not enough to say they had Abraham for their father. And to the same purpose doth our Saviour tell Nicodemus a Mr. in Israel, that without the new Birth his Birth-priviledge would not avail him in the Gospel-priviledges, Joh. 3. and with more severity doth he tell the Jews, that however they bore up themselves, as the Sons of Abraham, yet without believing in Christ, who could only make them free, 
6. Baptism came not in the room, place, & use of Circumcision. 1. Not in the room and stead  they were Bondslaves to sin, and the Children of the Devil.  
The sixth thing to be searched after is, Whether Baptism did succeed in the Room, Place and use of Circumcision. To which I answer by no means, for the following Reasons.  
1. Not in the room and stead.  
1. Because than only Males, not Females, would be baptised; because no other Circumcised, but all believing women, as well as men, were to be baptised, Acts 8.12, 16.14.15.  
2. Because then some, not all Believers, should be baptised; because not only women, as before, were not admitted; but all Believers out of Abraham's Family, to whom he was a Spiritual father; because he was a Believer before he was Circumcised, Rom. 4.11, 12. Whereas all Believers according to the Commission were to be baptised.  
3. Because then the Circumcised needed not to have been baptised, if they had been already sealed with the new Covenant-seal: But Christ himself, and all his Apostles, and so many of the Churches were Circumcised, yet nevertheless were baptised.  
2. Not to the ends and uses 
2. Not to the ends and uses.  neither as suggested upon the following grounds.  
1. Because Circumcision was a sign of Christ to come in the flesh; and Baptism, that he was already come in the flesh, witnessing to his Incarnation, Death, Burial, and Resurrection.  
2. Circumcision was to be a partition Wall betwixt Jew and Gentile; but Baptism testified the contrary, viz. That Barbarian, Scythian, Bond and Free, Jew and Gentile, Male or Female, were all one in Christ. Cornelius the Gentile must be baptised, and have the Spirit given to witness, that nothing must be called common or unclean, where God had purified the Heart by believing.  
3. Circumcision initiated the Carnal Seed into the Carnal Church, and gave them right to the Carnal Ordinances; but Baptism was to give the Spiritual Seed an orderly entrance into the Spiritual Church, and a right to partake of the Spiritual Ordinances.  
4. Circumcision was to be a Bond and Obligation to keep the whole Law of Moses'; but Baptism witnessed that Moses Law was made void, and that only Christ's ●aw was to be kept.  
5. Circumcision was administered to all Abraham's natural Seed, without any profession of Faith; Repentance or Regeneration; whereas Baptism to be administered to the Spiritual Seed of Abraham, was only upon profession of Faith, Repentance and Regeneration, and which appears more fully by the following Instances compared.  
1. Because a Carnal Parent, and a fleshly begetting by the the Legal Birth-priviledge, gave right to Circumcision; whereas a Spiritual begetting by a Spiritual Parent, gave only a true right to Baptism.  
2. Because a Legal, Ecclesiastical, Typical Holiness (when Land, Mountains, Houses, Birds, Beasts, and Trees were holy) qualified for Circumcision; whereas only Evangelical and Personal Holiness was a meet qualification for Baptism.  
3. Because Strangers and Servants bought with Money, and all ignorant Children of Eight days old, yea Trees were capable of Circumcision; whereas only men of understanding that were capable to believe with all their Heart, and to give an account thereof with their mouths, were to be esteemed capable Subjects of Baptism.  
6. Circumcision was to be a sign of Temporal Blessings and Benefits to be enjoyed in the Land of Canaan; whereas Baptism was to be a sign (as before) of many Spiritual benefits, viz. Remission of sins, Justification, Sanctification here, and Eternal Salvation hereafter.  
It is granted there are in some things an Analogy betwixt the one and the other, both signifying Heart-Circumcision, and an initiating into the Church, though as a different Church; so different Subjects, and Church Members, upon different grounds, and to different ends, as before, and in a far different manner; one to be done in a private House, and by a private Hand, and the other in some public place, and by the hand of some public Minister appointed by the Church to administer the same.  
But now because there is some Analogy in some things, is there therefore ground to conclude, it cometh into the room, stead, and use thereof? by no means; for by the same Argument we may as well conclude, that it cometh in the room and stead of the Ark, Manna, Rock, etc. And from such like Arguments drawn from Analogies what Jewish Rites may not by our wits be introduced, to the countenancing the Papists in their High Priesthood, National Churches, Orders of Priesthood, Tithes, and all other their innumerable Rites and Ceremonies, that without any Institution of Christ, or pretence of new Testament-authority, they have introduced or imposed upon the account of Analogy with old Testament- Rites and Services. Concerning which you have the Lord Brooks in his Treatise of Episcopacy, 
L Brooks  P. 100 saying very well, viz. That the Analogy which Baptism now hath with Circumcision in the old Law, is a fine rational Argument to illustrate a Point well proved before; but I somewhat doubt (saith he) whether it be proof enough for that which some would prove by it, since (besides the vast difference in the Ordinance) the persons to be Circumcised are stated by a positive Law, so express that it leaves no place for Scruple; but it is far otherwise in Baptism, where all the designation of Persons fit to be partakers, for aught I know, is only such as believe; for this is the qualification which with exactest search I find the Scripture requires in Persons to be baptised, and this it seems to require in all such Persons; now how Infants can be properly said to believe, I am not yet fully resolved.  
And very full and most excellently you have to this point Dr. Taylor, 
Dr.   p. 228. Who saith, That the Argument from Circumcision is invalid upon infinite considerations: Figures and Types prove nothing, unless a Commandment go along with them, or some express to signify such to be their purpose: For the Deluge of Waters, and the Ark of Noah, were a Figure of Baptism said Peter; and if therefore the Circumstances of one should be drawn to the other, we should make Baptism a Prodigy, rather than a Rite; the Paschal Lamb was a Type of the Eucharist, which succeeds the other, as Baptism doth to Circumcision; but because there was in the manducation of the Paschal Lamb no prescription of Sacramental drink, shall we thence conclude that the Eucharist is to be administered but in one kind? And even in the very Instance of this Argument, supposing a Correspondency of Analogy between Circumcision and Baptism, yet there is no Correspondence of Identity; for although it were granted, that both of them did consign the Covenant of faith, yet there is nothing in the Circumstance of children's being Circumcised that so concerns that Mystery, but that it might very well be given to Children, and yet Baptism only to men of Reason; because Circumcision left a Character in the flesh, which being imprinted upon Infants, did its work to them when they came to age, and such a Character was necessary, because there was no word added to the Sign; but Baptism imprints nothing that remains on the Body, and if it leaves a Character at all, it is upon the Soul, to which also the word is added, which is as much a part of the Sacrament, as the Sign itself: for both which Reasons it is requisite, that the Parties Baptised should be capable of Reason, that they may be capable both of the word of the Sacrament, and the impress made upon the Spirit; since therefore the Reason of this Parity does wholly fail, there is nothing left to infer a necessity of complying in this Circumstance of a●e, any more than in the other Annexes of the Type; then the Infants must also precisely be Baptised upon the Eighth day, and Females must not be baptised, because not Circumcised; but it were more proper, if we would understand it right, to prosecute the Analogy from the Type to the Antitype by way of Letter and Spirit and signification: and as Circumcision figures Baptism, so also the adjuncts of the Circumcision, shall signify something Spiritual in the adherences of Baptism; and therefore as Infants were Circumcised, so spirial Infants shall be Baptised, which is Spiritual Circumcision; for therefore Babes had the Ministry of the Type, to signify that we must, when we give our names to Christ become Children in malice, and then the Type is made complete, etc. Thus far the Dr.  
7. Whether the not Baptising Infants makes the privilege under the Gospel less than under the Law, who had then Circumcision.  

7 Not baptising of Infants, makes not Gospel-Priviledges less than Legal.  To which I answer, not at all, for the Reasons following.  
1. Because they were not Circumcised, because they were Children of Believers, or Sealed with a new Covenant Seal, as being in the new Covenant thereby, as before proved; but upon the account of a Birth-priviledge as being of the natural Lineage and Seed of Abraham, as a Typical shadowy thing; all whose posterity were to he marked therewith, to distinguish them from the Nations, and to keep that Line clear, from whence Christ according to the Flesh should come, and to oblige them to keep the Law, etc. But no such thing in the Gospel; the Body and Substance being come, the Shadow was to vanish and pass away, no common Father then but Christ, and if Christ's, than Abraham's Seed, and Heirs of Promise, no Birth privilege, but the new Birth; therefore to go back to the national Birth privilege, is so far from being a Privilege, that it i● a Bondage rather, to return to the Type and Shadow, the Antitype and Substance being come.  
2. Neither ought such a thing to be any more esteemed the loss of a Privilege, than our not enjoying literally a Holy Land, City, Temple, a succession of a High Priest, and a Priesthood by Generation or Lineal descent, (for y●u know their Children were Priests successively in their Generation, a levite begat a Priest or Minister, as well as the other Tribes begat Church-Members) since all those Types are Spiritualised to us the Believers under the Gospel, who are now the Holy Nation, the Holy City and Temple, the Royal Priesthood, and all Church-Members by Regeneration, not Generation. Therefore we are so far from being loser's by the Bargain, that as far as Christ exceeds Moses and Aaron, the Gospel, the Law, the Antitype, the Type, the Spiritual Birth, the Carnal, the Extent of all Nations, the Confines of Judea; so far are we better, and not worse.  
Nor thirdly, if it should be taken for granted, that Circumcision was a Seal of the new Covenant belonging to all the Children of Israel, then would not the Baptising of the Children of Believers answer it; Neither amount to so great a Privilege, no● be equivalent to it, for these Reasons.  
First, there were all the Families and Tribes of Israel (and all Proselyted strangers) with their Children without distinction of good or bad, to be Circumcised: But here only one of a City, or two of a Tribe; for Believers are but thin sown, and the Children of unbelievers, and wicked men are to receive no such benefit in the judgement of so many.  
And Secondly, you ●ould be very short in another respect, as being at an utter uncertainty when you had a right Subject; for if the Parent was a Hypocrite, or no Elect Person, which is out of your reach to understand. you cannot know whether the Child be fit for Baptism; for the Seed of a wicked man you must not meddle with by any means, whereas there was not the least doubt or scruple in Israel as to the Subject; for the Father being Circumcised, it was an infallible mark they were right.  
And Thirdly, neither can the Child (when he is grown up) have any certain knowledge, that such a Ceremony hath passed upon him in Infancy, he having no Infallible mark thereof; whereas the Circumcised Infant had an indelible Character and mark in his flesh, to assure him that he had received that Rite.  
By all which demonstrations you may understand; that we lose no Privilege under the Gospel for not Baptising our Infants, though they were Circumcised under the ●aw.   

CHAP. IU. Wherein is made manifest, that the Ordained Ceremony of Baptism is in this of Infants altered and changed, and another Rite introduced, quite contrary both to the signification of the Word, nature of the Ordinance, and manifest practice thereof; not only in the Apostles time, but many Ages after, as confessed by Parties themselves.  

The Ceremony of Baptism is by dipping.  THat the manner and Ceremony of Baptism ought to be by dipping or plunging the whole Body under Water, and not by sprinkling or pouring a little Water on the Face or Head, as hath commonly been used, especially since the Subjects have been changed from Men to Babes, is thus made good, viz.  
First, 
First, from the signification of the word,  from the proper and genuine signification of the word so well agreeing with the ends and use of Baptism, the Ceremony to the Substance, Sign to the thing signified.  
The word we call Baptism, and the Latins Baptismus, is no other than the Greek word itself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [being so retained all along, as Gomarus observes in the Latin Church] and in plain English is nothing else but to dip, plunge, or cover all over.  
The Truth whereof will more fully appear from our best Greek Lexicons, and by the observation of our most eminent Critics.  
Scapula and Stephens, 
Scapula & Steph.  two as great Masters of the Greek Tongue as we have any, (and also great defenders of Infant's Baptism) do tell us in their Lexicons, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies margo, imergo, submergo, obrue, item tingo, quod fit immergendo, inficere, imbuere, viz. To dip, plunge, overwhelm, put under, cover over, to die in Colour, which is done by plunging.  
Grotius 
Grotius.  tells us, it signifies to dip over Head and Ears.  
Pasor, 
Pasor  an Immersion, Dipping, or Submersion.  
Vossius, 
Vossius.  that it implieth a washing the whole body.  
Mincaus 
Mincaeus  in his Dictionary, That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in the Latin Baptismus, in the Dutch Doopsel or Doopen, ●nglish Baptism or Baptism, viz. to Dive or Duc● in Water, and the same w●th the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to dip.  
Leigh, 
Leigh.  in his Critica Sacra, saith, its native and proper signification is to dip into Water, or to plunge under Water, for which he Cites these Scriptures, where so used, viz. Mat. 3.6. Acts 8.38. And that it is taken from a Dyers Fat, and imports a Dying, or giving a fresh Colour, and not a bare washing only, Rev. 19.13. And for which he quotes Casaubon, Bucan, Bullinger, Zanchy, Spanhemius. He saith withal, That Beza and some others will have it signify washing, and which sense Erasmus opposed, affirming, that it was my otherwise so, then by Consequence; for the proper signification was such a dipping or plunging, as Dyers use for Dying of Clothes.  
Mr. Daniel Rogers in his Treatise of Sacraments, 1. P. C. 8. P. 177. saith, 
Mr. Dan. Rogers.  That the Minister is to dip in Water, as the meetest Act, the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notes it; for the Greeks wanted not other words to express any other Act besides dipping if the Institution could bear it. What resemblance of the Burial or Resurrection of Christ is in sprinkling? All Antiquity and Scripture, saith he, confirm that way.  
Dr. Tailor in his Rule of Consc. Lib. 3. Ch. 4. 
Dr.   If you would attend to the proper signification of the word, Baptism signifies plunging in Water, or dipping with washing.  
Mr. Joseph Mede in his Diatribe on Titus 3.2. saith, 
M. Mede  That there was no such thing as Sprinkling or Rantisme used in Baptism in the Apostles days; nor many ages after them.  
I might add many more, 
Dr. Ham  but shall conclude with that observable Remark that Dr. Hammond gives us hereon in his Annotations, viz. upon Jo. 13.10. Telling us, That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies an Immersion, or was●ing the whole Body, and which answereth to the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used for dipping in the Old Testament: And therefore upon Mat. 3.1. tells us, That John Baptised in a River, viz. Jordan, Mark. 1.5. in a confluence of much Wuter, as Aenon, Joh. 3.23. Because it is added, there was much Water, upon which account he saith That as the Greeks called the Lakes where they used to wash 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so the Ancients called their Baptisterio●s or the Vessels containing their Baptisms Water, Columbethras, viz. swmiming 〈◊〉 diving places, being made very large wit● partitions for Men and Women. And upon Mark 7.4. tells us, That the Washing or Baptising of Cups, Vessels, Bed●, etc. was no other than a putting them i● to the Water all over, rinsing them.  
I have carefully examined all the places in the Old Testament, where the word Dipping or Baptising is mentioned, and do find it is expressed by the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Mincaeus and Dr. Hamond observes, and which always signifies to dip, (the word rendered washing being by another word) as the following Scriptures will inform you, Gen. 37.31. Exod. 12.22. Leu. 4.6, 17.14.6.16.51. Leu. 9 9 Deut. 33.24. Joh. 3.5. Num. 16.18. 2 King. 5.14. which are all the places I can find the word used in, in the Old Testament.  
The word generally used for washing in the Hebrew is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies such a washing as taketh away filth from persons or things, by swilling, rinsing or rubbing, as Buxtorfius and Leigh, and which answereth to all the three words for washing that we meet with in the Greek, viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a washing of the Body, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Hands, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clothes, as Stephens saith in his Thesaurus, which word you find in very many places in the Old Testament, as Exod. 30.19, 20. Exod. 25. Leu. 14.8, 9.16.24. etc. which signification and sense of the word is emphatically confirmed to us by the several Metaphors used by the Holy Spirit in Scripture in allusion hereto, viz. for Persons to be plunged into great sufferings, they are said to be Baptised therein, Mark 10.38. And so for persons that were endued with great measures of the Spirit, they are said to be Baptised therewith, Acts. 1.5. The Children of Israel being encompassed with the Cloud over their Head, and the divided Sea on both sides were said to be Baptised in the Cloud and Sea, 1 Cor 10. And Baptised persons are said to be de●d and buried, in allusion to putting men into the Earth, and covering them therewith, none of which can hold good by sprinkling.  

2. From the Scripture practice.  Secondly, It appears to be so from the practice and usage we find hereof in Scripture, and the opinion of the learned upon it.  
First, in the Story of Christ's Baptism we read, Mat. 3.5. 
Mat. 3.5  That Jesus came from Galilee to Jordan unto John to be Baptised of him, and Ver. 16. And when he was Baptised he went up strait way out of the Water.  

C jetan.  The learned Cajetan upon the place, saith Christ ascended out of the Water; therefore Christ was Baptised by John, not by sprinkling, or by pouring Water upon him, but by Immersion, that is, by dipping or plunging in the Water,  
A second Scripture considerable is that of Joh, 3.23. 
John 3.23.  And John was Baptising in Aenon near Salim. (and the Reason why he pitched upon this place, is given) because there was much Water there.  
Piscator 
Piscator.  upon the place says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies many Rivers, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Singular number signifies the River of Jordan; this, saith he, is mentioned to signify the Ceremony of Baptism which John used in dipping or plunging the whole Body of Man standing in the River, whence saith, Christ being Baptised by John in Jordan, is said to ascend out of the Water.  
Calvin 
Calvin.  upon these words, saith, That from this place you may gather, that John and Christ administered Baptism by plunging the whole body into the Water.  
A Third Scripture worthy our notice, 
Acts 2.36.  is Acts 8.36, 38. As they went on their way, they came unto a certain Water, and the Eunuch said, see here is Water, and they went both down into the Water, both Philip and the Eunuch, and he Baptised him, and when they were come up out of the Water: upon which place.  
Calvin 
Calvin.  saith, We see what fashion the Ancients had to administer Baptism; for they plunged the whole Body into the Water: The use is now saith he, that the Minister casts a few drops of Water only upon the Body, or upon the Head.  
A Fourth Scripture we shall mention, is Rom, 6.4. 
Rom. 6.4  Buried with him in Baptism, where the Apostle elegantly alludes to the Ceremony of Baptising in our death, and Resurrection with Christ.  
Cajetan 
Cajetan.  upon the place. saith, Thus we are Buried with him by Baptism into death: By our Burying he declares our Death from the Ceremony of Baptism; because he who is Baptised is put under the Water, and by this carries a similitude of him that is Buried, who is put under the Earth Now because none are Buried but dead men, from this very thing that we are Buried in Baptism, we are assimulated to Christ buried, or when he was Buried.  
Tilenus' 
Tilenus.  in his disputation, P. 886, 889, 890. A learned Protestant Writer gives a most remarkable Testimony in the Case: Baptism, saith he, i● the first Sacrament of the New Testament instituted by Christ in which with a most Pat and Exact Analogy between the Sign and the thing signified, those that are in Covenant are by the Minister washed in Water. The outward Rite in Baptism is Three old, 1. Immersion into the Water; 2. Abiding under the Water; 3. Resurrection out of the Water: The form of Baptism, viz. Internal and Essential, is no other than the Analogical proportion which the signs keep with the things signified thereby: For the properties of the Water in washing away the defilements of the Body, do in a most suitable similitude set forth the efficacy of Christ's Blood in blotting out of sins; so dipping into the Water doth in a most lively similitude set forth the mortification of the old man; and rising out of the Water, the Vivication of the new, The same plunging into the Water holds forth to us that horrible Gulf of Divine Justice, in which Christ for our sins sake (which he took upon him) was for a while in a manner swallowed up. Abiding under the Water, how little a while soever, denotes his descent into Hell, even the very deepest of lifelesness, while lying in the sealed and guarded Sepulchre, he was accounted as one dead: Rising out of the Water, holds out to us a lively similitude of that Conquest which this dead man g●t ever Death, which he vanquished in his own Den, (as it were) that is, the Grave. In like manner therefore (saith he) it is meet, that we being Baptised into his Death, and buried with him, should rise also with him, and so go on in a new Life, Rom. 6.3, 4. Col. 2.12.  

Bish. Jew  Bishop Jewel in his Apology, P. 308. Brings the Council of Worms, determining the manner of Baptism, viz. That the dipping into the Water is the going down into Hell, (or the Grave) and that the coming out of the Water, is the Resurrection.  
And most remarkable is the Testimony that Mr. Baxter himself gives to this Truth, 
Mr. Bax.  wherein he also owns the changing of the Ceremony in his third Argument against Mr. Blake, in these words, viz.  
Quoadmodum, To the manner saith he, it is commonly confessed by us to the Anabaptists, (as our Commentators declare) that in the Apostles time the Baptised were dipped over head in Water; and that this signifieth their profession both of believing the Burial and Resurrection of Christ, and of their own present renouncing the World and Flesh, or dying to sin, and living to Christ, or rising again to newness of Life. or being buried and risen again with Christ, as the Apostle expoundeth in the forecited Texts of Col. 2. & Rom. 6. And though, saith he, we have thought it lawful to disuse the manner of dipping, and to use less Water; yet we presume not to change the use and signification of it: So than he that signally professeth to die, and rise again in Baptism with Christ, doth signally profess saving Faith and Repentance; but this do all they that are baptised according to the Apostles practice. Thirdly, from the use of the Ancients, and the confessed Change thereof, since this Rite of dipping in Baptism is confirmed.  
Daille 
Daille.  on the Father's 2d. Book, P. 148. saith, That it was a Custom heretofore in the Ancient Church, to plunge those they baptised over Head and Ears in the Water, as saith he, Tertullian in his Third Book de Cor. Mil. Cyprian in his 7. Ep. P. 211. Epiphanius Pan. 30. P. 128. and others testify. And this, saith he, is still the practice both of the Greek and the Russian Church at this day, as Cassander de Bapt. P. 193. And yet, saith he, notwithstanding this Custom, which is both so Ancient and so universal, is now abolished by the Church of Rome; and this is the reason (saith he) That the Muscovites say, that the Latins are not rightly and duly Baptised; because they are wont not to use this Ancient Ceremony in their Baptism.  

Walfrid Strabo.  Walfridus Strabo de Reb. Eccles. Tells us, that we must know, at the first Believers were Baptised simply in Floods and Fountains.  
Mr. Fox 
Mr. Fox.  tells us in his Acts and Monuments, Part. 1. P. 138. out of Fabian Cap. 119, 120. That Austin and Paulinus did in the 7th. Century Baptise here in England great multitudes in the River Trent, and the River Swol; where note by the way, saith Mr. Fox, it followed there was no use of Fonts. The like also as you'll hear after find, Germainus and Lupus the two French Evangelists, did in the fifth Century Baptise multitudes in the River Allin near Chester.  

Hierem. Pa. Con.  Hieremias Patr. of Constantinople ad Thelo. Wit●bergenses Resp. 11. C. 4. saith, The Ancients Baptised not by sprinkling the Baptised with Water with their hands, but by Immersion, following the Evangelist, who came up out of the Water; therefore did he descend, which must needs be Immersion, and not Aspersion.  
Zepperus 
Zepperus  de Sacramentis, from the Annotation and Etymology of the word it doth appear what was of old the Custom of administering Baptism, which though we have changed into rantising or sprinkling.  
Dr. Tailor in his Rule of Conscience, 
Dr. Tayl.  B. 3. C. 4. P. 644, 645. The Ancient Church did not in their Baptism sprinkle Water with their Hand, but did Immerge; and therefore we find in the Records of the Church, That the Persons to be Baptised were quite naked, as it is to be seen in many places, particularly in the Mystagogy Chat. of St. Cyril, and many others, (as you have before in the second Chapter of this Part from Vossius P. 133.)  
And this of Immersion was of so sacred an account in their esteem, that they did not esteem it lawful to receive him into the Clergy, who had been only sprinkled in Baptism as the Epistle of Cornelius to Fabianus of Antioch, Euseb. lib. 6. c. 43. It is not lawful that he who is sprinkled in his Bed by reason of sickness, should be admitted to Holy Orders, doubting whether such a sprinkling should be called Baptism.  
And therefore Magnus in his Epistle questions, whether they are to be esteemed right Christians, who are only sprinkled, and not dipped in Water.  
And that chrysostom saith, That the old man is buried and drowned in the Immersion under Water; and when the Baptised Person is afterwards raised up from the Water, it represents the Resurrection of the new man to newness of life.  
And therefore concludes, that the contrary Custom being not only against Ecclesiastical Law, but against the Analogy and Mystical signification of the Sacrament, is not to be complied with.  

Marq. of Worcest  The Church of Rome confesseth by a Learned Pen, the Marquis of Worcester in his Certam Relig. That she changed dipping the Party Baptised over Head and Ears into sprinkling upon the Face.  
Until the Th●rd Century we find not any that upon any consideration did admit of sprinkling. The first we meet with is Cyprian, in his Epistle to Magnus, 
What Clinical Baptism.  Lib. 4. Ep. 7. where he pleads for the Baptising of the sick by sprinkling, and not by dipping or pouring, called the Clinical Baptism, Magdib. Cen. 3. Ch. 6. P. 126. As also for the sprinkling of new Converted Prisoners in the Prison House: And which by degrees afterwards they brought in use for sick Children also, and then afterwards all Children.  
Aquinas, Scotus, and others of the Schoolmen conclude, that dipping is most agreeable to the Institution; but admit that in case of necessity, viz. when either many are to be baptised, scarcity of Water, or sickness, and weakness, they may sprinkle. Vossius, P. 38.  
All which Arguments from the Genuine Sense of the Word, Nature of the Ordinance, Usuage of the Ancients, were excellently inculcated by the learned Dr. Tillotson, in a Sermon Preached at his Lecture in Michael's Cornhill London, April 15. 1673. from Rom. 6 4. Therefore we are buried with him by Baptism into Death, proving from thence, That Dipping or plunging was the proper Ceremony and Rite in the Ordinance; and how naturally Arguments did arise from that Sign in Baptism, to enforce Holiness and Mortification the thing signified thereby.  
Object. But the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which you so much stand upon, signifies if not to sprinkle, yet not only to dip and overwhelm, but also to wash, as Mark 7.4. The washing of Hands, Cups, Pots, Vessels, Beds, and Tables, which we hope you will grant may be done without dipping or plunging in Water.  
Answ. That Baptism in a sense is washing I no ways doubt; for you cannot dip a thing, but you may be said to wash it; therefore in allusion hereto, 'tis said, Acts 22. Arise and be bapzed, and wash away thy sins, and Tit. 3. The washing of Regeneration, and Heb. 10. Bodies washed with pure Water. And so in dipping of Clothes they wash them. And so here by dipping of unclean Hands, Pots, Cups, Vessels and Beds; for Tables are not there, the word being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which as in your Margin signifies a Bed, but never a Table, [as a Learned Critic observes] they are also washed.  
Object. But Hands, Cups Vessels and Beds may be washed, though not dipped.  
Answ. It is true they may (though not from this Scripture, the word being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) for though all dipping is washing, yet all washing is not dipping in a proper sense, (for Water sprinkled or poured upon a thing, may be so called in an improper sense) though it is a very unusual thing so to deal with unclean Hands, Beds or Vessels: And I presume you will account her but a Slut, and give her no thanks for her pains, that having unclean Hands, Vessels, Beds, or Clothes to wash, doth only sprinkle or pour a little water upon them, as though that would serve the turn; and doth not our familiar experience tell us, that to dip our dirty hands in Water, rinsing them, is the most effectual way to wash them, and that sprinkling or pouring a little water will not do the business. Therefore are we to take washing here in this 7. Mark 4. to be dipping in a proper sense as the word imports, and as most agreeable to known Custom and Use, for neither the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to wash, nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to pour, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sprinkle, are ever taken to dip or baptise; nor is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 simply taken for washing, by pouring or sprinkling that I can find.  
The divers washings mentioned Heb. 9.10. may well be explained from Leu. 1.9, 13. & 6.27, 28. & 15.6. Exod. 30.19. to be such as was done by baptising in water, not sprinkling with, or pouring water upon.  
And in the 2 Kings 5.10. the Prophet bids Naaman go and wash in Jordain seven times, and accordingly Ver. 14. 'tis said in obedience hereto, and in explanation of that kind of washing the Prophet intended, he went and Baptised himself seven times in Jordain.  
Therefore for any to shun the proper true Genuine sense, and build a practice upon an uncouth, indirect, unusual, and at best an Allegorical sense, is no other than as the Proverb is, To leave the King's High way, and to take Hedge and Ditch  
And besides, if you will follow the Allusion, do you not wash all that is unclean, whether of Hands, Cup, Vessel, or Bed; but the whole man is all unclean, every Member, and every Part; therefore all and every Part ought to be washed, and not the Head and Face only, as you expect to have all your sins washed away, and every Member cleansed by Faith in Christ's Blood; As well as in this Figure, to represent that as every Member hath lived to sin, should here also die, be buried, raised and quickened spiritually with Christ, in firm assurance of Christ's Resurrection, and confident expectation of the whole man's being to be raised and glorified in the Resurrection of the Just. And to which purpose we have Dr. Goodwin, 
M. Good.  in his support of faith, P. 54. very excellently, viz. That the eminent thing signified and represented in Baptism, is not simply the blood of Christ, as it washeth us from our sins; but there is a farther representation therein of Christ's Death, Burial and Resurrection in the Baptised, being first buried under water, and then rising out of it, and this is not in a bare conformity to Christ, but in a representation of a Communion with Christ in that his Death and Resurrection▪ Therefore it is said, (We are buried with him in Baptism) and whrein we are risen with him, etc. And moreover, here it is that the answer of a good Conscience, which is made the inward effect of this Ordinance of Baptism, 1 Pet. 3.21. Is there also attributed to Christ's Resurrection, as the thing signified and represented in Baptism, and as the cause of that answer of a good Conscience, even Baptism doth now also save us, etc.  
As for the Cavils of unseemliness and hazarding of health to the weak,; they are as the fruits of Carnal wisdom, unbelief, and shunning the Cross, so no other than to reproach the wisdom of Christ, that so ordained, and himself so practised, telling us that (however the world may call it undecent) that it is a comely thing therein to follow him in the fulfilling of Righteousness. And as for that of unseemliness they that have or shall see the decency of the Practice, will sufficiently vindicate it from such a Calumny, and be able to convince Mr. Baxter, or any other Cavilers of their unchristian slanders of that kind (already touched.) And for hazard of Health to the Weak, the Constant, Known Experience doth amply refute that vain Imagination and Suggestion.   

CHAP. V Wherein you have an account of several Mischiefs, Absurdities, and Contradictions that are justly to be charged upon the Practice.  
I. BY its altering Christ's Order in the Commission, Mat. 28.19. where in teaching Repentance and Faith, are required always to precede or go before Baptism, which this makes to proceed or follow after altogether.  
II. By its changing the Subjects of Christ's appointment, viz. Men and Women of Knowledge and Understanding capable to Evidence Faith and Repentance for ignorant unconverted Babe● that know neither good nor evil, their right hand from their left.  
III. By frustrating all the Holy and Spiritual Ends of the Ordinance which you have before at large, viz. to be a Sign of present Regeneration, a dying, burying, and rising with Christ, to be the answer of a good Conscience, to be a mutual stipulation or contract then and there entered into betwixt God and the Party, as well as a visible entrance into the Church, all which as applied to a poor Ignorant Infant, are but mock-shews, and utterly insignificant and invalid  
IV. By its inverting the Order and manner from dipping the whole Man, into sprinkling or pouring a little Water upon the Head or Face, contrary to the Sense of the Word, Nature of the Ordinance, and constant Usage of the Primitive times, as confessed by Parties themselves, obliging thereby the Administrator to tell a lie in the name of the Lord, saying he doth Baptise, when he doth but Rantize.  
V By introducing so much Error and false Doctrine into the world, viz.  
1. That it was to take away Original sin.  
2. To work Grace and Regeneration, and to effect Salvation by the Work done  
3. That it was an Apostolical Tradition.  
4. That Children have Faith, and are Disciples of Christ.  
5. That all Children of Believers are in the Covenant of Grace, and faederally Holy.  
VI By defiling and polluting the Church, viz.  
1. By bringing false Matter therein, who are no Saints by Calling, being neither capable to perform duties, nor enjoy Privileges.  
2. By laying a foundation of much ignorance and profaneness.  
3. By confounding World and Church together which Christ hath separated, bringing the World into the Church, and turning the Church into the World.  
VII. By introducing and establishing many Humane Traditions and Inventions of Antichrist together with it; as Gossips or Sureties, Bishoping or Confirmation, Chrism. Exorcism, Confignation, etc. profaning thereby so solemn an Ordinance, taking God's name in vain, and making his Commandments void.  
VIII. By being such a makebate, such a Bone of Contention; and that amongst themselves too that own it, as well as with those that oppose it: For what Divisions and Subdivisions are there amongst them both, as to Subject, Time, Order, Circumstances, what endless strifes about women's baptising, and whether Bastards, or the Children of Apostates, Heathens, or Excommunicated persons should be baptised.  
IX. By being an occasion to stir up much bitter hatred, wrath, strife, enmity and persecution against those that oppose it. Oh how have they been loaded with Calumny and Reproaches as the vilest of Men, and how in all Ages have they been followed with Stripes, Imprisonments, Confiscations, yea Death itself, as the Historical Part informeth you.  
X. By confirming hereby the whole Antichristian Interest, as made good in the Preface.  
XI. By ushering in great Absurdities, 
Absurdities.  viz.  
1. That persons may have Regeneration and Grace before Calling.  
2. That Persons may be visible Church-Members before Conversion.  
3. That Persons may Repent, believe, and be Baptised, and saved by the Faith of another.  
4. That Types and Shadows are profitable, after the Antitype and Substance is come, introducing thereby the Legal Birth-priviledge, the Carnal Seed, the Typical Holiness, the National Church, etc. to the reviving Judaisme, and outing Christianity.  
5. That the better to exclude believers Baptism, new Church-Covenants are invented to enter into the Visible Church by, instead thereof, especially amongst those that own Infant's Baptism, yet deny them the right of Church-Membership.  
XII. By the manifold Contradictions 
Contradictions:  that attend the Practice.  
1. By asserting, that Baptism is a Symbol of present Regeneration wrought, and yet apply it to ignorant unconverted Babes, so uncapable of regeneration, as Jam. 1.18. 1 Pet. 1.23. Joh. 1.12, 13. And as so well defined by Dr. Owen in his Theo. l. 6. c. 4 p. 480. viz. To be a Renovation, new Creation, Vivification, opening blind Eyes, raising from Death to Life, etc.  
2. That it truly figures and represents a Death, Burial, and Resurrection, and yet do nothing but sprinkle or pour a little Water on the Face.  
3. That Faith and Repentance is required in Persons to be baptised, an● that it is ridiculous, yea impious an● profane to do it without, and yet confess that Children, to whom they apply it, have neither.  
4. That it is the declaration of the Spiritual Marriage, the stipulation that is mutually entered into betwixt God and the Believer, and yet assign it to Subjects as uncapable of either, as Stocks or Stones, Bells or Church-walls, that yet Antichrist makes capable Subjects thereof, as well as Infants.  
5. That the Baptismal Covenant enters into the Visible Church, and yet deny the Church-Members the Privileges thereof, or separate from them without any warrantable cause showed, or orderly proceeding either against them, or they that do own them as such.  
6. That separate from Rome as the false Church, and yet own their Baptism the Foundation Stone thereof: And others that pretend separation from National and Parish Churches, and to disown the baptising the Children of all, good and bad, with the sinful Ceremonies attending it, yet if Papist or Protestant either, upon their Terms tender to their fellowship, they are received without Renouncing their sinful Baptism and performing it in the way they judge right.  
7. That they own the Doctrine of Perseverance, and disown falling from Grace, yet baptise all the Children of Believers, because they conclude them in the Covenant of Grace, yet afterwards teach them Conversion, and in Case of unbelief reject them as Reprobates.  
And to all which you may familiarly add by your daily observation, which Chapter we shall conclude with these high expressions of Dr. Tayler, 
Dr.   in his Lib. Pro. P. 244. And therefore whoever will pertinaciously persist in this opinion of the Paedobaptists, and practise it accordingly, they pollute the Blood of the Everlasting Covenant: They dishonour and make a Pageantry of the Sacrament: They ineffectually represent a Sepulture into the Death of Christ, and please themselves in a Sign without effect, making Baptism like the Figtree in Gospel, full of Leaves, but no Fruit; and they invocate the Holy Ghost in vain, doing as if one should call upon him to illuminate a Stone or a Tree.   

CHAP. VI Wherein the nullity and utter insignificancy of Infant's Baptism is made appear.  
THat it is no way safe for any to rest contented with that Baptism which they received in their Infancy, may appear, because such their Baptism is a mere nullity, an insignificant nothing, in respect to the New Testament Ordinance of Baptism; and the reason is plain, because there is that wanting in it which is so essential to true Baptism.  
For first, 
Neither right matter nor form.  there is as the right Subject of Baptism wanting, so the true External form is wanting also, as practised with us: For the External form as before showed is not sprinkling, or pouring a little Water upon the Head or Face, but a dipping the whole person under Water, and raising him up again, to figure out death, burial and Resurrection, as before.  
If then matter and form be wanting; which is Essential to its being, it must needs be a nullity, for what is more essential to the being of a thing then matter and form, and how is it possible to define Baptism, or any thing else, where they are wanting; and which is such a difficiency in that or any thing else that makes it a nonentity, or a mere nullity.  
Object. But 'tis said there was the right words of Baptism, it was done in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.  
Answ. So there was also in baptising of Bells and Churches, which in your judgement is so far from making it a right Ordinance, the true Subject being wanting, that it is no less than a profanation thereof, and a miserable taking of the name of God in vain.  
And farther to demonstrate and illustrate this point, you know it is generally owned, that Baptism is no other than our mystical Marriage, as being the solemnisation of a mutual consent and striking of a Covenant (the essentials of Marriage) betwixt Christ ●●d a believer, 
Mr. Bax.  as Mr. Baxter ●●ly owns and acknowledges in his 9 Argument to Mr. Blake, saying, I conclude, Christ hath appointed no Baptism, but what is for a visible Marriage of the Soul to himself, (as Protestants saith he ordinarily confess) therefore he hath appointed no Baptism, but for those that profess to take Jesus Christ ●o be their Husband, and to give up themselves to him as his Spouse.  
Now mutual consent in Marriage is so essential an Ingredient, that without it there is no Marriage, being as Beza saith, the formal cause thereof, because only Consent makes the Marriage, as saith the Lawyers; so that if there should be only the consent of one Party, it is but like a bargain wherein only one side is agreed; for as well known there is no Covenant, where no Consent.  
And just so it is in the Case of Infant's Baptism; for if you dip an Infant without Consent or Understanding, (that indeed is capable of neither) it no more makes Baptism then a bargain, a bargain, though one side only be agreed, or if made with an Infant, or an Idiot, or then a forced bed is lawful Matrimony; for as Mr. Baxter before 〈◊〉 ingeniously confesseth, That for persons to be baptised without such a professed Contract, is a Baptism not of Christ's appointment, and that being done without Repentance and Faith, i● an impious profanation, yea ridiculous saith Mr. Calvin, as before.  
And in Confirmation of this weighty point of nullity, we are yet farther beholding to Mr. Baxter, who is pleased in his Christian Directory amongst the many Cases of Conscience to give 〈◊〉 the discussion of this, and which in P. 817. you'll find managed after this sort, viz.  
Q. 41. Are they really baptised, who are baptised according to the English Liturgy, and Canons, where the Parent seemeth excluded, and those to consent for the Infant which have ●o power to do it?  
Answ. I find (saith he) some puzzled with this doubt, whether all our Infant's Baptism be a mere nullity; for say they, the outward washing without Covenanting with God, is no more Baptism than the Body of Corpse is a Man, the Covenant i● the chief essential part in Baptism: And he that was never entered into Covenant with God, was never Baptised. But Infants according to the Liturgy are not entered into Covenant with God, which they would prove thus. They that neither ever Covenanted by themselves, or any authorized person for them were never entered into Covenant with God; (for that is no act of theirs which is done by a stranger that hath no power to do it) but &c.— That they did it not themselves, is undeniable: That they did it not by any person empowered by God to do it for them, we prove; first because God fathers are the persons [by whom] the Infant is said to promise; but Godfathers have no Power from God, 1. Not by Nature, 2. Not by Scripture. Secondly, because the Parents are not only included as Covenanters, but prositively excluded, 1. In that the whole Office of Covenanting for the Child from first to last is laid on others; 2. In that the 29. Canon saith, [No Parent shall be urged to be present nor admitted to answer 〈◊〉 Godfather for his own Child] by ●●●ch the Parent is excluded: Therefore our Children are all unbaptized, to which he is pleased to answer to this purpose.  

Mr. Bax. Answer.  That though the Parents be absent, who yet may if he please be silently present, yet his consent is supposed, because he chooseth the Sponsors, and gives the Minister notice before hand; and though my judgement be, that they should be the principal Covenanters for the Child expressly, yet the want of that expresness will not make us unbaptised persons.  
Now whether Mr. Baxter herein hath not most amply confirmed, and not at all answered the Scruple, let all men judge.  
For first, if it be so as scrupled, and by him not denied; 1. That the entering Covenant with God, it so the Essential part of Baptism, that without it, it is not.  
2. That Children cannot.  
3. That the Sureties (either by the Law of God or Nature ought not.  
4. That the Parent by the Canon Law must not.  
How then is it possible, (which our learned Casuist would impose upon us) that a Parents ●●pposed Consent can create a power in another to do a thing, which neither the Law of God nor Nature enjoy us, for approves.  
And therefore have we not good and substantial ground from this Argument to conclude, That for as much as Children by the Liturgy are baptised without any covenanting with God, either by themselves or others, (authorized by God thereto) therefore their Baptism, is a mere nullity.  
And as to his saying, [Dictator and Oracle like] that a Parent hath a Covenanting Power for his Child inherent in him, and which he may confer upon another: It is but begging the Question in both parts, and no less than opposing the Canon, but especially a contradicting the whole Current of Scripture.  
As to the Humane invention of Gossips or Sureties for Children and Bells, etc. you have before at large treated of, both as to their Original and Use; and also how sinful and ridiculous by the Bishop of Down, P. 91, 92.  
Which Chapter therefore I shall conclude with the words of Mr. L. a person of great learning and moderation, as generally esteemed in his book of Baptism, upon this Point, P. 359. And the Patrons of Baptism I hope will pardon me; If what Chamier affirms of Baptism, not given by a right Minister, I with more Equity and Reason affirm here. That it is not a Sacrament, but a rash mockery or deceiving, by no ●●ans to be endured in the Church.   

CHAP. VII. Wherein there is an account of some eminent witness that hath been born against Infant's Baptism from first to last.  
THe first we shall mention is that excellent Testimony Tertullian bore against it, 
Tertul.  upon the first appearance of it in the 3. Century, in his Book de Baptism Cap. 18. Wherein he dissuades from the practice by such like Arguments as these, viz.  
First, From the mistake of the Scripture usually brought to enforce it, which was afterwards called the Scripture Canon for Baptism, viz. Mat. 19.14. Suffer little Children to come to me, and forbidden them not, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven, etc.  
It is true saith he, the Lord saith, D● not forbidden them to come to me. Let them come therefore when they grow Elder, when they learn, when they are taught why they come; let them be made Christians when they can know Christ.  
Secondly, From the weightiness of the Ordinance which ought not to be trifled with: For, saith he, they that do understand the weight of Baptism, will rather fear the attaining it, than the deferring it.  
Thirdly, From the sinfulness of such a Practice: So rashly, saith he, to give such Holy things to Dogs, and to cast such Pearls before Swine, and so headily to partake of other men's sins.  
Fourthly, From the absurdity of it, To refuse to commit Earthly and Secular things to their trust by reason of their incapacity, and yet to commit to, and intrust them with Heavenly and Spiritual things.  
Fifthly, From the folly of exposing of Witnesses, Who by death may not only frustrate their Promises but be disappointed through the evil disposition of them they so largely undertake for, Mag. Cen. 3. c 6. 125.  
Sixthly, From the consideration that the Adult were the only proper Subjects of Baptism; because, saith he, Fasting, Confession, Prayer, Profession, Renouncing the Devil and 〈◊〉 Works is called for from them. Coron. Mil. 124.  

The Witness Born by the Donatists.  
THe second we shall mention is the Witness that the Novations and Donatists gave against it, 
2. Novations & Donatists Austin.  as Augustine's 3. and 4. Books against the Donatists doth demonstrate, wherein he manageth the Argument for Infant's Baptism against them with great zeal, enforcing it by several Arguments, but especially from Apostolical Tradition, and cursing with great bitterness they that should not embrace it.  
And therefore Osiander 
Osiander  in his Epit. Gen. 16. P. 175. saith, That our modern Anabaptists were the same with the Donatists of old.  
And Fuller 
Fuller.  in his Ecclesiastical History, l. 5. p. 229. saith, That the Anabaptists are the Donatists new dipped.  
And in farther Confirmation thereof, Pope Innocent I. the first Institutor and Imposer of Infant's Baptism, did banish th●● People (called Cath●ri) out of Rome, as Socrates 
Socrates.  l. 7. c. 9 We put the Donatists and Novations together, because they did so well agree in Principle, 
Cryspin.  as Cryspins' French Hist. P. 17. [out of Albaspinaus upon Optat. Milevitanus Observat. 20.] telleth us, saying, That they hold together in the following things, viz.  
First, For purity of Church Members, by offering, that 〈◊〉 ought to be admitted into Churches, but such as were visibly true Believers, and re●● Saints.  
Secondly, For the purity of Church-Discipline, as the Application of Church Censures, and keeping out such as had Apostatised or scandalously sinned.  
Thirdly, They both agreed in asserting the Power, Rights and Privileges of particular Churches, against Antichristian encroachments of Presbyters, Bishops and Synods.  
Fourthly, That they baptised again those whose first Baptism they had ground to doubt.  

Eckbert.  Eckbertus and Emericus, two great opposers of the Waldenses, for denying Baptism to Children, (as afterwards you'll find) do assert, That the new Cathari or Puritans, (which they called the Waldenses) do conform to the Doctrine and manners of the old Cathari, viz. the Novations.  
And Paul Perin 
Perin.  in h●s History of the Waldenses, tells us, That the Fratricelli, or little Brethren, another name given to the Waldenses, were time out of mind in Italy and Dalmatia, and were the Offspring of the Novations persecuted and driven from Rome about 400. and why for their purity in Communion, were also called Cathari.  
And as for Cassander's Reason in his Epistle to the D. of Cleve, why the Donatists did not disown Infant's Baptism, mentioned also by Mr. G●bb●t, I conceive hath no weight at all in it, viz. because the 6 Council of Carthage decreed, That all that returned from the D●nat●●●s, should be received ●●to the Catholic Church without Rebaptisation, th●●gh baptised in Infancy; which is b●● 〈◊〉 supposition at ●●st that they might be baptised in Infancy, o● they might not, and c●● signify nothing against all the former Evide●●●●.  
●bje●●s. But the Novations and Donatists, were by Popes and Counsels adjudged and dealt with as Heretics.  
Answ. So were the Waldenses, as you'll hear none more, and so have ●een the Christians in all a●es, therefore all that have heen so Censured, ought not so to be esteemed, Paul himself tells us, That in the way they called Heresy, so worshipped be the God of his Fathers. And indeed what part of the purest Gospel way and worship has escaped this Censure.  
Neither doth is follow, if Christians should err, or mistake themselves in some things, that therefore they must be rejected as Heretics in others.  
I could enumerate several gross errors and mistakes of Austin himself, (their great opposer) as they are ●●corded amongst his Navi, m●st be therefore be esteemed 〈◊〉 Heretic.  
But as to the Nova●●us and Donatists, (so much one in principle and pra●ti●e) however adjudged by Popes and Councils, I 〈◊〉 find they 〈◊〉 other than a very Holy People, ●●●●cially the Novations, whose great Crime was, that they pressed after purity in worship, and to separate, 〈◊〉 you have heard, from Antichristian defilement, & therefore called Puritans or Cathari, concerning whom Socrates, Scholastious speaks so honourably, and so largely vindicates from the Calumnies cast upon them, defending them to be a holy, zealous, sincere, faithful People.   

The Witness born by the Ancient Britain's.  
THe next we shall mention, 
3. Britain's.  is that witness we find born by the Old Britain's, (of whose Antiquity and Purity in Christianity, you have a more particular account in the following History) who having as you will find, received the Christian Doctrine and Worship from the Apostles time, did entirely keep thereto, cleaving to the Scriptures, utterly renouncing all Romish Traditions, and Superstitions, especially the Remains of them, that after the Roman and Saxon invasions, inhabited Wales; to whom Austin the Monk, the ●●gate of Pope Gregory about the year 604. did address in two Assemblies, that he procured upon the Borders of Wales, to engage them as he had done many of the Saxons, to embrace the Romish Rites, especially in Christening Children, and keeping Easter. But in as much as they utterly refused to be seduced by him therein; he not only threatened their ruin, but accomplished the same in a short time after.  
Concerning which Mr. Fox 
Fox:  in his Martyrology, P. 153, 154. 1. Part, tells us, That Austin having charged them to Preach with him to the English, and that they should among themselves form certain Rites and Usages in theer Church, especially for keeping their Easter- Tide, and Baptising after the manner of Rome, and for which he quotes Bede, Polichron, Huntingdon, Jornalenses, and Jeff Monmouth, and Fabian, 
Fabian.  5. Part Ch. 119. etc. Fabian expresseth himself thus, Fol. 125. Part 5. viz. Then he said to them, since you will not assent to my Hosts generally, assent you to me, especially in that things. The first is, that you keep Easter i● d●● form and time as it is Ordained. The second, that you give Christendom t● Children. And the third, that you Preach to the Saxons, as I have i● h●●●●ed you: And all the other debate I shall s●ffer you to amend, and reform amongst yourselves; but saith he they would not thereof. To whom then Austin spoke and said, That if they would not take Peace with their Brethren, they should receive War with their Enemies: And if they disdained to Preach with them the way of Life to the English Nation, they should suffer by their hands the revenge of Death; and which Austin accomplisheth accordingly, by bringing the Saxons upon them to their utter ruin, as you will hear afterwards at large. And thereupon saith Fabian, That Faith that had endured in Britain for near 400 years, became near e●ti●●● through all the Land.  
And that the Churches in Britain did oppose the baptising of Infants, and assert and practice that of Believers, is farther manifest by these following Arguments.  
1. Because as you'll find in the History that they received the Scriptures, th● C●●istia● Faith, Doctrine and Discipline from the Apostles and A●●●tick Churches, who had no such things the baptising of Infants amongst them, as you have largely heard.  
2. Because it appears they so fully pr●●ed, and faithfully adhered to the Scriptures both for Doctrine and Discipline, wherein no such thing is to be found, as also you have understood, and as is confessed.  
3. Because they did so vehemently reject Humane Traditions in the Worship of God, especially all Romish Innovations, Rites and Ceremonies, this 〈◊〉 before undeniably appearing to cou●e from Rome's Ordination and Imposition.  
4. Because Constantine the Great, the Son of Constance, and the famous Helena, (both eminent Christians) born in Britain in the year 305. was not baptised till he was aged, as before, a clear proof, that the Christians in Britain in those days did not baptise their Children.  
5. Because of the Correspondency and Unity that were betwixt the French Christians, after called the Waldenses, and them, who had Colleges like them, communicated in the Ministry with them, both in preaching and baptising, viz. Germanus and Lupu●, two famous French Men, sent for to help against the Pelagian Heresy, who were not only useful and serviceable to suppress that error, but were Instrumental to convert many, and did Bapti●e great Multitudes amongst them upon confession of Faith in the River Allin near Chester.  
And lastly, another Argument why they did not baptise Children in Britain, because Austin himself, the Romish Emissary, was himself so raw and ignorant in the Rite, when he came best into Britain, as appears by that Question, which he amongst others writ from thence to Pope Gregory to be resolved in, viz. how long the baptising of a Child might be deferred (there being no danger of death) in his 10th. Interogatory, Ex decreto Greg. 1. Lib. Concil. Th●●. 2.   

The Witness born by the Waldenses.  

4. Waldenses.  THe next we shall produce, is the most eminent Testimony that was born by the Waldenses, those French Christians, who are so very famous in Story, for the defence of the Gospel against Antichristian Usurpations, that the learned Usher in his Book of the state and succession of the Christi●● Church, doth trace its succession through them in a distinction from, and opposition to that of the Papacy, the Romish Church, and who amongst other of Christ's Ordinances, (that they defended and witnessed too, to death, and banishment, and bonds) that of Baptising Believers in opposition to that of Infants, was you'll find by plentiful Evidence none of the least.  
Leaving the History of this famous People, as to the Names they are known by in Story, their Original, Growth, Excellency, and Suffering, till the Conclusion, we proceed to demonstrate to you what witness they gave unto this great truth, in the particulars following, viz.  
1. In their public Confession of ●aith.  
2. In the particular Witness that some of their principal men bore thereto.  
3. In the more general Witness born by the Body of the People, as appears by Decrees of Councils, the Decretal P●●stl●●, and General Edicts given forth against the whole Party for the 〈◊〉.  
4. In the Footsteps that we find thereof in the several Countries, where they have heretofore Imprinted the same.   

The first is the Witness we find hereof in their public Confessions of Faith, viz.  

1. In their Confessions of Faith. P. Perin  IN their Ancient Confession of Faith bearing Date 1120. Article 1ST They say we acknowledge no other Sacraments but Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord, P. Perin 87.  
And in Article 28. of another Confession. That God doth not only instruct us by his word, but has also Ordaine● certain Sacraments to be joined with it; as a means to unite us unto, and to make us partakers of his benefits, and that there are only two of them belonging in Common to all the Members of the Church under the New Testament, viz. Baptism and the Supper of the Lord, Morland. 1. B. Ch. 4. 67. And in another very Ancient Confession of Faith,  
Article 7. We do believe that in the Sacrament of Baptism, Water is the Visible and External Sign which represents unto us that (which by the Invisible virtue of God operating) is within 〈◊〉 viz. The Renovation of the Spirit, 〈◊〉 the mortification of our Members in 〈◊〉 Christ, by which also we are received into the holy Congregation of the 〈◊〉 of God, there protesting and declaring openly our Faith and amendment 〈◊〉 Life, P. Perin P. 89.  
Vignier 
Vignier.  in his Ecclesiastical History; 〈◊〉 They expresl● declare to receive 〈◊〉 Canon of the Old and New Testament, and to reject all Doctrines which ●re not their foundations in it, or are 〈◊〉 any thing contrary unto it. Therefore all the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church of Rome they condemn and abominate, saying she is a Den of Thiefs, ●●d the Apocaliptical Harlot, Usher P. 374.  
And in their Ancient Confession, Article 11d We esteem for an abomination, and as Antichristian all Humane Inventions, as a trouble and prejudice to the liberty of the Spirit; and in their Ancient Catechism you have these further Principles about Tradition and Humane Inventions, as you find them in P. Perin de Doct. de Vaud. Liv. 1. 168, 169. When Humane Traditions are observed for God's Ordinances, then is he worshipped in vain, as the Prophet 〈◊〉 affirmeth, Ch. 19 And our Savi●●● himself allegeth, Mat. 19 And whi●● done when Grace is attributed on the B●●●●●●al Ceremonies, and Persons enjoined to partake of Sacraments with●●● Faith and Truth.  
But the Lord chargeth his to take he●● of such false Prophets, to separate, avoid and withdraw from them, Mat. 16. ●● to the 23. Psal. 26.5. 2 Cor. 6. 1● 2 Thes. Rev. 18. And—  
In their Ancient Treatise concerning Antichrist, Writ 1120. They say th●● 〈◊〉 attributes the Regeneration of the 〈◊〉 Spirit unto the ●●ad outward w●● Baptising Children into their Faith, 〈◊〉 teaching that thereby Baptism and Regeneration must be had, grounding the●●in all his Christianity, which is against the Holy Spirit, P. Perin Lib. 3. 267.   

●he second is the Witness we find born hereto by several of their most eminent leading men. 
2. By their leading Men.   
THe first we begin with is the famous Beringarius 
1. Beringarius.  of Turain in ●n●●n, one of their Barbes, as M●r●●.  
Who in the 11. Century did so eminently and learnedly oppose Transub●●●tiation, and other Popish Innova●●●●, and for which he was persecuted 〈◊〉 above 30. years, by no less than 〈◊〉 Popes, viz. Leo the IX. Nic. II. ●●x. II. Greg. VII. and prosecuted by 〈◊〉 desperate persecuters, viz. Gui●●●●d, Algerius, F●lbertus, Heldibrand, after Greg. VII. and Lunifrank Archbishop of Canterbury, and Sentenced in no less than four Councils, as the Magd●burgs tell us, viz. The 1st. Lateran, the Vercellans, the Thureus, and 2d. Lateran, as Cen. 12. P. 454, 456, 457.  
Who with his Witness against the r●●al presence doth also testify against t●● other of Baptising of Children.  
The Magdiburg Cent. 11. C●. 15. 1. 240. tell us, That Beringarius did i● the time of Leo the IX about the ye●● 1049. publicly maintain his Heresies, which they set down to be denying Transubstantiation, and Baptism to litt●● ones, under five Heads, which La●●franck Archbishop of Canterbury, 〈◊〉 his Book called Scintillaris answer●● large; and as to that of his denying infant's Baptism, he answers by say●●● he doth thereby oppose the general Doctr●●● and Universal consent of the Church, P. 243.  
Cassander 
Cassand.  in his Epistle to the D●●● of Cl●●●, saith, That Guitmund Bl●●● of Averse doth affirm, that with the 〈◊〉 presence in the Eucharist, he did 〈◊〉 Baptism to little ones, though not 〈◊〉 latter so publicly as the former, kn●●●● (as he saith) that the Ears of the 〈◊〉 of men would not brook that blasph●●●.  
In the Bibliotheca Patrum, P●●●● at Paris, 
Durand. Epistle to H. 1.  P. 43. It is Recorded, T●● Durandus Bishop of Leodienses, hear● that Henry I. King of France, had called a Council to suppress the Heresies o● Brow●● Bishop of Austen, and Berringari●● of T●●rionenses writes a large Epistle ●o him to this purpose; first to applaud ●is wisdom in the calling of that Coun●●● to suppress those pernicious Doctrines of the old Heresies now modernly revived, which had filled all Ears through France and Germany.  
Then Secondly, mentions the same to be, first, the affirming the Eucharist ●o be not the real Body, but a Shadow ●●d Figure rather of the Body of Christ; ●●d Secondly, the denying, and as much 〈◊〉 in them lay the destroying the Baptism of Infants.  
Then Thirdly, shows the necessity of the Councils severity against them, especially against the Bishop of Bruno, ●hose influence in his Capacity might be of so evil Consequence, and therefore adviseth, that they should not be suffered so much as to speak in the Council; And lastly, endeavours to confute the said opinions, viz. the first from several. Authorities of the Ancients, as Leo, Ambrose, Hillary, Cyril, Basil; and the second concerning Infants Baptism. From a single quotation out of Au●●●● against the Donatists, Lib. 4. which Epistle you have at large in the said ●ib. Pat.  
Mr. Clerk 
M. Clark  in his Martyrology, t● 〈◊〉, That God raised up Beringari● who boldly and faithfully Preached, and witnessed to the Truth against the Romish Errors; whereupon the Gospelers w●● called Berringari●● for about 100 years after.  
Math. Paris saith, That Berringarius had drawn all France, Italy and England to his opinion, 1087.  
Dr. Usher 
D. Usher  tells in in the Succession of the Church, P. 252. out of Thunder That Bruno Archbishop of Tryer● did expel several of the Berringarian Sect, that had spread his Doctrine in several of those Belgic Countries, and that several of them upon Examination did say, That Baptism did not profit Children to Salvation, 〈◊〉 (saith h●) the Auth●● of the Acts of Bruno (found in the Lord C●●e●● Library of Clapton) doth ●●stifi●.  
But 〈◊〉 to B●rin●●ri●●, it is objected 〈◊〉 said, Th●t ●e did recant and re●oke hi● opinion, a● appea●● by th● R●●●●tation itself Recorded by Gr●●●●●●.  
To which I answer in the words of a learned Man ●●prest in Crispius 
Crispin.  French History, fol. ●1. That if he did through frailty recant and deny the truth, it was 〈◊〉 other than Peter did before him, who ●it repent of that evil, and so did Ber●●garius too.  
And writ against his own Rec●●●●●● so viola●●ly extorted from him; for most conclude he lived some time after, and died in his former profession, a man of great worth and goodness, as his Epilaph by his Scholar Heldebert Bishop of Tryers discovers, mentioned by Malmsbury. P. 1. 14.  

Vir v●re sapiens & parte beat●● ab omni,  
Qui C●●lo● anima corpore ditat hu●um.  
Post obitum vivam sicum, sicum qui●scum.  
Nec sciat melior sors mea sorte sua.   

He was a Man was blest on every part.  
The Earth hath his Body the Heavens his Heart.  
My wish shall be that at that my end.  
My Soul may rest with this my Friend.   
The second eminent Witness we meet with amongst the Waldenses, w●● t●●● famo●● Peter Bruis of Tholo●s●, 
P. Bruis  another of their renowned Barbes, who publicly and most successfully Preached the Gospel in that City, and the Provinces round about it for about 20. years, wi●● for his opposing the Doctrines of the Church of Rome, was apprehended, imprisoned, and b●rnt in the Fields of Sir Giles near Tholo●●e, about the year 1136. whose Doctrine and Positions, for which he suffered, we have Recorded by the Magdib. C●●t. 12. 843. and L. Osiander 
Osiander.  Cent. 12. 262. And amongst which we find these about Baptism; First, That Infants are mith●● to be sword, nor to be baptised by the Faith of another, all being to be bapti●ed, and expect to be saved by their own proper faith.  
Secondly, That Baptism without proper faith saves not.  
Those two Positions, saith Osiander (the Lutheran) have no Error in them, the Papists being rather to be condemned, who deny Infants to have proper faith.  
Thirdly, That little Children that are under age, and without understanding, that are brought to Baptism, are not saved thereby.  
Fourthly, That those that are Baptised in their Infancy, after they are come to understanding, are to be Baptised again, and which is not to be esteemed Rebaptisation, but right Baptism.  
These two saith Osiander are Heretical & Anabaptistical. Cen. 12. l. 3. p. 262.  
All which, with his assertions about Transubstantiation, worshipping of Images, Purgatory, etc. are distinctly and at large answered, by Peter Cluniensos', 
Peter Cluniens.  whereof the Magdiburgs do give a particular account: And also you have the said Peter (writing to three Bishops in France about this time) saying, That neither Temples nor Altar's are made by these People, neither are Crosses worshipped, but rather broken, and trodden underfoot; the Mass is esteemed an abomination, and that the benefits of the living did not profit the dead, etc. And that this Heresy of the Pe●ro Brusians was received in the Gali● Norbonc●s●●, complaining that the People were Rebaptised, the Churches, Altars and Crosses profaned, ●le●● 〈◊〉 in Lent, y●● upon Good Friday itself.  
This Peter Bruis was supposed to have written the Treatise of Antichrist, whereof you have some account in the History, and so eminent and worthy a Person, that for many years the Waldenses were called Petro Brus●ians.  
The next we shall mention is the famous Arnoldus, 
Arnold.  or rather the Arnoldeses, there being three of that name.  

Pridieux  The first, viz. Arnoldus of Bri●ia, was in the second, Lateran Council with Peter Bruis Censured for the Heresy of rejecting Infant's Baptism, Church-buildings, and the Adoration of the Cross. Prid. Introduct. to H●st Latin Councils, P. 23.  
The said Arnoldus was in the year 1155. as saithVsher 
Usher.  out of Gerhohus, at Rome put to death, being first hanged, than his Body burnt, and his Ashes fling into Tiber, lest the People of Rome following his Doctrine, should adore him.  
Another eminent Man of this name, (and one of the Waldensian Barbes also) whom Eckber●●●, a●Vsher tells us, P. 292. calls the Arch-Catheri or Puritans was with two of his Associates, v●z. Mar●●llyus and Theodoricus, who with him managed a public dispute at Cologne, against one Eckberius, were burnt, Arnold, and Eight more of his Disciples at Cologne, August 2. 1163. And Theodoricus and Marsellyus afterwards at Bunnae near Cologne. Eckbertus saith, That the Principal Argument they brought against Infant's Baptism, was Christ's Commission, Mat. 28 19 Mark 16.15, 16.  
We read also of another Arnold, who in the time of Honorius II. 1124. was burnt at Rome for witnessiing against the Pride, Pomp, and Luxury of the Priests, as Prid. in his Introduction, and Baronius in his Anals 1124. Balaeus saith he was an English Man.  
The Waldensian Sect were also called Arnoldists, as BishopVsher and P. Perin tells us after their names,  
Another eminent Person we meet with, witnessing to this great Truth, 
Heneric.  was one Henricus, a great Friend and Colleague of P. Bruis 's, whose Doctrines and Positions are also recorded by the Magdiburgs, under 11. Heads; the first whereof was den●ing Baptism to Children, Cent 12. 843. which Bernard 
Bernard.  at large endeavours to answer, and confute, telling us, That Infants are to be baptised upon the Faith of the Church.  
The same Bernard in his Epistle to Heldes●ns●s, Earl of St. Giles, saith, The Henerici (for so they called his followers) did deny Holy days, Sacraments, Churches and Priests, complaining that the Children of Christians were excluded the Life of Christ, whilst they denied them the Grace of Baptism, and not suffered them to partake of Gra●e and Salvation thereby.  
Cassander 
Cassand.  in his Epistle before his Book of Baptism, saith, that Peter Bruis, and Henry his Disciple and Colegue, were great Propagators of the Error of denying Baptism to little ones, affirming that it did only belong to the Adult.   

Thirdly, 
By the People themselves suffering for the same.  in the Witness born not only by some particular men, but by the Body of the people, as appeareth by Decrees of Councils, decretal Epistles, and Edicts given forth against them, as well as the Testimony of many learned Writers.  
DR. Usher 
Dr. Usher.  out of the Fragments of the History of Acquitane, written by P. Pithao, P. 81, 82. tells us, That in the time of Robert King of France, that they of Acquitaine and Tholouse, (principal places of the Waldenses) did deny Baptism (for so they called denying Baptism to little ones) the Sign of the Cross, the real presence in the Eucharist, and other Rites of the Church, and that many of them were Sentenced by Council and burnt.  
Dr. Usher also tells us out of Papir Masson in his French Annals, That 14. Citizens of Orleans in the Reign of King Robert, were convicted of the same Heresy, for denying baptismal Grace, and the real presence, and were all burned alive, and that the names of three of the chief of them were Herbert, ●isius and Stephen.  
Dr. Usher tells us, That in the time of the Emperor Henry II. 1017. many of this Sect were about Mediolanenses fined and banished as he tells us, Antonius in his History, 2. Tit. 15. Chap. 23. informeth.  
And also out of Radulp. Ard Homil. tells us, That in Germany, under the Reign of Henry iv about 1054 several of this People, whom they called the Manchean Sect, and the Reason of it you will understand afterwards, did inhabit the Country of Aganenses, who denied Baptism, and the Sacrament of the Altar.  

P. Leo IX  Pope Leo the IX. in his Decretal Epistle to the Bishop of Acquitaine, (a Principal, Place of their abode) about the year 1050. Commandeth; that Young Children should be Baptised, because of Original sin.  
Pope Gregory VII. decreed 1070. That th●●e young Children whose ●●●o●t● are absent or unknown, should according to the Tradition of the ●●●●ers be Baptised.  
Bernard 
Bernard.  Abhor of Clara●el, in the 12 Century, in his 66. Sermon in C●●itio● complained, That the Cathari did deride them, because they baptised ●●●●●●s, and prayed for the dead, and asserted purgatory; and that the Soul as so●● as it departed out of the Body, went to Salvation or Damnation.  
Eckbertus' a great Dr. about the same time, 
Eckber.  in his Sermon against the Cathari, saith, That they say concerning the baptising of Children, that through their incapacity it nothing profited them the Salvation, and that Baptism ought to be deferred till they come to years of discretion, and that then only they ought to be baptised, when they can with their own months make a profession of Faith, and desire it, and which he largely endeavo●●ds, to confute in that Sermon, Bib. P●t. 2. To●. fol. 99 106.  
Erbrardus another great Dr. of this time, saith, 
Erbrard  That the Cathari do deny Baptism to Children, because they want understanding; and therefore spends his 6. Chapter to confute them; the Title of which is, Children which cannot speak aught to be Baptised; and concludes thus: By this therefore we find that we ought to call little ones to faith by Baptism. Bib. Pat. Tom. 4. P. 1108.  
Ermengendus. 
Ermengendus.  another great writer of this Age, in his Book contra Waldenses, proves Infant's Baptism (which he saith they deny) by two Scriptures, namely Mat. 19.14. Suffer little Children to come to me, etc. And 1 Cor. 15. Baptised for the dead; whence he thus reasons. If they of old baptised the Living for the Dead, for their Eternal Salvation, though they neither received it, nor were capable thereof; how much more doth the faith of the Gossips avail for Spiritual Grace and Salvation, in the baptising the persons of the little o●●s themselves Bib. Pat. Tom 4.  

Dr. Usher  Dr. Usher in his foresaid Book of the Succession of the Church, P. 292. tells us out of Decretal, Lib. 5. Tit. 6 c. 10. That Pope Alexander the III. in the Turonensi●n Synod, held 1163. touching the Albigenses, made the following Canon, viz.  
To damn that Heresy, 
Alex III Turonensian Canon.  that had so infected as a Canker, all those parts about Gascogne, requiring the Clergy of every sort to give their utmost diligence to detect and suppress it, and to require all upon penalty of Excommunication, not only to refuse harbouring of them, but to avoid all civil Communion and Converse with them; and if taken by any Catholic Princes, that they be Imprisoned, and their Goods and Estates confiscated  
And in as much as multitudes under pre●ence of sojourning together in one Mansion house, (which was very much the Custom of the Waldenses to do) do under that Colour carry on their Errors in such Cohabitations, that all such Conventicles should diligently be searched out; and if found, to be proceeded with by Canonical severity.  
And further the said Dr. Usher tells us out of Hovedens Annals, fol. 319. 
Hoved.  That the said Pope Alexander III did 〈◊〉 the year 1176. The better to extirpate the Albigenses, send a Cardinal and three Bishops, as Commissioned Inquisitors against them, under the names of the Cridentes, Lyonists, Patrinos', Bonhomes, or Manichees, (of the Reason of which names you will understand afterwards) with a Creed to put to them for the better discovering of them, in which these following are some of the Articles, 
Inquisitors Creed.  viz. We believe we cannot be saved except we eat the body of Christ, and which is not so, except Consecrated in a Church by a Priest: We believe that none are saved, except they are baptised; and that Children are saved by Baptism, and that Baptism is to be performed by a Priest in the Church, Hovend. Annals 319. 6.  
In the same year Pope Alexander, calls another Gallican Council, to convince and condemn the Albigensian Heresy.  

Alex. III his Canon in the Galican. Council.  In the Third Canon, whereof they say they do convince and judge them of Heresy for denying Baptism to Children, or that they are to be saved thereby, urging Arguments from Christ's d●ing for all, and from the Circumcising of Infants of old; for their baptising, and affirming, that the Faith of the Gossips is sufficient to baptise upon, etc. which you have at large in the Book of Decretals.  
Two years after, as saith Mat. Paris, 
Mat. Paris.  viz. 1178. Cardinal Chrysoginus, i● sent Inquisitor to suppress the Heretic about Tholouse, that had evil Sentiments about the Sacraments, in which Inquisition many of them were persecuted, and amongst the rest Roger ●●●●es.  
Also the same Pope Alexander III. 
Alex. III his Canon in the Lateran Council.  in the year 1179. In the general Lateran Council condemns the Waldensian or Catharian Heresy; and in the 27. Canon Anatham●tiseth the Cathari, etc. dwelling in Gascogne, Albi, and other Parts about Tholouse, and amongst the rest of their Heresies, for denying Baptism to Children, and or their contempt of all the Sacraments, Decret.  
Favin, 
Favin.  in his History of Navarre, P. 2●0. saith, That the Albego●s do esteem the baptising of Infants superstitious.  
In the year 1181. 
P Lucius his Canon in the Verone Council.  P. Lucius held his general Council at Verone in the time of Fred. I. Wherein the Albigensian Sect. and Heresy were damned, and Anatha●atized under the names of Cathari, Patrini, Humiliati, poor people of Lions, Arnoldists, for during to Preach without Apostolical Approbation, or mission publicly or privately, and for teaching otherwise about the Eucharist, Baptism, Confession, Marriage, and other Sacraments of the Church, than the Church of Rome Preacheth and observeth, Decret. Lib. 5. Tit. 6. de Heret. c. 11. 126. confirmed by Urban the III. 1185. Coelestin. 3. 1192. In 3. 1200. as Favin Hist. P. 290.  

P. Innocent III. his Decretal Ep.  Pope Innocent the III. about the year 1199. writes his Decretal Epistle to the Bishop of Aries, (the principal City in Provence) respecting the Albigensian Sect, to which Barronius in his Annals writes this Preamble; and which is also expressed by Spondanus in his Epitome, 981. 1199. viz. Amongst the Arlatenses were Heretics, (saith he) who excluded Infants from Baptism, counting them uncapable of that Heavenly Privilege: Therefore did Innocent write this excellent Epistle to the Arch Bishop of Arles, to confute and confound them; which he recites at large (as it is also found both in Gratian, and the Book of the Decretals.  
Wherein having given many Arguments to enforce the baptising of Infants, he makes this Decree, viz. That since Baptism is come in the room of Circumcision; therefore no● alone the Elder, but also the young Children, which of themselves nei-neither believe nor understond, shall be Baptised, and in their Baptism Original sin shall be forgiven them.  
And then after the Epistle, Baronius 
Baronius  adds, This Innocent writ in a time of great Immergensy concerning the Sacrament of Baptism, which, saith he, the poor People of Lions, those Albigensian Anabaptists did deny.  
After this he sent a great number of Friars in imitation of the Albigensian Barbes to go up and down those Countries to preach and dispute amongst them; Dominicus, Benedict, and Francis being in the Head of them. Then after them many Legates, and Inquisitors upon Inquisitors; after them a Crusado of Armed Men, which he supplied from time to time from all Parts, and continued a bloody War against them all his days; but yet could neither vanquish nor suppress them; who by the help of strong Allies, the Kings of England and Spain, Earl of Tholouse and F●ix, were enabled in a defensive way to maintain the War against his mighty Armies that came against them, a Hundred Thousand at a time; and by which me●n● as Dr. Ʋsher 
Usher.  observes, P. 266. That as the persecution about Stephen by that dispersion proved much for the furtherance of the Gospel in other Parts of the world, so was i● here; for those that were not so fit for the War, went up and down with more freedom into most Parts of Europe. insomuch that Aeneas, Silvas, 
Aeneus, Silvas.  afterward Pope Pius the II. in his 16. Chap. confesseth in these words. Nec ull●s vel Romanorum, Pontificium Decrete, vel Christianarum armis deleri potuiss●. That neither the Decrees of Popes, nor Armies of Christians could exterpate.  
Having produced to you so much Evidence to this Point, I conceive it not unseasonable before I proceed farther, to present to you what I meet with from Mr. Baxier 
Mr. Bax.  upon it, who  
In his plain Scripture Proof, p. 157. is pleased to tell us, That for his pa●● he cannot find in his small Reading, that any one Divine, or party of m●n, did certainly oppose or deny Infant● Baptism, for many Hundred years after Christ.  
And again, p. 261. That the World may now see what a Cause you put such a face upon, when you cannot bring the least proof so much as of one Man, (much less Societies, and least of all godly Societies) that did once oppose or deny Infant's Baptism from the Apostles days, till about Luther's time.  
And yet farther, p 266. I am fully satisfied, that you cannot show me any Society (I think not one man) that ever opened their mouth against Baptism of Infants till about 200. years ago, or thereabouts, which confirms me m●ch that it is from the Apostles time, or else some one would have been found as an opposer of it.  
Though with what Evidence and Truth these confident assertions, and severe reflections are made, (in respect to what hath, and is farther to be said hereto) is recommended to his own, and the consideration of the impartial Reader.  
And Mr. Cobbet in, P. 200. saith, That the Doctrine of Paedobaptism was never ex professo, opposed by any Orthodox Church or Christian in time of old as far as I can learn.   


By their Disciples in several Countries.  Lastly from the footsteps we find of this Truth in the several Countries and Places, where the Waldenses had heretofore Imprinted it, as appeareth by the following Instances.  

1. Germany.  1. FRom what we find hereof in Germany, where (by what you will find hereafter) the Waldenses were so conversant, that their itinerant Ministers could Travel through the whole Empire, and lie every night at a friends House. Du Plessis 
D● lessis  in his Mystery of Iniquity, P. 403. saith, They are spread abroad in Germany and France, as that their footsteps are to be discerned throughout the course of History.  
In which Country we find, yea and and in most parts thereof, Multitude● of this persuasion down to the 16. Century; as may appear not only by the oppositions made against those persuasions, by the Popish Party, but by the Protestants also; witness not only ●he writings of Bar●nius, Cassander, Eckius, Gres●●●●● in contradiction and ●●●●ty thereto; but the several Canons of the Council of Trent, and the Catechism of Pope Pius Quin●us, respecting that of Infant's Baptism, printed and annexed with the same Decretals to be read in every Parish (by the Popish.]  
But by the several disputations, 
Anabaptists in all parts in Germany.  writings, and opposition made by the Protestant party also; yea, and that from those that were called chief of the ●●formation, viz. by Regius at Ausburg about 1516. Luther in Saxony 1522. Micarius in Thuringia 1525. Zwinglian i● Switzerland 1529. Brentius in S●●via 1530 Calvin at Geneva 1537. J●nius about Limburg and Heidlburg 1570. and Multitude of Anabaptists in Basil, Vlme, Ausburg, against whom O●●l●mpagius disputed, 1527. 29. As Clerk in his Lives, and their respective works manifest.  
Whereby it is evident they had a being in those parts before Luther's time; for it cannot rationally be supposed, that they should all of a sudden be so spread over so great a Territory as the upper Germany; and therefore cannot be concluded to be other than the Remains and Offspring of those that the Waldenses had instructed in those times.  
But in the next place we do not only find them in the upper, 
2. Hollan.  but lower Germany, being spread all over the Low-countries.  

Cassand. reports well of Anabaptists.  Cassander in his Epistle to the Duke of Cleve, tells us, That the Anabaptists of the Belgic and lower Germany, are followers of Menno Simonis, and since of Theodoricus, in both whom were Tokens of a godly mind, and whose Disciples seem to err more out of ignorance than malice, and therefore, saith he, are more worthy an amendment, than persecution and perdition.  

Anab. called Mennists from Menno. Cloppenb.  From the said Menno the Anabaptists in Holland are called Mennists to this day.  
Cloppenburg in his Epistle to his Gangrea●e, saith, The Troops of Anabaptists that dwell in Friezland, although they trouble not the Common Wealth, yet they suffer not the pure reformed Churches to be edified without daily conflicts.  
Beza in his Epistle to the Gallabelgick Churches at Embden, saith, 
Beza 's honourable Testimony of Anabt.  Many of the Anabaptists are good men, Servants of God, Martyrs of Christ, and our most dear Brethren. Hornbeck p 364.  
Vossius in his Book de Baptismo, 
The learned Zwingerius writ for Anab.  fol. 175. tells us, That the learned Zwingerius in his Book de Baptism, fol. 63. did maintain, that Children were uncapable of Baptism through unbelief, and that it did only belong to the Adult.  
He also tells us, 
Erasmus a favourer of Anabapt.  That Erasmus of rotterdam himself seemed not much to differ from him, who would have all Parents either to baptise in Infancy, or to defer it till they were of years, provided that they did carefully educate, them in the Doctrine of Faith, and train them up in good Manners.  
Therefore Bell●rmine saith of him, 
3. Bohemia and M●rav.  That he was not only a friend to them, but had sowed the Seeds of Anabaptism.  
In the next place we find, that as P. Perin tells us, That the Waldenses of old were dispersed, and their Doctrines taught in Bohemia, Moravia, and Austria; so there also till they were expelled by the Emperor about 50 years since were several Anabaptist Churches to be found.  

Scultet.  Scultetus in his Annals upon 1528. tells us, That the Brethren in Bohemi●, and many godly Men in that time were Rebaptised, not that they did favour the many Errors charged upon the Anabaptists; 
Anabab. a nick name.  but they saw not (they say) how otherwise to separate themselves from the pollutions of the world, not owning a Rebaptisation, because they esteemed the former a mere nullity, and unlawful  
And farther tells us, That their Martrology mentions, That one of their sufferers in the year 1553. being asked whether he was Rebaptised, answered, That he knew no Anabaptist; for being ●nce baptised, was as much as the Word of God required.  
Baltazar Hu●bmer a Dr. in Waldshu●t, a great preacher of this way in Bohemia and Moravia, 
Dr. Hubmer and Wife Mart.  whom Osiander calls a Fanatic, and gross Anabaptist, was taken Prisoner with his Wife, by the Emperor's command, who was himself burnt at Vienna in Austria, and his Wife drowned, for Heretics in the year 1528.  
But that which is most considerable in the Account we have to give of Bohemi●, is what we meet with in the History of Bohemia, writ by Commenius, p. ●●4. 
Comenius Hist. of the Anabapt. of Morav.  who giving an account of the distresses that befell them upon the deseat of Frederick by the Emperor's Forces at Prag●●, tell us, That when the Enemy resolved to exercise their cruelty against us, they began the year after the victory with the Anabaptists in Moravia, who possessing about 45. 
Lived in Colleges  Houses or Colleges, (many Families dwelling together in them) having all things managed in partnership, in a public, Stock or in common, according to their Custom, lived peaceably under their own Discipline, troublesome or grievous to none, but beneficial to all by their Trades and Callings.  
They banished, saith he, these first in the year 1622. about Autumn, being forced to leave their Houses, Lands and Vineyards, though the time of Vintage was at hand, and carrying the weaker fort with them in some Hundreds of Carts, went in great Troops into the neighbouring Countries of Hungaria and T●●nsilyania, where he saith they could find fit, Seats for themselves, and whereby they avoided th●se evils that were after to be suffered by 〈◊〉 that were left behind And that ●b●se were of the Stock that had been instructed by the Waldenses of old, may appear by this Custom of living together in Houses or Colleges, which w●● their Custom, as Bishop Usher 
Usher.  in the state of the Church tells us, p. 292. maintaining themselves by their Manufactures. And living so together, not only for the benefit & comfort of their ●o●●● having the better opportunity for Religious service, 
4. Hung.  eyeing also that primitive pattern, Act. 4. But to free themselves more from observation and persecution which flocking together from several parts might occasion.  
In which way upon good information I find they continue together in H●●garia, Transilvania, Poland, and some parts of Germany to this day.  
Concerning whom a Hungarian Scholar, that about 5, or 6. years since came from those parts, and had lived ●mongst them, gave the within a f●● days this particular account; That he himself known four Colleges of them in those Parts, viz. two in the lower Hungary, one at a place called Coso●●●, ●nd another at Turk●s Hida, and in the upper Hungary another famous College in a place called Saras Patack, in which Town he himself lived, (as he told me) and knew the People very well, and that there were near 100 Families in that College, who are reputed a very Holy, Harmless, Innocent People, and that they do support themselves by their Manufactures, brought into one Joint-stock, Eat altogether in one great Hall, Worship God together twice a day, each several Manufacture, being ranged together both as to their Work-Rooms, Lodgingss, and Table in the common Hall, having public Officers to manage all their Affairs, and Schools for their Children.  
In Transilvania he saith he knows another, at a place called Alvinez. 
5. Transilvania.  All which, as he saith, are the remains of those that came out of Moravia and Bohemia about 50. years since. I understand that near Heidlberg in the Palatinate, there is another great College, consisting of near 100 Families, and that in Prusia there are others of them also.  
V●ssius in his Book de Baptismo, P. 177. tell● us, That the Ministers in Transilvania do reject Infant's Baptism, and Baptise only upon profession; but he withal saith, That many of them are infected with Socinianism; though this Hungarian Gentleman tells me, That the Colleges are very free from that infection.  

6. Poland  And farther, That this Truth was spread in Poland (where the Waldenses as you'll afterwards find had much to do) appears from what we find out of John a Lasco, the Polonian Baron, in his Book de Sacramentis, where he tells, That the Anabaptists do refuse to Baptise their Chldrens, because they neither do believe nor understand the Spiritual Mystery thereof, and say there is no ground from Circumcising Children under the Law, to Baptise them under the Gospel; because say they there is a Command for the one, and none for the other; and that God had other ways to save the Children that died in their Infancy, then by such external Ceremonies: And that neither by Circumcision were Children to ●e saved of old; for than would the ●●mules as well as the Males have been enjoined the fame, and that it was God● Covenant of Grace, and no onward Rite or Ceremony that were to be leaned ●●on to effect the same, to all which as an ●●●my to their persuasion, he largely replyer in the said Book. He also in his Theologia Muscovitica, P. 157. 〈◊〉 us, That the Ministers of these fraternities in Poland, do for the most part live single lives, though under no public vows or constraint, admitting Marriage to any that desire the same, and that they live very pious lives, as Dr. Usher, P. 363.  
A farther and mo●e particular account of the state of these Churches in all these parts, I doubt not shortly to give you, having lately written into Germany to a learned and very intelligent person, now (as I hear) writing a History of them.  
And lastly in England itself, 
7. Engl.  where several of the Waldenses (and then Disciples out of France, Germany and Holland had recourse, and) have left us some Prints of their footsteps, viz Rainard L●●●ard, a famous Waldensian Barb, was an Evangelist sent into England, as P. Perin and Morland, P. 184. and whose Disciples were called Lo●●ards, and imprisoned in that Tower in Paul's Church, known by the name of Lollards Tower to this day, and which was a Sect. so hated by the Popish Rulers both in Church and State, that they put a Clause into the Oaths of all Magistrates, especially Sheriffs and Parliament Men, utterly to exterpate and root them up, and which form of Oath continued till King James' time.  
In Henry II. Time, there were 30. of the Waldensian Sect taken at Oxford, and marked with a Key in their Foreheads, and every one forbidden to relieve them, whereby they perished for want of Sustenance, as Holinshed in his Cron, and Bishop Usher in his State of the Church.  
In Henry VIII. Time in the year 1528. Seven Dutch Anabaptists that came over with Anne a Cleve, were apprehended and imprisoned, of whom five bore the Faggot and recanted, and two of them, a Man and a Woman, were burnt in Smithfield. Stow's Cron. 576.  
And again in Henry VIII. Time 1535. Twenty Two Anabaptists were apprehended, and Ten of them put to Death, F●● Act. Mon. V 2. P. 315.  
In Queen Mary's Time, about the Year 1●57. we find Anabaptists Imprisoned, giving the following grounds against Infant's Baptism, viz. 1. Because Antiscriptural. 2. Because commanded by the Pope. 3. Because Christ commanded teaching ●o go before Baptism, Pox's Acts Mon. V 3. P. 606.  
In Queen Elizabeth's time, in the Year 1575. A Congregation of Anabaptists were taken at their Meeting within Allgate, Twenty Seven of whom were Imprisoned, and of them Four recanted, Two were burut in Smithfield, and the rest were banished, Stow's Cron. 676.  
In the 16 Year of King James 1618. That excellent Dutch Piece called a very plain and well grounded Treatise concerning Baptism, that with so much Authority both from Scripture and Antiquity, proves the Baptising of Believers, and disproves that of Infants, was printed in English.  
Since when (especially in the last 30. or 40. years) many have been the Conferences, that have past, and many the Treatises that have been written Pro and ●on upon that Subject, and many have been the Sufferings both in old and new England's that people of that persuasion have undergone, whereby so much Light hath broken forth therein, that not only very many learned men have been convinced thereof, but very many Congregations of Baptists have been, and are dally gathered in that good old way of the Lord, that hath so long lain under so much obloquy and reproach, and been buried under so much Antichristian Rubbish in these Nations.  
There are two material Objections that I conceive it will be necessary to obviate, viz. First, That Concerning the Germane Anabaptists. 
T●e miscarriages of the Germane Anabapt. examined and the reproach from thence reflected upon the way removed.  And Secondly, Concerning some of the Waldensian Confession, th● 〈◊〉 seem to own the Baptising of Infants.  
To the first, What has been more frequent in these latter Times then to reflect some gros● miscarriages of some that went under the name of Anabaptists in Luther's days, upon the whole profession ever since.  
To which I would (say these few things, That take it for granted that things were so 〈◊〉 mat●●● of Fact, that many Anabaptist did prove fo● horribly wicked, a● Sp●●hanti●s, Sl●●den. Osiander and others do report; yet how unreasonable and uncharitable would it be to render all the people either in those times or since to be such Persons also, and to judge an Error in the Principle from the Error in Conversation of some that have professed it; for by the same Rule may not the purest State of the Church both in the Old and New Testament be sensured and judged, who had their Choras, Judass, and Diatrophes amongst them: But that others that owned that Principle were Men of another Spirit, both in that as well as former and latter times you have most ample and authentic Testimony from their greatest Enemies; witness that honourable Character that Rainerius the bloody Inquisitor gives of them in those days, P. 14. of those in France, Cassander, Bellarmine, 
Anabaptists well reported. of.  and Baronius, P. 22. of those in Germany Mr. Baxter himself, one of their severest Enemies in these Nations, yet hath done himself and his opposites that Right as to witness to the Innocency of their conversation; which you may please to read in his own words, in his Book called the Defence of the Prin. of Love, P. 7 viz. That Anabaptists are Godly Men that differ from us in a Point so difficult, that many of the Papists and Prelatists have maintained, that it is not determined in Scripture, but dependeth upon the Tradition of the Church. And I know as good and sober men of that mind, as of theirs that are most against them, and that he once motioned Terms of Concord to the Anabaptists, and was in as hopeful a way for peace with them, as with most others. And in his late large Book called a Christian Directory, he is pleased to say P. 827. That Anabaptists may not only be admitted to Church Communion, but may be tolerated in their practice also. 1. Because they agree with us in all Points absolutely necessary to Communion, 2. That the Ancient Christians had liberty either to Baptise, on to let them stay till Age, as they thought best. And therefore Tertullian and Nazianzen speak against haste: And Augustine, and many Children of Christian Parents were baptised at Age, [and if so, what greater Argument against Apostolical Tradition.] And 3. That the Controversy is of so great difficulty, that is in all such Cases none that differ be tolerated, we may not live together in the World or Church but endlessly excommunicate or persecute one another.  
But in the next place I think it will not be unnecessary, being upon this Point, to give you some account from the best Authors of the matter of fact itself, that has occasioned so much blunder in the world; 
The Rustics War.  concerning which you must understand there are two things especially reflected upon, viz. First those many insurrections and disturbances that happened in Isuria and Swe●ia by times for the space of 22. y●●rs, viz. from 1502. to 1525 called the Clowns or Rustics War, wherein Munzer and several other Anabaptists were concerned in Luther's time.  
And the other, those horrible thing; that are spoken of to have been in the City of Munster in Westphalia, from the years 1532. to 1536. by J●. a Layden, Mathias, Gniperdoling, etc.  
As to that of the Clowns War, 
Baronius  I find in Baronius' Annals, that in the year 1502. there was a Conspiracy of Husbandmen against the Bishops and Canons, which was called the Rustic League, which began from two Rustics, of which Conspiracy the principal Article was, That they should shak● off every Yo●e, and in imitation of the Helvetians should recover their liberty. Which beginning s●ith Osia●der, Cent. 16. P. ●●4. were the praeludium of that great sedition of the Rustick● which was in its vigour, 1525.  

Gnodol.  Gnodoliu● ●n his History of the Rustics in Germany in the year 1525. Lib. 1. saith, That in Swe●●●, where they first began, they did openly signify, that they were not Gospelers, nor did flow together for the Gospel's sake, 
Upon the account of Civil and Religious Liberty.  but because of Exactions. The first Boars that rose were against Count Ly●si●●, to whom after an infinite number of Rustics did join themselves, crying up Gospel-Liberty after, as well as Civil, in both which they were so oppressed, by their Lords and Bishops (which Spanhemius himself, in his Diatro●e Misteria, refer● to Luther's Book of Christian Liberty, as the occasion taken by them.)  

Bish Jew  Bishop Jewel in Defence of the Apology of the Church of England, Part 4. Chap 1. Divisions to Harding to his upbraiding the reformation, saying, What became of the Hundred Thousand Boars of Germany, consumed by by the Sword of the Nobility for that their Sedition and Rebellion? answers him thus. The Boars of Germany, of whom you speak, for the greatest part, were Adversaries unto Luther, and understood no part of the Gospel, but conspired together, as they said against the cruelty and tyranny of their Lords, as they had done 22. years before in the Conspiracy called Liga Sotularia; the partners of which Conspiracy had for their word the Virgin Mary, and in honour of her were bound to say five Ave Maries every day, 
Papists as well as Protestants engaged in the Rustic War  and touching those latter Rebels, Luther writ against them. It is true, Munzer was a busy man in Thu●ingia, and stirred up the People disposed to tumults by reason of oppression.  
Osiander 
Osiander.  gives us in the 16 Century P. 36, 37, etc. the Twelve Demands of the Rustics comprehending their Civil and Spiritual Liberties, wherein people of all persuasions concerned themselves; which was no other than their Neighbours the Swissers had successively undertaken before them: And had Geneva, where they did the like, or any of the famous Men amongst the Cantons miscarried in their attempt, they and their Religion too might have fallen under as much obloquy, as the chiefest of those people did in their defeat, which the Papasts you find nevertheless do reflect upon the whole Reformation, and that upon as good grounds as the Protestants have since reflected upon the Anabaptists; because there were some of their persuasion concerned in that attempt for freedom.  

The first rise of the troubles in Munster.  And as to the other at Munster in 1532. etc. It is manifest both by Spanhaemius and Osiander, that the first stirs in that City was about the Protestant Reformation, the Synod siding with Mr. Rotomon, and others of the Ministers against the Papists, and their Bishop and Canons that opposed them to Arms, and this before the coming in of Jo, Mathias, and Jo. Becold of Leyden: In the latter part of the Siege (as they say) monstrous wickedness and villainy by horrid Pride, 
Good ground to question the Munster Stories.  Tyranny, and Luxury in their Communities, was perpetrated by them.  
Though I must needs say as to the truth thereof there is good ground to doubt.  
First, 
Written either by inveterate Papists.  Because the things are either written by the malicious Papists, their Morat● old Enemies, and who have said as bad things of Luther and Calvin themselves, representing them no less Monsters and Devils than these poor People, just as they used to deal with the Waldenses of old, whereof Dr. Usher gives us a large account in ●he State of the Church, or else by some of their most inveterate Enemies the Protestants, 
Or envious Protestants.  who were willing to take up and improve such reprorts, to blast not only the whole party of the Anabaptist, but their Principles also; against whom they so vehemently contended: And alas! how far good men may be transported by prejudice or malice in this kind, we need not go far for Instances: For if Mr. Edward's in his Gangrea●● be to be believed (which it may be other Nations do that have got it) what Monsters of Men hath he represented the Independents and Anabaptist to be: Or Mr. Baxter himself to be credited in that horrid Calumny of the Anabaptists, Baptising naked in these Countries, mentioned P. 134. What unnatural Brutes would they be esteemed; by which we may guests, if matter of fact cannot better be told amongst ourselves at home, what may we expect of it abroad at such a distance.  

Because of the Community of Goods that they always held.  And besides, there was secondly another thing by which people in all Ages took an occasion to miss represent this people, which was found amongst them at Munster, and that was that Community of Goods, casting their Estates into one common Stock; which saith Hornbeck in his Summa Contraversiarum, P. 334. was the first thing that Becaldus and Gerardus endeavoured amongst them in the year 1533. and was the same thing that Osiander tells us Munzerius did in Mulhusium in Thuringia in the Rustic Tumults 1524. and no other than the Waldenses did so much practice of old in their Communities, and their Disciples do to this day both in Poland, Hungaria, Transilvania, and many parts in Germany living in Colleges in that very way, as you have heard, and will understand more thereof in the Historical part, and which Custom they observed partly out of conveniency, and partly out of Conscience, respecting the Example, Acts 4.34. And from hence they took occasion to reproach the Waldenses of old, as though with their Stocks and Food they had their Women in common too, and from hence also I persuade myself much of this Clamour of the Munster business did arise.  
But though if it should be taken for granted that some Anabaptists in Germany did turn Ranters, and were given up to such desperate Course● as reported of them, can that justly be reflected upon the Principle, and upon the Innocent in other parts of the world, that hate and abhor all such ways and courses.  
The other Objection as to the Waldensian confession in favour for Infant's Baptism: 
The other Objection concerning the Waldendensians answered  It is very true that Mr. Baxter, Mr. Marshal, and others beat themselves high against those that assert the Waldensians, were against Infant's Baptism from two passages.  
The first is in that confession that was presented to Ladislaus King of Bohemia 1508. by his Subjects. and afterwards presented to Ferdinand 1535. 
The Confession to K Ladislaus, not by the Waldens.  Wherein in the 12. Article they say that they teach, That Children are to be baptised unto Salvation, and to the consecrated to Christ according to hia word suffer little Children, etc. In answer whereto we need to say nothing but what is contained in the very Title itself; saying that they were falsely called Waldenses justifying themselves from that aspersion, being not of their Tenants, which you may take in their own words, viz. Lo petit tropel de le Christians appella per falce nom falsae ment pani●●r● Ovaldes. Osiander tells us, That the professors there were a mixed People, some that only separated from Rome in the business of the Cup, called the Calextines. The other the Hussites that went farther than they, and the Thabarites that were more thorough for Reformation, & more especially did comprehend those they called the Brethren or Picards, 
Three sorts of professors in Bohemi●.  many of whom did oppose the Baptism of Infants; but the other two, and the greatest part of the professors in that Nation did own it, as appears by this their profession, which doth not at all weaken our assertion for I presume it will not be denied, that all the 45. Colleges belonging to Bohemia and Moravia, containing many Thousands, were of another persuasion, this being of so late a Date as the 16. Century.  
The other is a passage in that piece called the Spiritual Almanac, owning that they did Baptise their Children, which was written, as supposed, by George Moril about 1530. one of the Ministers sent by the Waldenses of Provence to Occolompadius, Bucer and Capito, to advise with them, being at that time in a very declining Condition, and to that degree so, that very many of them could satisfy themselves with going to Mass, and other their Antichristian Abominations to save themselves provided they kept their Hearts right with God: For which provarication Oecolampadius in his Letter Dated 1530. and sent them back by George Morel, (recorded at large by P. Perin) sharply rebukes and condemns them, and for which they promised reformation, and to suit themselves according to the Documents they received from them, which for the most part since they have done, there being little or no difference between the French and Germane Protestants, 
The Waldenses in France much declined from their Pristine purity.  especially those that own Calvin's way, being most of them shrunk up, (more is the pity) into little more than a bare form; little of the old purity, or power being to be found amongst them, which I conceive cannot at all weaken or enervate their old Confession, practice and witness, confirmed with so great Authority, and for so many Ages together. Neither would I be thought to assert such a universal Harmony; but that 'tis possible there might be some difference amongst some of them, even in this particular, as there were many differences betwixt the Calvinists and Lutherans; but I profess to you ingeniously amongst all my search, excepting these two passages of so late a date, I find none.  
And I must confess I cannot think it reasonable, that any of them that lived up to their Principles could embrace such a thing; for they were so zealously exact, none more for the Letter of the Scriptures, founding all thereon, and rejecting whatever they found not contained therein, whereas this practice by Confession of all sides is not to be found in the Letter of Scripture, and none more severe rejecters of Traditions, and Popish Traditions also, whereof this is such a principal one Thus have we gone through the Waldensian Story, and witness, evidencing a concurring Testimony to this great Truth from first to last.  
By all which you see by plentiful Evidence, that Christ hath not been without his witnesses in every Age, not only to defend and assert the true, but to impugn, and to reject (yea even to death itself) the false Baptism. 
The succession of Believers Baptism  Insomuch that we are not left without good Testimony of a Series of succession, that by God's Providence hath been kept a foot of this Great Ordinance of Believers Baptism even since the first times.  
And in as much as the Ancient Britain's, and the Waldenses have so large a share in this witness, we think it not inconvenient to join the History of the Antiquity and Purity of their Christianity hereto.    
FINIS.   

THE History of Christianity AMONGST The Ancient Britain's and Waldenses; Discovering the Antiquity, Purity and Progress thereof; With their great Sufferings for the same by Popish Antichristian Tyranny and Cruelty.  
THe Ancient Britain's and Waldenses, having born so early and large a part among the Eminent and Faithful Witnesses that have stood up for Christ and his Truths, against Antichrist and his Abominations. I conceive, it may neither be unseasonable, nor altogether unacceptable to give you a brief Historical account of their Christianity, from our best and most approved Authors, whereby it may be manifested, That the Gospel, and the Truths thereof, did flourish in Power and Purity in these Western parts of the World, as received from the purest Times, and were so far from being beholden to the Romish Harlot for Gospel Light and Truth, as she lyingly and vain gloriously boasteth, saying, Where was your Religion, Ministry, Churches, Ordinances before Luther? That she hath all along not only been the abominable Corrupter and Contaminater of the Gospel, and all the parts thereof; But the malicious and murderous Persecutor of all that have sincerely embraced and professed the same: A Consideration not unworthy the present juncture, wherein so much of her poisonous Infection is so afresh cast about: And which you'll find is no small Antidote and Preservative the worthy Usher prescribes against it, in his excellent Piece called, The Succession and State of the Church: Renouncing any the least Succession from whorish Rome, but from these faithful Churches.  
The filthiness of whose Fornications, shall in due time be more and more detected: & that however she may dream of fitting still as a Queen and as the Lady and Mistress of the Nations, yet must she certainly fall both Mother and Daughter, those that help, and those that are helped, yea, as a Millstone into the Sea●: for strong is the Lord God that will judge her. When that Doxology, Rev. 19.1, 2. must be sung by all the Servants of God, that fear his Name, both small and great, Allelujah; Salvation, and Glory, and Honour, and Power unto the Lord our God. For true and righteous are his Judgements, for he hath ●udged the great Whore, who did corrupt ●he Earth with her Fornications, and hath avenged the Blood of his S●●●ants at her hand, Amen. Allelujah.  
The First we begin with is our Countrymen, the Ancient Britain's, 
Of the Britain's.  concerning whom little is to be found from their own Writers, either before, or some Ages after Christ, who either through Ignorance or Sloth, writ nothing; or if they did, were by the Revolutions of Time devoured.  
The most we find is from Strangers, especially the Romans, their first Conquerors: Whose Writings tell us what a Barbarous, Savage People they found them, with their Naked Bodies, and Painted Skins (from whence as Speed saith, 
Why called Brita●ns.  their name of Britain's came, viz. from Brit, Paint; and Tain, a Region.) And so inhuman, that they offered Man's Flesh in their Sacrifices, and kept their Women in Common: But afterwards as the Gospel came and prevailed amongst them, they cast away their Heathenish Abominations; and which was so sincerely embraced by them, and took such deep Rooting amongst them, that they became Instrumental, in several Ages, to Convert, and Conquer their Conquerors to it; viz. Both Romans, Saxons, Danes and Normans.  
Of the Gospel's first Entrance and Progress, we have the following account from the best Authors we meet with; viz. The First I shall mention, giving any account hereof, is our Countryman Gildas, called by Balaeus, Bodonjcus, or Sapiens, the best and mo●t Authentic of all the Ancient- Brit●in Historians, who (in his Book called, De Victoriâ Aurelii Ambrosii) affirmeth, That Britain received the Gospel under Tiberius the Emperor, under whom Christ suffered, and that many Evangelists were sent from the Apostles themselves into this Nation, and that they came first out of France, about the Year 63. and who were the first Planters of the Gospel in this Nation. And again in his Book called De Excidio Britaniae, saith, That the Precepts of Christ, though they were received but lukewarmly of the Inhabitants in general, yet they remained entirely with some, less sincerely with others, until the ninth year of the Persecution under Dioclesian the Emperor, which was above 290. in the third Century.  
Out of an Ancient Book of the Antiquities of England, as Mr. Fox, p. 139. 
Elutherius Epistle to King Lucius.  Part. 1. tells us, we find the Epistle of Eleutherius written to Lucius, the King of Britain, Anno 169. [in answer to his] recorded; By which we understand, that Lucius had embraced the Faith of Christ, who wrote it seems to Elutherius, f r the Roman Laws to govern by, who in his said Epistle, as you may read at large, you have to this purpose; viz. You have received, through God's Mercy, in the Realm of Britain, the Law and Faith of Christ you have with you within the Realm, both the parts of the Scriptures; out of them, by God's Grace, with the Council of your Realm, take ye a Law, and by that Law, through God's sufferance, rule your Kingdom of Britain, etc.  

Tertul.  Tertullian in his Book contra Judaeos, There are places of the Britain's (saith he) which were unaccessible to the Romans, but yet subdued to Christ.  
Origen 
Origen.  in his fourth Hom. on Ezek. saith, The power of God our Saviour, is even with them which in Britain are divided from the World.  

Magdib.  Magdiburg. Cent. 3. Cap. 2. p. 6. We doubt not to affirm, That the Churches of the Island of Britain, did also remain in this Age.  
Balaeus 
Balaeus.  Cent 1. fol. 37. saith, That the British Churches received the Nicen Confession of Faith against the Arians, whence it was that Basil, chrysostom, and others of the Greek Fathers make such frequent and great mention of the British Isles, their reception of the Gospel, and the Divine sense they had of the Power thereof, 
☜  that their Churches also were exactly constituted according to Christ's pattern.  
Jeffry of Monmouth in his Book, 
Jeffr. of Monmou.  de Britanorum Gestis, Lib. 8. c. 4. tells us, That in the Country of the Britain's, Christianity flourished, which never decayed, even from the Apostles Time; amongst whom, saith he, was the preaching of the Gospel, sincere Doctrine, and living Faith, and such Form of Worship, as was delivered to the Christian Churches by the Apostles themselves; and that they, even to Death itself, withstood the Romish Rites and Ceremonies, and that about the Year 448 the English Saxons began to possess Britain, and that about 593, they having made a complete Conquest of the Britain's, began to settle their Heptarchy; That in 596 Gregory, Bishop of Rome, sent Austin the Monk into England, to bring the Saxons into a Conformity to the Church of Rome: For as long as the British Churches possessed the Country, they kept themselves sound in the Faith, and pure in the Worship, Order, and Discipline of Christ, as it was delivered to them from the Apostles, or their Evangelists.  
That they were great Opposers of the Church of Rome, the ancient Bard Taliessyence 
Taliessyence.  in his Welsh Verses, recorded by Bede, and translated by Fuller in his Ecclesiastical History, 1. Book, doth testify, viz. 
Woe be to the Priest yborn,  
That will not cleanly weed his Corn,  
And preach his Flock among.  
Woe be to that Shepherd, I say,  
That will not watch his Fold always,  
As to his Office doth belong.  
Woe be to him that doth not keep  
From Romish Wolves his Sheep  
With Staff and Weapon strong.   
That about the beginning of the Seventh Century, Austin endeavoured to reduce the Britain's, as well as the Saxons, to a Conformity with the Church of Rome; at which time the old Britain's were principally in Wales, where Bangor on the North, and Care-Leon on the South were the two principal Seats, both for Learning and Religion; In Bangor was a College containing 2100 Christians, who dedicated themselves to the Lord, to serve him in the Ministry, as they became capable; To whom was attributed the Name of the Monks of Bangor. Yet did they no ways accord with the Popish Monks of that, or the following Age: For they were not reduced to any Ecclesiastical Order, but were for the most part Laymen, who laboured with their Hands, married and followed their Callings; only some of them, whose Spirits the Lord fi●ted and inclined to his more immediate Service, devoted themselves to the study of the Scriptures, and other holy Exercises, in order to the work of the Ministry: Who sent forth many useful Instruments, Fuller, Lib. 1. p. 40. Balaeus, Cent. 1. c. 70. Many of whom Austin got to a Council he kept about Worcester-shire, where he propounded to them the embracing the Romish Rites, and to join with him in Preaching and Administering in their way, which they refused. Then (as Rob. Fabian 
Fabian.  in his 5th Part, c. 119. fol. 125. tells us, He said to them, Since you will not assent to my Hests generally, assent you to me specially in three things. The First in your keeping Easter- D● 〈◊〉 Form and Time as it is ordered. The Second, That you give Christendom to Children. And the Third, That you Preach to the Saxons, as I have exhorted you. And all the other debate, I shall suffer you to amend and reform amongst yourselves. But, saith he, they would not thereof. To whom then Austin said, That if they would not take peace with their Brethren, They should receive war with their Enemies; And if they disdained to preach with them the way of Life to the English Nation, they should suffer by their hands the revenge of Death: And which Austin accomplishod accorddingly, by bringing the Saxons upon them, to their utter ruin. And thereupon, saith Fabian, that Faith that had endured in Britain for near 400 Years, became near extinct throughout the Land.  
An account of the Destruction of that famous Monastery of Bangor and those worthy Christians inhabiting the same, you have thus briefly from Humphrey Lloyd, 
Humph. Lloyd.  the learned Welsh Antiquary, in his Breviary of Britain, p. 70, 71. as followeth;  
In Denby- Shire, saith he, near the Castle of Holt, is seen the Rubbish and Relics of the Monastery of Bangor, while the glory of the Britain's flourished; In the same were 2100 Monks, very well ordered and learned, divided into seven parts, daily serving God, amongst whom those that were simple and unlearned, by their handy labour, provided Meat, and Drink, and Apparel for the Learned, and such as applied themselves to their studies, and if any thing was remaining, they divided it unto the Poor. That place sent forth (saith he) many hundred of excellently well-learned Men, amongst whom it also vomited forth to the World, Pelagius. And afterwards, by the Envy and Malice of Austin, that arrogant Monk, and the most cruel execution of his Minister Ethelfred. Those worthy Men were destroyed, the whole House, from the very Foundation, together with their Library (more precious than Gold) was razed down, and demolished by fire and sword.  
And hence it is manifest, that this bloody Massacres of those glorioas Witnesses of Christ did arise from their Christian Courage and Zeal against those Antichristian impositions of the Romish Church.  

The History of Christianity amongst the Ancient Waldenses.  

Of the W●●●●●ses.  THe other Historical Account we are to give you, is that of the Waldenses, that eminent and famous Christian People, who have not only given so large a Testimony to the truth before treated; but by the Learned Usher, and many of our Protestant-Writers, are owned to have been the true Church, and from whom the Protestants do derive, in Opposition to the Papacy: Concerning whom, the better to preserve the savour of their precious Memory,  
We shall observe in their Story, this following Method, viz.  
1. Give you an account of their several Names they are known by in History. 2. Their Original and Antiquity. 3. Their excellent and worthy Conversations; as testified by their greatest Enemies. 4. The Progress and Success of the Gospel in their hands a●d the Methods thereof. 5. Their 〈◊〉 it 〈◊〉 W tness against, and great Sufferings under Antichrist, as I have collected them out of the best Historians, both of their own and others. Though as to their own Records (as Perin and Morland inform us) the Papists have used no small industry to raze and obliterate, as they have had the opportunity; though in spite of their utmost malice of that kind, Providence hath preserved something from themselves.  
First, As to the Names, 
Their Names in Story.  by which they are known and distinguished in History, you will find to be various; viz. Sometimes from the Places and Countries of their abode; Sometimes from their Men of Name; sometimes from Reproach and Slander.  
1. From the Places of their abode, 
1. From the places of abode.  therefore called Lyonists, or the poor People of Lions, from that City or County of Lions in France.  
Albigenses, from the City Albi in Languedoc; Tholouzions, from the City toulouse in the same Province; Arletenses, from the City Arles, the chief Seat of the Kings of Burgundy in Province; Picards, from Picardy; Lumbards', from Lombary in Italy; Gazars, either from a City, so call, in Languedock, or from the word of disgrace, signifying Execrable.  

2. From their principal Leaders.  Sometimes by some of their Principal Leaders; as Waldenses, as many suppose from one Waldo a Citizen of Lions; though others suppose upon another account, because they were so called long before his time, as appears by the Book of Claudius Seiscelius a Councillor to Charles the Great, in the 8th Century, who mentions them by that Name, in his Book Advers. Waldenses, who though a good man, and in many things holding with them, yet in some things against them, which was 260 Years before Waldo's time.  

Beringarians.  Sometimes they are called Beringarians, from the famous Beringarius, one of their Barbs, or Elders; sometimes Petro Brusians', from that worthy Martyr Peter Bruis; sometimes Arnoldists, from Arnold, another eminent Barb. and Martyr; sometimes Henericans, from Henericus; sometimes joseplests, from Joseph; Lolarde, from Lolard another of their eminent Barbs.  

3. From Nicknames.  Sometimes by Nicknames, or terms of Disgrace, viz. The Apostolici, or Apostolic men, The Cathart, or Puritans, the old name of reproach, by which the Novatians and Donatists were called in the 4th Cent. Perfectionists, because they pressed after Holiness. Publicanos, because they said, they were sent to publish the Gospel. The Fratracili, or the little Brethren; and Fraticelli, viz. Shifting Companions. Passagenes, from their Itinerat Preach. Credentes, the Believers. The Humiliati, the humble Men. The Bonhomes, the good Men. Siccars, Cutpurses. Gazars, Execrable.  
Turlupins, because like Wolves they inhabited. Woods, Caves, and Mountains.  
Sometimes from slanderous, lying Reflections.  
As the Paterines', as though they only worshipped the Father, but refused to adore the Son; because they would not fall down to the Host, nor give reverence to their Breaden God. And from like reason also Arians, as denying thereby the Divinity of Christ. Manichées, because they denied the Civil Magistrates Authority to depend upon the Popes, as men asserting therefore two Principles. Devyers of Baptism, because they denied that of Bapt. of Infants, and their Inventions to be Christ's Ordinance. Deniers of Marriage, because they disowned that to be one of the Sacraments, and that many of their Barbs lived single Lives.  
Secondly, As to their Original and Antiquity which you will find to be very Antient.  

The Antiquity of their Christianity.  Eusebius tells us in his Ecclesiastical History, Lib. 5. p. 74. That there were Churches of them in those parts of France, under Antonius Verus the Emperor, An. 179. recording there a large Epistle written by them, and as a Preamble thereto, he makes this following Inscription, Of the Martyrdom of Saints, and cruel Persecution in France, under Anton. Verus the Emperor.  
It was the Country of France, wherein the Theatre of this Wrestling,  lay, whose chief Cities and most frequented, in respect of the rest in the same Region, are Lions and Viena, by both which Cities the River Rhodonus doth run, compassing that whole Country: The holy Churches there sent their Letter touching their Martyrs, unto the Churches throughout Asia and Phrygia, making relation of their affairs, after this manner: The Servants of Christ inhabiting Vienna and Lions, Cities of France, unto the Brethren throughout Asia and Phrygia, having with us the same Faith and Hope of Redemption; Peace, and Grace, and Glory from God the Father, and Christ Jesus our Lord be multiplied.  
Which excellent Epistle they mention at large, and which also you may read in the Book of Martyrs.  
In the Preface to the French Bible, 
Morland.  and the first that ever was Prnted, they say, That they have always had the full enjoyment of that Heavenly truth, contained in the Holy Scriptures, ever since they were enriched with the same by the Apostles themselves, having in fair Manuscripts preserved the entire Bible in their Native Tongue, from Generation to Generation, Morland Hist. p. 14.  
Rainerius, 
Rainerius  one of their grand Persecutors, and chief Inquisitor, in the time of Pope Innocent the Third, in the thirteenth Century, gives this account of their Antiquity. Among all the Sects which are, or ever were, thereiss none more pernicious to the Church of God than that of the Poor People of Lions.  
First, Because it is of a longer duration, some say it hath remained from the time of Pope Sylvester, some from the times of the Apostles.  
Theodore Belvedre, 
Balvedre.  another of the Popish Missionaries, saith, that That Religion (which he calls Heresy) hath been always in the Valleys of Angrogna, in his Book De Pro. Fide, p 37.  
Beza 
Beza.  affirms in his Book, History des Homes illustres, That the Waldenses were so called from their abode in the Valleys and straighter parts of the Alps, where they had from a long time retired themselves, and one may say, they were the Relics of the Pure, Primitive, Christian Churches; Some of them were called, The Poor Men of Lions, who as some men have judged had for their Head a Merchant of Lions named John, and surnamed Waldo; but herein they abuse themselves, because on the contrary this John was so named, being one of the Waldenses.  

Scultetus.  The Waldenses in their Letter to Ocolampadius affirm, That their Churches had continued down in constant Succession from the Apostles times, so Scultetus Anal. in Anno 1530. p. 295.  
Beza, 
Beza  as Peter Perin, c. 6. tells us, That the Seed of the most Ancient Christian Church, That was and hath been most miraculously preserved in the midst of the Darkness and Errors which have been hatched by Satan in these later times. And farther tells us, That Constance upon the Revelations showeth, that the Reformation of the Church in the West parts of the World, began in France, and that from their source it spread itself through the rest of Europe.  
In the next place you have some account of their Conversation, 
Of their Conversation.  given by their Enemies themselves.  
Rainerius, 
Reinerius  the Inquisitor aforesaid, saith thus of them, That whereas all others procure horror by their blasphemies against God, this of the Lyonists, hath a greater appearance of Piety, in as much as they live uprightly before men, and put their trust in God in all things, and observe all the Articles of the Creed; only they blaspheme the Church of God, and hold it in contempt, and therein they are easily believed of the People.  
And again Jacob de Riberia Secretary to the King of France, in his Collections of Tholouse, hath these words, viz. The Waldenses, or Lugdenses, have continued a long time; the first place they lived in was in Narbone in France, and in the Diocese of Albie, etc. who disputed of Religion more subtly than all others: were after admitted by the Priests to Teach publicly, not for that they approved their Opinion, but because they were not comparable to them in Wit. In so great honour was the Sect of these men, that they were both exempted from all Charges and Impositions, and obtained more benefit by the Wills and Testaments of the Dead, than the Priests: A man would not hurt his enemy, if he should meet him upon the way, accompanied with one of these Heretics; in so much that the safety of all men seemed to consist in their protection. Du Plessis Mist. Iniquit. p. 331.  
Amongst the Rules and Directions Reinerius gives to discover these Heretics by (as he calls them) these are written by him, as you will find them in the Bib. Pat. printed at Paris, 1624.  

Reinerius.  Heretics, saith he, are known by Words and Manners; They are in Manners composed and modest, no pride in Apparel, because they are therein neither costly nor sordid. They transact their affairs without lying, fraud, and swearing, being most upon Handicrafts Trades: Yea their Doctors, or Teachers are Weavers and Shoemakers, who do not multiply Riches, but content themselves with necessary things: These Lyonists are very chaste and temperate both in Meats and Drinks, who neither haunt Taverns or Stews; They ●o much curb their Passians, they are always either working, teaching, or learning, etc. very frequent in their Assemblies and Worships, etc. They are very modest and precise in their words, avoiding Scurrility, Detraction, Levity and Falsehood. Neither will they say so much as Verily, Truly, nor such like, as bordering too much upon Swearing, as they conceive; but they usually say, Yea and Nay.  
Claudius, 
Claudius.  Archbishop of Turin, in his Treatise against the Waldenses, gives this Testimony of them, That as touching their Lives and Manners they have been always sound, and unreprovable, without reproach or scandal amongst men, giving themselves, to their power, to the observation of the Commandments of God, Perins' H●st. p 40.  
The Cardinal Baronius 
Baronius.  attributeth to the Waldenses of Tholouse, the Title of good men, and that they were a peaceable People, Baron. Tom. 12. An. 1176. 835. However, he elsewhere (saith Perin) imputeth unto them sundry Crimes, and that very falsely.  

The Lord Hailon.  Bernard de Girard, Lord of Haillon, saith in his Histor. of France, Lib. 10. The Waldenses have been charged with wicked things they are not guilty of because, saith he, they stirred the Popes and great Men of the World to hate them for the Liberty of their Speech, which they used in condemning the Vices and dissolute Behaviour of Princes and Ecclesiastical persons.  
Viret, 
Viret.  Lib. 4. c. 13. p. 249. speaks of the Waldenses as followeth,  
The Papists, saith he, have imposed great Crimes, and that very wrongfully, upon those Ancient, Faithful People, commonly called Waldenses, or the poor People of Lions, whose Doctrine makes appear, That the Pope is Antichrist, and that his Doctrine is nothing else but Humane Traditions, contrary to the Doctrine of Christ Jesus; For which cause they have dealt against them, as the Ancient paynims did against the Christians, accusing them that they killed their own Children in their Assemblies.  
Many more Evidences might be brought from their Enemies, who have been enforced, by the force of Truth itself, to give most honourable reports of them; But let this suffice.  
The next thing we shall acquaint you with, 
The Progress of the Gospel amongst them.  is the great Progress and Success of their Doctrine.  
Bullinger tells us, That not only throughout France, but Italy, Germany, Poland, Bohemia, and other Countries and Kingdoms of the World, the Waldenses have made profession of the Gospel of Christ Jesus. Bullin. in the Preface to his Sermons.  
Rainerius 
Rainerius  saith, That another thing that makes this Sect more considerable than all others, is because it is more general; For there is not any Country almost, whereinto this Sect hath not crept.  
Math. Paris 
M. Paris.  saith, in his History of the Life of Henry the 3d in the year 1223. That the Waldenses had goodly Churches in Bulgaria, Croatia, Dalmatia and Hungaria.  
George Mrel in his Memorials, p. 54. asserts, That notwithstanding all the bloody Persecutions, that attended the Waldenses, That in the Year 1160. There was in those days above eight hundred thousand Persons, that made profession of the Faith of the Waldenses.  
The Sea of Histories 
Sea of History.  tells us, That in the Year. 1315. there was in the County of Passau, and about Bohemia, to the number of fourscore Thousand Persons, that made Profession of the Faith of the Waldenses.  
Le Sieur de Popeliniere 
Popleniere.  hath set down in his History, That the Religion of th● Waldenses hath spread itself almost in all parts of Europe, even amongst the Polonians, etc. And that after the Year 1100 they have always sowed their Doctrine, little differing from that of the Modern Protestant, and maugre all the Powers and Potentates that have opposed themselves against them, they have defended it to this day.  

Rainer.  Rainerius saith, That in his time there were Churches of them in Constantinople, Philadelphia, Sclavonia, Bulgaria, and Digonicia, and in Albania, Lombardy, Milan, and in Romagna, Venice, Florence, etc.  
Vignier 
Vignie●.  saith, That after the Persecution of Picardy, that they were dispersed abroad in Livonia and S●rmatia.  
Trithemius 
Trith●m  recounts, That they confessed in those times, that the number of the Waldenses was so great, that they could go from Cologne to Milan, and lodge themselves with Hosts of their own Profession, and that they had Signs upon their Houses and Gates, whereby they might know them.  
In the Year 1200. they were in such a manner multiplied, that they possessed at home the Cities of Tholouse, Apamies, Montauban, Vill●mur, St. Antoin, Puech Laurence, Castres', Lambs, Carcasonen, Beziers, Narbonne, Beaucaire, Avignion, Tarascon, the Count Venicin, in Dauphine, Crest Arnaud, and Monteil Amar. And had many great Lords who took part with them, as Earl Raimiand of Tholouse, and the Earl of Foix, the Viscount Beziers, Gaston Lord of Berne, Earl of Carmaine, and Earl of Brigor; The Kings also of Arragon and England too, d●d many times defend their Cause, by reason of their Alliance with Earl Ra●miand, Hologary in the History of Foix.  

The means they used to propagate the Gospel.  The means by which Truth came to be so propagated by them, were principally these; First, By the diligent care they had to instruct their Youth in the knowledge of the Scriptures, and to train them up in the Nurtriture, Fear and Admonition of the Lord, as the Nurseries, Seminaries, and Seed-plots of Grace and Truth.  
Secondly, The industrious Care and Pains they took, not only to beget Ministerial Abilities, but the due improvement made thereof, by those engaged therein, in all parts and places whither they were sent.  
And Thirdly, By the violent Persecutions of them, whereby they came to be dispersed into most parts of the World, that old way, That Knowledge and Truth was propagated in the Primitive Times.  

1. By diligently instructing the Youth.  The First means blest for the increase of Knowledge, was the Care and Pains they took in the Catechising of their Youth, instructing them in the Knowledge of the Scriptures. 
P. Perrin.  Perrin in his Second Book, p. 16. And in this it was, saith he, 
P. Perrin.  that they have been blest of God, above all Christian People throughout Europe, insomuch that their Infants were hardly weaned from their Mother's Breasts, but their Parents took a singular Care and Diligence to instruct them in the Christian Faith and Doctrine, until they were able to confound the Ancient and the Learned. And of which you have a very pregnant Instance out of Vessember, 
Vessember.  in his Oration touching the Waldenses, who tells us, The Bishop of Cavaillon, in the time of the great Persecution against the Waldenses of Merindal in Provence, first sent a Monk among them, to convert them; who returned so convinced himself, that he confessed, he had not so much profited in his whole life in the Scriptures, as he had done in those few days of Conference with them. The Bishop not being satisfied with this trial, sent a Company of young Doctors that came lately from Sorbonne, to confound them by the Subtlety of their Question; But one there was among the rest, that said at his return, with a loud voice, That he had learned more touching the Doctrine necessary to Salvation, in attending to the Answers of the little Children of the Waldenses in their Catechise, than in all the Disputations of Divinity which he had ever heard in Paris. Then the Bishop sent for the Children themselves, and caused them in the face of a great Assembly to be interrogated, and to Question one with another, and which was done with that Grace, and Gravity, and Understanding, that it was marvellous to hear: to the confounding the Doctors and Learned Men then present. The Story whereof you may read at large in Fox Martyrol. 2 Book, p. 194.  
And thus it was that every Family was as it were a College, to instruct into the true Learning, that maketh wise to Salvation, and furnisheth to every good Word and Work, and which was the Seedplot to their Ministry.  
Rainarius 
Rainarius  tells us, That they had the Old and New-Testament in the Vulgar Tongue, and that they Teach and Learn it so well, That he had seen and heard, he said, a Country Clown recount all Job, word for word; and divers others, that could perfectly deliver all the New Testament; And that Men and Women, little and great, day and night cease not to Learn and to Teach.  
Secondly, 
2. By improving their Ministry.  As to the way of their Ministry, That special means appointed by God to beget Faith, and increase Knowledge, you have it briefly set forth by P. Perrin, as he had extracted it out of their ancient Manuscripts, viz. All those who are to be received as Pastors amongst us, while they remain with their Brethren, are to entreat our People to receive them into the Ministry, as likewise that they would please to pray to God for them, that they may be made worthy of so great a Charge; and this they are to do, to give a Proof, or Evidence of their Humility. We also appoint them their Lectures, and set them their Tasks, that they may get by heart, not only all the New Testament, but a great part of the Old, viz. The Writings of Solomon, David, and the Prophets; And afterwards having a good Testimonial, and being well approved of, they are received with Imposition (or laying on of Hands) and Preaching. He that is received the last, aught to do nothing without the permission of him that was received before him; and in like sort, the former aught to do nothing without the consent of his Associate. Our daily Food, and that Raiment wherewith we are covered, we have ministered and given to us freely, sufficient for us, by the good people whom we Teach and Instruct.  
Their Ministers were called Barbes or Uncles, as Fox, 186. Or as some suppose, because bearded Men, Elders or Fathers. 
Vignier.  Of these some were married, to manifest thereby their approbation of the state of Matrimony; others kept themselves single for conveniences sake, forasmuch as they were ofttimes obliged to remove and shift their Habitations and Abodes; and as occasion required, to undertake long and tedious Voyages, for the propagating of the Gospel, in remote and far Countries, with whom they had a particular and constant Correspondence; namely into Bohemia, Germany, Calabria and Lombary, whither the abovesaid Barbes went by turns as Iteneraries, to visit their Brethren there, and to preach the Gospel of Christ amongst them, having not only Houses of their own to entertain their Barbes, but Schools also in divers Countries. Vign. Mem. p. 15.  

Morland.  Those Barbes who remained at home in the Valleys (besides their officiating and labouring in the work of the Ministry) took upon them the disciplining and instructing of the Youth, especially those who were appointed for the Ministry, in Grammar, Logic, Moral Philosophy and Divinity. Moreover the greatest part of them gave themselves to the study of Physic and Chirurgery, and herein they excelled (as their Histories tell us) to admiration, thereby rendering themselves most able and skilful Physicians, both of Soul and Body. Others of them deal in divers Mechanic Arts, in imitating of Paul, who was a Tentmaker, and Christ himself, who was a Carpenter. Once in the Year they use to have a general Meeting in the Month of September, to treat of their affairs. Taken out of an Ancient Italian Manuscript, as you have it, morland's Hist. 1 Book, 8. c. p. 183.  
Bucer, 
Bucer.  p. 159. saith, Besides Ministers of the Word and Sacraments, they have a certain College of Men excelling in Prudence and Gravity of Spirit, whose office it is to admonish and correct offending Brethren, to compose such as disagreed, and judge in their Causes.  
And again in morland's 
Morland.  Hist. p. 179. Their Ministry were through God's grace endued with excellent Spirits, and were for the most part, a Generation of humble, holy, and harmless Men, of meek, peaceable and quiet Tempers, exceeding painful in their Calling, and carefully watching over their Flock committed to their charge. Labouring faithfully in the Lord's Vineyard, and employing their whole Time and Talents for turning Souls unto Righteousness, which they did with much Labour, Watch, and Fast; by suffering many Buffet, Stripes, and Imprisonments, yea and many times by Death itself; Sealing 〈◊〉 Truths they Preached to others with ●●●ir own Blood: In sum, they were men ●ortified to all the Pomp, Glories, and Riches, to all the Pleasures, Honours, and Preferments that this World could afford them; having their Conversations as Strangers, Pilgrims, and Sojourners here bilow, conforming themselves, as near as they could, to the Scripture-pattern and Example of the Apostles, and proportionable thereto were their Labours blest, and succeeded to admiration in all places where they came.  
Perin H●st. p. 16. Their Pastors, saith he, did not only content themselves to exhort them on the Sabbath- days, but went all the Week to instruct them in their Villages, Preaching also in the Fields to the keepers of the flocks.  
The other way whereby the Gospel was thus promoted and spread, 
3. By their great Sufferings.  was by the great Sufferings and Persecutions that attended them, especially from the 12th Century downwards; For till then, as observed by Fox, Ʋsher, and others, there was more Calmness and Serenity, Satan being as it were bound, as they conceived; and the Reason thereof a Learned Pen observes to be, That Antichrist till about this time was not arrived to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or perfect stature, having now attained as well a Temporal as Spiritual Sovereignty; his temporal Advantages accrued most to him by the Donation of Pippin and Charles the Great, etc. And his Spiritual not only by the Establishment of the several Orders of the Regular Monks and Friars, viz. The Benedictines, Franciscans, and Dominicans, which much advanced and strengthened the Popish Usurpations; But the Ratification of the Canon Law about this time collected by Gratian, as also the Sophistical School Divinity now begun by Lombard, Aquinas, and Albertus Magnus that gave no small addition thereto. Now it was they durst cope with Kings and Emperors for Sovereignty, and assert their Bloody Idolatrous Masses, Images, Breaden God, with all Force, Cruelty, and Violence imaginable.  
Against whose Pride, Pomp, Idolatry, and Antichristian Usurpation, doth the Lord raise up these his Witnesses, even these poor, mean, contemptible People, who by asserting and maintaining Christ's Ministry and Ordinances, according to the Simplicity and Plainess of the Scriptures, faithfully do oppose, impugn and confront all the Popish Traditions, Usurpations, and Inventions, in all their Grandeur. And so it may be said, That against the Beast and his Armies doth the Lamb and his Army oppose themselves.  
The Waldenses now standing up with a loud Voice, do call upon all to come out of Babylon, to have no Fellowship or Communion with her; detecting her to be that Abomination that was to sit in the Temple of God, and that should corrupt the Earth with her Filthiness; And about this time it was that that most excellent Piece touching Antichrist was brought forth by them, which deserves to be written in Letters of Gold, supposed to be written by Peter Bruis, the famous French Martyr, and which hath been preserved in all Ages since, by the Waldenses in the Alps, whence Perin tells us he received it, and which he hath Printed at large, Par. 3. Lib. 3. c. 1. 
An Extra●t of their Treatise of Antichrist.  In which Treatise we have Antichrist described to be the Mystery of Iniquity, or a Lie under the cloak of Truth.  
2. It is said, That this Antichrist is not one single Person, but a Confederacy of Iniquity, in opposition to Christ, etc.  
3. This Contrariety of Antichrist to Christ, consists, (1.) In his Worldly Wisdom. (2.) His Pharisaical Religion. (3.) Managing Spiritual Power by Secular Tyranny, Riches, Dignity, etc. (4.) By filling up the Churches of Christ with carnal Worldlings.  
4. That the perfection of Antichrist consists in a full Usurpation of the Authority of Christ, according to 2 Thes. 2.4.  
5. That the work of Antichrist is to change Truth into Error, and Error into Truth. (2.) To rob Christ of his Merits, etc. (3.) Placing Sanctification of the Spirit in externals, and Grace and Salvation in the work done. (4.) Neglecting Discipline. (5.) By maintaining Unity by Tyranny.  
6. The Subterfuges of Antichrist are laid open, and its Causes.  
7. The moving Causes and Scriptures loudly calling to come out from, and not to touch her, etc.  
By such like Exasperations did the Popes, whose Interest & Grandeur was thus struck at, come forth now with all the Subtlety, Malice, and Revenge, that Hell and their Devilish Natures could invent, and that by several Methods and Stratagems to crush and suppress Truth; which the more they endeavoured, the more it throve and got ground, and increased in the Nations; The Blood of the Martyrs proving the Seed of the Church.  
Whose cunning, murderous Designs were much after this sort; 
the several ways of their persecutions  First, The ●he better to discover their Persons and Principles, they sent forth Missionaries in all points to imitate them, in a plain, humble way to go up and down afoot amongst them, to dispute with them, to preach to them, to gain upon them; of this sort was Francis, Dominick, and Benedict, for whose excellent Service then, they have since Sainted, and set up Orders in their Names, in imitation of the poor People of Lions, or as they would be thought, in an Apostolic guise: But when that would not do, when they could neither flatter, dispute, nor preach them out of the Truth, than they.  
Secondly came forth with Synodical Censures, Condemnations, anathemas and Curses, Pope's Bulls and Decretals, with Emperor's Statutes, Decrees, and Injunctions. But they nothing prevailing,  
In the next place, Thirdly, They sent our their Inquisitors, empowered and commissioned to Examine, Censure and Condemn, and to deliver up to the Secular Powers to all manner of Tortures and cruel Deaths, which they exercised with great Severity, but all in vain.  
Fourthly, They betook themselves to Surprises and Massacres, and to stir up Kings and Princes to raise Armies, to suppress, and root up this Generation, and by Fire and Sword to lay waste their Cities and Countries; which they did with great Devastation, especially in Province, Dauphin, Languedoc; But the effect was, as they drove them out of one Country and Place, they went into others; and where ever they came, they still met with the same measure from that spirit: But God carried them through wonderfully, so that they could rejoice and glory in their Tribulations, that they were accounted worthy to suffer for Christ's sake, and whose titles of Honour, as they say in the Preface of their Bible, were Injured, Reproached, Fugitives, Forsaken, Despised, Abandoned, Excommunicated, Anathematised, Confiscated, Imprisoned, Tortured, Banished, publicly disgraced, wearing Mitres in Derision, spit upon, shown upon Scaffolds, their Ears cut off, their Flesh plucked off with Pincers, drawn with Horses, dragged up and down, broiled, roasted, stoned to Death, burnt, drowned, beheaded, dismembered, and other like glorious and honourable Titles, they say, of the Kingdom of Heaven.  
But the more they designed to suppress Truth by these means, the more it thrive; These worthy Confessors being found Overcomers by the Blood of the Lamb, and word of their Testimony, not loving their Lives unto the Death; as it was experienced in the several Countries, in the several Ages hereafter mentioned, as at large is given you in P. Perrins Hist. Viz.  
The Sufferings of the Waldenses Churches in Dauphine, in the 12, 13, 14, and 15 Cent. Chap. 3.  
Their Sufferings in Pi●dmont in the 14, 15, 16 Cent. ch. 4.  
Their Sufferings in the Marquisate de Saluces, 16, 17 Cent. c. 5.  
Their Sufferings in the New Lands, 16 Cent. c. 6.  
Their Sufferings in Calabria, 14. and 16. Cent. c. 7.  
Their Sufferings in Province, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, Cent. c. 8.  
Their Sufferings in Bohemia, 15 Cent. c. 9  
Their Sufferings in Austria, 14, and 15. Cent. c. 10.  
Their Sufferings in Germany, 13, 14, 15. Cent. c. 11.  
Their Sufferings in England, 12, 13 Cent. c. 12.  
Their Sufferings in Flaunders, 13 Cent. ● 13.  
Their Sufferings in Poland, 12, 14. Cent. Chap. 14.  
Their Sufferings in Paris, 13, 14. Cent. c. 15.  
Their Sufferings in Italy, 13, 14, 15. Cent. Chap. 16.  
Their Sufferings in Dalmatia, Croatia, Sclavonia, Constantinople, Greece, Philadelphia, Digonicia, Livonia, Sarmatia, Bulgaria, in the 13. Cent. c. 17.  
Their Sufferings in Spain. 13. C. c. 18.  
Their Sufferings by the cruel Wars managed against them by Pope Innocent the Third for eighteen Years together, in conjunction with many Kings and Princes, in the 13 Cent. together with other Wars carried on by other Popes and Kings of France and Spain in the 13 and 14 Cent. with the wonderful detriment that accrued also to the Enemy, who lost sometimes an Hundred Thousand Men at a Siege, you have largely set forth in Perrin's Hist. of the Albigenses, in 2 Books. Their Sufferings at Merindal & Cabriers by Fox, p. 201. vol. 2. Their late Sufferings in our time by the Duke of Savoy, in the Valleys of Piedmont, 1655. is largely set forth by Sir Samuel Morland, who was the Agent sent with the English Contribution.  
Having thus finished the Historical Account of these Eminent Worthies, I cannot but again remember you, That this was the People that bore so great a witness for Believers, and so firmly opposed Infants Baptism, as by so many Arguments in the Seventh Chapter is made good to you.    

A Postscript.  
UPon the closing of my Papers, Mr. Bunions Book in Answer to Mr. Paul's coming to hand [called Differences about Baptism no Far to Communion] defending still, That Churches may and aught to hold Fellowship with Unbaptised Persons.  
I took myself concerned, having briefly hinted to his former, to give some short return to this also, leaving his manifold Absurdities, Contradictions, unbrotherly Taunt and Reflections, Contemptions, traducings the wisdom of Christ, and his holy Appointments, to be called to account by that hand, that hath so well begun to reckon with him.  
The little that I shall do herein, is not to trace him in his Meanders, or to answer his Reflections with Reflections, but in a few things to discover, how he hath darkened Counsel by words without Knowledge, and whilst he pretends Brotherly love, violates the very Law of Charity, and under pretence of pleading for Truth, introduceth heinous Error, and fundamentally mistakes himself in both his Books.  
Five of Six of which Fundamental Mistakes are here detected, and which, I conceive, may be as full an Answer to both his Books, as if Volumes w●re written thereto▪ For according to the Maxim, Frustra fit per plura, quod fieri potest per panciora; In vain we do that by much, which may be done by less: which therefore take as followeth, viz.  
Mr. Bunians Fundamental Mistakes.  

1. Asserts Principles without Scripture to warrant them  First, By asserting that for a Principle and Practice in the Worship of God, that hath neither footing nor Foundation in the Word of God, and for which neither Precept nor Example is produced to warrant it.  
A Presumption, than which as nothing can savour more of Ignorance and Folly, Isai. 8.20. Jer. 8.9. so nothing more dangerous and destructive to Religion itself, as Mark 7.7, 8, 9  
Secondly, 
2. Positively contradicts Scripture Precepts and Practice  In so positively thwarting and contradicting not only the Wisdom and Authority of Christ in his Commission, who enjoins Baptism to be the next thing after Faith and Conversion, Matth. 28.19.  
But the constant Practice of the Saints in obedience to it. As for instance, Acts 2.41. it is said, Then (viz. immediately) they that gladly received his Word were baptised, and the same Day added, and so continued in Fellowship, and breaking of Bread, etc. Where you have the direct Order kept, 1. Teaching. 2. Baptising. Then 3. Church Fellowship, and Breaking of Bread, which is the standing Directory to the World's end, and not Teaching, Church-Fellowship, and then Baptism after.  
So Acts 22.16. Ananias exhorts Paul, after his Confession, to arise and be baptised, with a Why tarriest thou? Though he had eaten nothing of three days, Acts 9.9. being a Duty that admits not of Delays. It was not, Arise, and go and break Bread with the Church, but, Arise and be Baptised in the first place.  
And therefore the Jailor, Act. 16.33. must after his conversion, straightway, yea, in that same hour of the night, without further delay, be baptised, as a thing not to be neglected for a moment.  
And so also Cornelius in Acts 10.47. though he was Baptised so eminently with the Spirit, yet must forthwith be commanded to be baptised with Water, a thing by no means to be deferred, as Peter's words imply, who upon his seeing him so filled with the Spirit, saith, Can any man forbidden Water that these should not be Baptised, etc. No sure, no man of Knowledge or Conscience, can do it, or will admit of delays therein.  
And the reason hereof is plain, Because this was the Listing, Espousing, Covenanting, Engrafting, Implanting Ordinance; Believers being expressly said hereby to be planted into Christ, Gal. 3.27. and Baptised into Christ, Rom. 6.3. And which Baptising and Planting into Christ, is no other but an Orderly entering into the Visible Church, or Body of Christ, as so fully expressed, 1 Cor. 12.12. An Order faithfully to be observed as a Fundamental Practice, Heb. 6.2. & which must be kept, Eph. 2.21. and duly regarded, 1 Cor. 11.1, 2. upon the severe penalties threatened, Mat. 5.19. 2 Joh. 9 Act. 3.22, 23.  
And which lies so full and clear in the Scriptures, that it hath obtained an universal Consent by most that have owned the Christian Religion, and in any Form professed the same, whether Papists, Protestants, Independants, Baptists. In so much that Mr. Baxter himself in his plain Scripture proof, p. 126. saith, That if any shall be so impudent as to say, it is not the meaning of Christ, that Baptising should immediately follow Discipling, they are confuted by the constant Example of Scripture. So that, saith he, I dare say, this will be out of doubt with all rational, considerate, impartial Christians.  
So that Mr. Bunian, in his opposing this Principle, may well be said, Not only not to please God, but to be contrary to all men. And whose return to Mr. Paul hereupon is so ridiculous, that it may not be unworthy your knowledge, as witnessing either his egregious Ignorance, or Self-condemnation therein, which I shall give you in his own words, p. 98. who first sets down Mr. P. Question, viz. Whether your Principle and Practice is not equally against others, as well as us, viz. Episcopal, Presbyterians, and Independants, who are also of our side for our practice, though they differ with us about the subject of Baptism, (viz. 1. to Baptise, then to Communicate) Do you delight to have your hand against every man?  

Bun. Ans.  B. Answ. I own Water-Baptism to be God's Ordinance, but I make no Idol of it. Where you call now the Episcopal to side with you, and also the Presbyterian, etc. You will not find them easily persuaded to conclude with you against me, they are against your manner of Dipping, as well as Subject of Water-Baptism; neither do you, for all you flatter them, agree together in all but the Subject; Do you allow their Sprinkling? Do you allow their Signing with the Cross? Why then have you so stoutly an hundred times over condemned these things as Antichristian? I am not against every man, though by your abusive Language you would set every one against me; but am for Union, Concord and Communion with Saints as Saints, and for that cause I wrote my Book.  
This is that he calls his Answer; but let all the world judge, whether he hath so much as once taken the least notice of the Question.  
Mr. Paul tells him, his Principle and Practice opposes all those named as us, viz. Who do own with us as a principle, that Baptism should precede Church-Fellowship; and therefore in their sense of Baptism (which is not in the Question, either as to Subject or Circumstance) do practise it accordingly, not admitting any Unbaptised Person into their Fellowship. And the truth whereof, if Mr. Bunian doubt, besides their Writings, I could give him some late instances of grown persons, not Sprinkled in Infancy, that must not be admitted upon account of their Saintship into Fellowship, till they had Water sprinkled, or poured upon their faces, and that by some that he hath leaned upon as Patrons.  
But what doth he reply to this, how doth he acquit himself from this Singularity, so differing in Principle and Practice from all? They differ from you in the manner, as well as the subject. I am not against every man— but am for Union, Concord and Communion with Saints. But would any Child, that could say any thing for itself, have made a more ignorant Return; therefore you may judge of the rest by it. But to the next.  

3. That Ignorance absolves from Sins of Omission and Commission.  A Third Fundamental Mistake is his presumptuous asserting all along, That Ignorance doth absolve both from the Sin of Omission and Commission, and which not only justifies the neglect of the true, but the Exercise of false Worship; and not only bears out in rejecting of Christ's, but the embracing of Antichrists appointments; and that not only to give a Dispensation to the parties themselves thus transgressing, but to the Congregation also that shall Receive and bear with them. A Rule, if observed, what corrupt Doctrine or Practice might not be introduced thereby? And which may pass for as good Doctrine, as theirs of old, if they could but say Corbon, they might be set free from their dutiful Obligation to their Parents, 
4 By decrying Institutions, by crying up Moral Precepts.  Mark 7.11.  
A Fourth is, That under pretence of crying up Obedience to the X. Commandments, or moral Precepts, he takes the boldness to decry and trample under foot Christ's instituted Worship, as though it were possible to be guilty of false Worship and Idolatry, and not violate the first and second Commandment. Did not such daring Presumption cost Israel dear, in their following the Rebellions Inventions of Jeroboam the Son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin? and what was that helnous provetation, but the perverting the right way of the Lord, by changing part of his Instituted Worship.  
A Fifth is, 
5. That the Churches to whom the Epistles were written, were not all baptised  His asserting that the Churches in the New Testament, to whom the Epistles were written, were not all Baptised; to the vacating all the holy Exhortations and spiritual Obligations inferred and enforced from the same, almost in every Epistle: and which he grounds upon his vain Imagination, That because it is said, Gal. 3.27. As many of you as have been baptised into Christ, have put on Christ. And Rom. 6.3. Know you not, that so many of you as have been baptised into Christ, were baptised into his Death; implying that the words so many, import that some were not.  
Not considering that the S●●p● and the Argument from the words, which do necessarily enforce another sense; and that such a sense, as he would put upon them, is altogether groundless and unreasonable: as for instance, in Gal. 3.27. He tells them that they are all the Children of God, baptised into Christ. For the Apostle having said vers. 26. That they were all the Children of God, he in the next words gives the reason of what he had said; for they had put on Christ by Baptism.  
But now if their putting on of Christ in Baptism was to be esteemed as a proof of their Relation to God as Children, as the Apostle, you see, makes it to be, Then that which he gives in by way of Reason and proof that they were all the Children of God by Faith, would fall shor● of ●his end, if only a part of the Members of their Churches had been Baptised, and not all.  
And so in like manner in that other Text, he presseth a general Duty, viz. Mortification and Vivification, from a general and universal Practice, otherwise those Duties would not in this Ambient concern the Unbaptised. And by as good Argument may we conclude, that because the Apostle commands, that as many Servant's a● are under the yoke, should count their own Masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God be not blasphemed; That some Servants, by the same inference might be under the yoke, and some not, and that some must honour their Masters, and some might choose.  
Sixthly, By his declaring so often, 
6. That Baptism is no Church-Ordinance.  and so positively, That Baptism is not a Church-Ordinance, whereby he bears up himself exceedingly in his Notion: To which I would say, It must either be an Ordinance lest by Christ for the Church to manage and order, or to the World, for I know no medium: But that he left no such holy Appointment to be managed by the ignorant profane World, but to the Church only, I thus prove. 1. Because he hath committed the Ministry to them to Teach and Convert, which must precede Baptism, and qualify for it. 2. That to the Church belongs ordinarily to receive the account of such Conversion, that it may be better understood, whether the Party desiring Baptism, doth believe with all the heart; and that he hath brought forth fruits meet for Repentance, before he be baptised with the Baptism of it. 3. That to them belongs the appointing of the Administrators and faithful Witnesses to see it orderly performed; otherwise Women, Apostates, or any, as some hold, may do it: God is a God of Order, and not of Confusion. And all things are to be done to Edification. 4. Because it is an entrance and door into the Visible Church, as hath been amply in the foregoing Treatise proved, and the foregoing Scriptures evidence, and which is so clear, saith Mr. Baxter, that they must deny Scripture that deny it. It is true (as Mr. Paul affirms) that Persons entered into the Visible Church hereby, are by consent admitted into particular Congregations, where they may claim their Privileges due to Baptised Believers, being orderly put into the Body, and put on Christ by their Baptismal Vow and Covenant, for by that public Declaration of consent is the Marriage and solemn Contract made betwixt Christ and the Believer in Baptism, as before at large. And if it be propostrous and wicked for a Man and Woman to cohabite together, and to enjoy the Privileges of a Marriage-state, without the passing of that public Solemnity; So it is no less disorderly upon a Spiritual account, for any to claim the Privileges of a Church, or be admitted to the same till the passing of this Solemnity by them.  
But 'tis not done in the Church? No more is Visiting the Sick, or anointing with Oil, are they not therefore Church-Ordinances?  
If any desire further Satisfaction upon this Argument, they may peruse two Treatises, one written by Mr. Allen, called, Baptismal Abuses discovered, Disproving the Lawfulness of Infants, and verity of Believers Baptism, with the irregularity of mixed Communion, Baptised and Unbaptised, written 1653. The other by Mr. Lamb, called Truth prevailing against the fiercest opposition, upon the same subject, the same Year, both answering Mr. John Goodwin opposing the same. And which are done with that Judgement, strength of Argument, and Authority of Scripture, that notwithstanding they have both of them personally declined those Truths, so zealously and understandingly pleaded for by them, and gone back to that they therein call Humane Tradition, Will-Worship, and Idolatry, fulfilling Dan. 11.35. Pro. 28. 4● Gal. 2.18. 1 Pet. 2.21, 22. Yet will their Books, not only live as a Witness for God, and his reproached Truths, but as a living Testimony against themselves, in their unreasonable and unrighteous Departure from the same, (without Repentance) to all Generations.  
FINIS.