Infant-Baptisme JUSTIFIED BY A NEW DISCOVERY: And also, Several Scripture Allegories adjusted upon the like Account.  
By WILLIAM PARKER Clerk, Incumbent of WROTHAM In KENT.  
London, Printed for the Author. 1668.   

To the Reader.  
Courteous Reader,  
AS necessity brought, and brings forth the investigation of all Arts, (especially Mechanic) and perfects them; So a kind of necessity puts us upon this attempt, which we offer unto thee in reference to Infant-Baptism; otherwise we had not put manum ad tabulant, to declare what we have offered on God's behalf for his allowance of the practice of Infant-Baptism upon the accounts respectively, betwixt it and Circumcision in general, and betwixt Infant-Circumcision and Infant-Baptism in special, to be considered in their Administrations respectively.  
The said necessity is, for that we have been scandalised, and impleaded at Law for Printing (as it's feigned) in a certain Book called The late Assembly of Divines Confession of Faith examined concerning Infant-Baptism.  
Where there is nothing, we do appeal to all intelligent and  bystanders to give evidence against us, if there be any thing Printed against it in the said Book, when it's examined what we have replied to a certain Section in their Chapter of Baptism, which they have there laid down and declared.  
Their assertion in the fourth Section of the said Chapter, is, That not only those that do actually profess Faith in, and Obedience to Christ; but also the Infants of one or both believing Parents, (for so they order it) are to be Baptised.  
To that aforesaid we have replied, and tell them, that the said assertion (so disposed in order, and so magisterially laid down as it is) we say it's too far dipped in error; the reason why we use the said express (Dipped) is, for that it's an allusion to their own express Dipped, Sect. 3.  
And truly there, their fourth assertion is Dipped in error upon a twofold account; one the lesser, (yet an error) the other the greater, which they are guilty of; the lesser is the point of Order and Method; For they say the Infants of one, or both believing Parents are to be Baptised, which is à dictum frustra, and immethodical; For if it be true, that Infants of one believing Parent are to be Baptised, then much more of both believing Parents must be in rationality understood to be Baptised; Therefore to lay down Infant-Baptism of believing Parents in that Order aforesaid, is immethodicè dictum; For it's an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, against method; for if one of Believing Parents, then much more of both aught to be Baptised.  
This aforesaid we do but hint, for that it's but a Criticism from our observation, though re verâ, true, against Order and Method, as it is disposed by them in their said assertion.  
And as for their further asserting that Infants are to be Baptised, but not so much as taking notice, and expressing in what respect Infants of believing Parents are to be Baptised, is a great failing in defectu ex omissione, for that there are two modes or respects to be considered in Baptising Infants. One is, as it's expressly commanded in Scripture to Baptise Infants. The other, as it is not forbidden in Scripture.  
Both these respects aforesaid, aught to have been considered by them and declared, whether they do mean as it's commanded expressly in Scripture (or as it's not expressly forbidden) to Baptise Infants.  
Now for them to impose, as they do in their said assertion, a kind of necessity of Baptising Infants; saying, Infanss of such and such, are to be Baptised, and not declaring in what respect they are to be Baptised, either as commanded, or not forbidden. This may occasion much error, for that it may make many to mistake their meaning upon the account aforesaid, in reference unto the two said respective modes or manners of Baptising Infants.  
For who can tell, (but themselves) since they deelare it not in what of the two modes they intent their said assertion to be taken, (viz.) that Infants are to be Baptised  
Hence we come with our Reply, and say, their said assertion is two far Dipped in error, being too loosely and too generally laid down by them, in that they name not the mode or manner how, or in what respect Infants are to be Baptised, for that (as we reply) Infants are not where in express terms commanded to be Baptised.  
Yet they may (as we presently after say) be Baptised, for that Infant-Baptism is not where forbidden; and also for that their being Baptised may be to as good purpose (as we shall by and by demonstrate) to others at present, and to themselves afterward if occasion serve, as ever Infant-Circumcision was administered for.  
So that it appears, that what we have there replied unto their said assertion, is, and must be comprehended in a compound discreet axiom, which contains the totum integrale of what we have said, constituted in two distinct modes, manners or respects, in and upon which Infants are not to be, or may be Baptised.  
And further, we say in reference to their 5. Section, that to deny Infant-Baptism in the countries' and places where the Christian Magistrates require and command it to be done, there to deny it (we say) is a Sin of contumacy against those Magistrates, for that obedience to Magistrates is absolutely commanded, Rom. 13. and Infant-Baptism is not where forbidden, and for that it may be done upon so good an account, as aforesaid.  
From all aforesaid, the intelligent and impartial by-stander may observe simplici & uno intuitu, that we have not Printed omnino, altogether against Infant-Baptism, but only against one mode or manner of Baptising Infants, as not commanded in express Scripture, but owned in the other mode as it's not forbidden.  
Hence if our accusers had had so much discretion in them, as to distinguish of a discreet axiom, in which all that we have said in reference to Infant-Baptism is disposed and laid down as aforesaid, they would have blushed to have impleaded us to Print, especially altogether against Infant-Baptism, for that a discreet axiom consists always of a negative and affirmative, or affirmative and negative, wherein it's disposed, at least it always consists of two dissentany or disagreeing parts, in which one of them only is true, the other is not; as for instance, Nabal was a rich man, but a Fool; Abraham was a rich Man, yet a wise Man.  
Where we see in those two instances two differing parts respectively, both parts disagreeing respectively in each, as rich, but differing in both other parts respectively, in reference to wisdom and folly; Abraham being a rich Man, and Wise; But Nabal a rich Man, yet a Fool; but they might have been respectively one like the other in Riches and Wisdom, and in Riches and Folly, for that both are contingent and not necessary axioms, because they might have been otherwise then they are. Hence such axioms are called discreet axioms, differing only in some Logical respects in their parts and not otherwise; and therefore might have been agreers in their axiomatical dispositions respectively; So might the said Assembly have declared their said assertion, That Infants are to be Baptised in a discreet axiom; saying, Infants are to be Baptised, yet not as commanded expressly in Holy Writ, but as not forbidden; which if they had so disposed the said assertion, we had been ejusdem animi with them, and not have told them that their said assertion, (or mode of so declaring it in a discreet axom) was too far Dipped in error.  
In which we declare our Reply against their assertion, saying, Infants are not where commanded in Scripture to be Baptised, notwithstanding they may be Baptised, because it is no no where in Scripture forbidden.  
This is the truth, and the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in what we have Printed in the said Book concerning Infant-Baptism.  
Hence we say, that if our accusers aforesaid had had so much discretion in them; as to have understood a discreet axiom, they would not (for shame) have impleaded us at Law, for Printing against Infant-Baptism.  
Now if they think we impose too much ignorance upon them by our reflection aforesaid, than 'twill appear, that what they have impleaded us for, was, and is out of the malicious and self design, to wrest from us, as they have kept us out, ever since July 1662. of our Ecelesiastical Living, the Vicarage of Wrotham in Kent. They traducing and charging us also upon all occasions (when we implead our defence) to have Printed against Infant-Baptism; and scandalising us many ways besides, as not to be in Holy Orders, when we are 64 years of age, and were Incumbent in two Live successively in Lincolnshire long since, as it is well known; and therefore it's unlikely upon the account aforesaid.  
But the truth is, they are lost by reason of a Minister's death in Lincolnshire with whom they were left in the time of the sad War in 1643, who died a long time before we knew of it, and left his Estate to a Scotchman his Kinsman, who carried all the said Minister left him away into Scotland, or so disposed of Papers otherwise, that we could never find them, or hear of them. And upon this account, our accusers do press us to show our Orders. But whether it be because our Accuser shows sufficiently his Disorders we say not. But that is the one of the two impedimenta obstantia, which are prosecuted against us; but if they charge us with one crime of immorality, injustice, or unreasonableness committed by us in the said place, and prove it against us for above 20 years, wherein we have lived amongst them, we'll yield our cause unto them; and as for Infant-Baptism we have constantly (its well known) practised it in, and at Wrotham aforesaid.  
Quis nisi mentis inops contra sua practica scribit,  
Certè est illius tutior unda fide?  
Who but a brainsick, bereaved of's wits,  
Prints, Preaches, what his practice contradicts?  
His credit sure is more unstable  
Than Stygian water in the Fable, We say no more.  
Quicquid ex merito venit, patiamur ferendum est,  
Quae venit indigne paena dolenda venit.  
What is from undesert pursued as crime,  
Doth well deserve to be complained in Rhyme.  
By WILLIAM PARKER.   

Infant Baptism Justified by A NEW DISCOVERY.  
Exitus acta probabit.  
NOW to make way to the demonstration of the said New Discovery, in reference to the Justification of Infant Baptism; We think it not amiss to re-mind the Reader, that such was the Lords love of pity and compassion to the disobedient fallen Mankind, that he was willing to restore Mankind to a new and innocent life again; that so he might have fellowship and communion again with his God, and enjoy the Beatifical Vision of transcendent, Bliss, and Happiness, in the Kingdom of Heaven. John 3.16. 1 John 1.3.  
Which said New Life and State, (the Introduction to the said Transcendent Bliss) Our Saviour exemplifies by a Childlike innocent life, and state; therefore he set (upon occasion) a little Child in the midst of his Disciples; and said, Except you be Converted, and become as a little Child, ye cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. Mat. 18.  
Hence it's evident, that a Childlike Innocent life and state, is made (by Our Saviour) the Pattern and Exemplar of the said New Heavenly Life and State.  
Now since Mankind was by Disobedience, (and still will be be through Disobedience) fallen, as aforesaid, from the said Innocent Life, and must of necessity come to it again, before he be fit to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven; there must be the removing of all impediments that hinder the attainment to Bliss; which said impediments, are the Sins and Transgressions, which stand in opposition to Innocency, and separate betwixt Us, and Our God. Isa. 59.1, 2.  
Therefore the Lord in his Infinite Wisdom and Goodness, Ordained two most significant and fit Sacraments, to Figure forth in their Mysteries, the way and means whereby the Transgressions and Sins may be removed, and taken away from the depraved heart of the repenting Sinner.  
Which two Sacraments are Circumcision and Baptism.  
The one, (viz.) Circumcision, to cut off and destroy the gross Sins, which must first be removed (as we are commanded, Ezek. 18. to cast away our gross Sins) and then the washing away all remaining defilements in the depraved heart of Mankind, for that no unclean thing shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. Rev. 21.21.27.  
Hence the Lord saith, 2. Cor. 6.27. Come out from among them, and touch no unclean thing, and I will be your God; and you shall be my People: Therefore the Lord in his like Infinite Wisdom and Goodness, brought in Baptism upon the account aforesaid; as appears Ephes. 5.26, 27. where its said Christ gave himself, that he might Sanctify and cleanse his Church, etc. by the washing of water in and through the word, that he might present it to himself a most Glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it might be Holy, and without blemish.  
Thus we see how and wherefore Baptism also was brought in after Circumcision, to be administered: and these two Sacraments are so essentially relating and depending on each other respectively; as one cannot be complete in its operation and Mystery without the other; For if the gross Sins be not taken away, how can remaining defilements of Sin be purged away? and if remaining defilements be not also purged away, there can be no coming to the Innocent life again, and so no entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven, For no unclean thing shall enter into the said Kingdom, Revel. 21. So that we see the said use, and essential dependency as aforesaid, on each other respectively, in reference to the same end. And Circumcision must have its first work also, upon the account aforesaid; and therefore we must first begin with Circumcision, and we shall lay it down as it is in its fitness for the end aforesaid.  
2. The necessity of its application in its Mystery for the said end.  
3. Lay down the Persons who first received Circumcision, and the Persons who were in the first dispensation always to be Circumcised.  
And lastly, offer to Consideration, whether it be not to be granted, that the then Circumcised were than particularly and intentionally to be Baptised in reference to the removing of all Sin? for that the natural dependency betwixt them, as aforesaid, is so nearly and essentially annexed together, as aforesaid; that one cannot be efficacious and useful without the other: and that therefore none of Us can have fellowship with the Lord, without the operation of them both respectively; and therefore it's said, that Abraham received the Sign of Circumcision, as the Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith he had in his Uncircumcision; whence it is evident he had the Inward and Spiritual Circumcision, before he had the outward; and had Spiritual Baptism also, for that he had in his Uncircumcision, saith the Text, before he was outwardly Circumcised, the Righteousness of Faith, which purifies the Heart, Acts 1.5.  
Now Faith is annexed to the Ordinance of Baptism, saith OUr Saviour, Matt. 28. and Mark 16.17.  
Hence Abraham received also (as aforesaid) Spiritual Baptism, in his Circumcision; and therefore We believe that Spiritual Circumcision, and Spiritual Baptism were to be received, and intended to be so together, though but the outward Dispensation of Circumcision was appointed only at first to be in practice: Yet that Baptism was indeed intended in its Spiritual use also, appears by that 1 Cor. 10.1, 2. Moreover Brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant how that our Fathers were all under the Cloud: and all passed through the red Sea: and were all Baptised unto Moses in the Cloud, and in the Sea; where it's apparent, they were all Prophetically Baptised with the Ceremony of Baptism also, who were but practically Circumcised only, as aforesaid.  
Hence where one of the said Ordinances are outwardly by Dispensation appointed of right, and by God's appointment, the other also is, and must interpretatively (as aforesaid) be understood to belong; and therefore it will infer also Infant Baptism to be just, and reasonable upon the account of Gods appointing Israelites Infants to be Circumcised in truth; But we leave it to be seriously thought on, and considered, and argue it at present no farther on that account; but pass on to set forth Circumcision, according as before hinted.  
And first, unto its fitness for the end and purpose it was ordained for, which will appear in the signification of the word itself, (viz.) Circumcision, which is derived from the Latin word Circumscindere, to cut about; and answers to the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which the Apostle uses to express Circumcision by, Rom. 2.25. Acts 15.15. which signifies to cut about, and so to cut off; and answers also to the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gen. 17.10. which Arius Montanus renders, concidit, to cut off together, which is a most apt rendering of the said word, according to its innate signification and scope, for which it is intended, even to figure forth in a Mystery (by being applied to and on the foreskin of the Flesh) the cutting off the strong Lusts from the depraved heart of the disobedient humanity, which will be no otherways destroyed, than the Sons of Anack could be destroyed in the Land of Canaan, by cutting them off, which were, (as a Divinely Spirited German saith) the Figure of these strong and powerful Lusts: which unbelieving Christians say, (because they know not, nor make use of the Spiritual Circumcision aforesaid) can never be subdued in this life: even as the unbelieving Israelites aforetime cried out they could never be able to overcome those Giants, the Sons of Anack. Therefore the Lord of necessity brought in Circumcision, to Figure forth in its Mystery the way and means, whereby the said strong and Giantlike Lusts (so powerful through custom and habit) should be destroyed, in order to the coming to the said Innocent Life and State. Which said Circumcision, the Lord annexed to his Law of Compulsion, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gal. 3.24. that is, (as We believe) until Christ come to perform his Office on those who were Disciplined under the said Law, Gal. 3.10, 13. And made fit thereby for that his Office to be performed in them by Him, Gal. 4.45.  
Now the said Circumcision was adjoined to the said Law; for that the said Law was appointed by the Lord, to restrain the abominable nature of Sin, Rom. 3.20. & 7.1. 2. To discover also the Curse due to the Sin; from both which discoveries, when they are set home by his Spirit on the Heart. Then there doth, and must, (Ex vi antecedentium) arise a fear and trembling in the Sinner, as appears by St. Paul's express, Rom 7.24. ver. 9, 10. So Acts 2.37. & 16.29. Hebr. 12.20, 21. Upon which work, the Sinner is willing to part with any thing, in reference to his Salvation, as Judg. 10.16. it's said upon the like occasion, They put away their strange gods, and served the Lord.  
Hence also, the Fear is said to be the beginning of wisdom, Psal. 111.10. Prov. 9.1. and Prov. 24.10. it's said the wise man Fears, and departs from Evil; For than we are willing to do any thing to be saved, as aforesaid. Therefore the Lord joined Circumcision to his Law of Compulsion, which works the said Fear upon the Conscience aforesaid, to make the gross Sinner willing to be Circumcised in a Mystery, that is, to have his gross Sins cut off, which the Sinner must do, or he cannot come to the said Innocent life and state again; to be made fit to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, upon the account aforesaid.  
Hence Joshua was commanded (before he brought the Children of Israel into Canaan, the Type of the Kingdom of Heaven) to make sharp knives, and Circumcise all the males, Josh. 5.2, 3. The Original express is, Make thee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cultros petrarum, knives of stones, or rather of sharp flints, and Circumcise the males; which knives were a fit Figure of the Circumcising knife of the Law, to which Circumcision, was annexed for the end aforesaid.  
For that the Law was by Gods Command written in Stone, which is a Type of the Heart of stone; so made through custom, and obdurateness in Sin, Ezek. 36.26. & 11.19. wherein the Law, when the Heart becomes a Heart of Flesh again, is to be written.  
Now that the Laws were written in Stone, it appears Deut. 10.25. Exod. 34.1.  
The Persons who were first Circumcised by God's Command, was Abraham, Gen. 17. who received it after he believed, Rom. 4.11. And therefore he was then gone beyond Circumcisions work and scope, for which Circumcision was appointed, as aforesaid.  
Hence Abraham had then no Personal need of Circumcisions work, which was appointed to figure forth in a Mystery, the cutting off the gross Sins, as aforesaid: for He had attained (as it appears) to the Righteousness of Faith, which he had in his Uncircumcision, Rom. 4.10. and before his Circumcision was received, ver. 11.  
Where, by the way we may apprehend, that Abraham was then Circumcised by way of Office only, as to be thereby a representative and document, to hold forth what Circumcision related unto, and aimed at in the cutting off the gross Sins, as aforesaid; in order to the coming on to the Righteousness of Faith, by all the true Israel of God: So that hence it appears, that those may have a Divine Ceremony applied to them who have no need of it at present themselves, nor doth personally (at present) concern themselves, as Abraham was, upon the account aforesaid Circumcised, when he had no need to be Circumcised, in reference to his own personal concerns.  
And Christ was both Circumcised, Luke 2. and after Baptised; Mat. 3. who had no personal need at all of either; for that He was a Lamb without spot, holy, harmless and undefiled, separated from Sinners, Hebr. 7.26. In whose mouth was no guile: yet was he both Circumcised, and Baptised.  
Hence it's most apparent, that Christ received Circumcision, and Baptism also by way of Office only, as representative and documental to hold forth, that He is the Minister of the Spiritual Circumcision of the Heart, according to that of Rom. 15.8. Col. 2.11. and also the true Administrator of the Spiritual Baptism, or Washing, as the Apostle declares Him to be, Ephes. 5.27. Coll. 2.12.  
Hence it doth undeniably follow, that those may receive Circumcision and Baptism respectively, in reference to other Mysteries, than their own personal concerns at present; for that Abraham did receive Circumcision, and Christ both Circumcision and Baptism also, as aforesaid. And Our Saviour declares Infants to be the Patterns and Exemplars of the Innocent life and state, Matt. 18. And therefore both Circumcision and Baptism do relate in their applicatory Mysteries, by way of Office and document, respectively to Infants, in order to their being the Exemplars of the Innocent life: So that Circumcision and Baptism also, were brought in by the Lord in a Mystery, for the taking away of all gross Sins, and all remaining defilements from repenting penitent sinners; that so they may come thereby to the Childlike Innocent life and state again; of which Our Saviour declares Children to be the Patterns and Exemplars of, as aforesaid. And also for that Circumcision and Baptism are so essentially depending on each other, that the one cannot have its accomplishment without the other respectively: yet are they as (it's confessed) declared to be set forth in two distinct Dispensations, (viz.) Circumcision under the Law, and in reference thereunto: Baptism under the Gospel, and in reference thereunto. But though they be so, as aforesaid, for distinct discoveries of their respective uses; and how, and upon no other account they are here brought in; and how, and wherein they became useful and serviceable, by being joined to the Law and Gospel respectively, in their dipsensation; and are so nearly relating to, and essentially depending on each other; that they cannot but be incomplere one without the other, as aforesaid.  
Neither can Israelites Infants be more concerned in Circumcision to be Circumcised by way of Office and good document, than Christians Infants are concerned in Baptism, to be Baptised in Infancy by way of Office, and good document to others; no, not so much: for that as Infants are the Exemplars of Innocency, which is only attained unto by a repenting Sinner, in having his gross Sins cut off first by Circumcision in its Mystery: and then in having all remaining defilements of Sin washed away by Baptism in its Mystery, which is the nearest and most perspicuous purge for Innocency's introduction.  
Hence Baptism ought to be (we say) looked upon to have as much power and influence upon Christians Infants, to be administered to them in Infancy by way of Office, (though it be not literally commanded also) as Circumcision had, when administered to Israelites Infants, upon the account aforesaid; though it was literally commanded, as it was then needful, so to be, for that otherwise the Mystery begun in Infant Circumcision, by way of Office and good document only, had not had its rise and warrant to be known to be Instituted by the Lord for the same purpose; that the Childlike innocent life and state, should be the end and scope of Circumcisions work in a Mystery, as aforesaid: But now that being commanded, there needs not a new command for Christians Infants to be Baptised; For it may be demonstrated à pari, that Infant Baptism holds forth (undeniably) as good, yea greater usefulness to grown Christians, when it's administered to Infants by way of Office and good document, as Infant Circumcision was, or could be; though Infant Baptism be not literally commanded; for a Command shows only the information, and pleasure of the Commander in his Authority, not the rationem formalem of the thing Commanded, which is only considered in the justice and equity of the thing to be done, or not to be done; as Infant Circumcision was commanded thereupon, to be administered by way of Office, and good document only to others concerns, not their own at present; for Infants were not then apprehensive and capable of any duty in reference to their then personal Circumcision.  
Hence may also Christians Infants be warrantably Baptised, by way of Office, and good document to others; not then to their own Personal concerns: though Infant Baptism be not commanded literally; (which indeed need not) for that the ratio formalis of Infant Baptism, (which is its fitness, and equity to be done, by way of Office and good document,) is in reference to others, not then their own personal concerns, as aforesaid.  
All this is offered to consideration occasionally, as it falls in consequentially from something proceeding from Circumcisions discourse, as aforesaid. We return to insist further on Abraham's Circumcising all his Family by God's Command, which were born in his Hours, or bought with Money, Gen. 17.13, 27. Where every Male at Eight days old was to be Circumcised, ver. 12. There is no mention made of any further iground of their being Circumcised; than that they were of Abraham's Family.  
Hence it's more than probable, upon the like account, that when Lydia appeared to be a Believer; we presume to say, that if there were or had been an Infant, or Infants in Lydia's house at that time when Paul Baptised her and her whole household, he had Baptised them also: otherwise he had not left Lydia's House so good a document and instruction, to mind them to go forward, and endeavour after their Childlike innocent life.  
Now give me leave to say, upon Abraham's practice in Circumcising all his Family; as well those that were bought with his Money, as born in his house: to offer this also to consideration, to them that do (as they ought) allow of Infant Baptism, which scruple to Baptism any Children but Believers Children, as they persuade themselves they are whom they Baptism.  
The question is, whether upon account of Abraham's practice aforesaid, in Circumcising all his Family, whether born in his house, or bought with his Money; whether it be not lawful to Baptism in like manner the Children of a Turk, or like Nation, if Christian People would take care of its education and instruction of Baptisms work in its Mystery, as they come to riper years: For that Abraham Circumcised all Male Children of his Family, though bought with his Money of a stranger.  
Therefore, We thought good to offer this to their Consideration, who though they allow of Infant Baptism; yet limit and restrain it within the narrow compass of Believing Parents, as they persuade themselves they are whom they Baptism.  
Further, as for Abraham's Circumcising his seed; We find he did it at two several times or ages: for it it is expressly said, Gen. 17.25. first Ishmael, Abraham's Son was 13 years of age when he was Circumcised, and that at the same age or years the Jewish Doctors accounted them Filii praecepti; that is, fit to be instructed and taught the Laws of their persuasions, in reference to Abrams and Moses's instructions to the Israelites of their Children and Household, Gen. 19 Deut. 4. & 6.7.  
Hence it's very consentaneous and agreeable to Piety; that at the same age youth ought to be instructed by their Parents and Governors, even to begin to show forth then their true Circumcising: that is, their cutting off their gross Sins of life, which youth are growing up into, for want of Discipline and Correction.  
But too many pretending Christians in our days, do omit and neglect it; putting it off, by using a Brutish Proverb, that a rugged Colt makes a good Horse: as if they could tame (when they please) their bruitishly bred Children, as their rugged Colts are tamed; whereas Heathens, (commonly so called,) could say, that Children left some time to their Lusts, are hardly restrained, quo●e semel est imbuta recens servabit odorem testa diu; and Divine Writ tells us, that Youth corrupted, is not easily nor frequently reduced again; but it becomes in little time to be like the Sons of Anack, so strong in Lusts, that they must be cut off before they can be subdued; and therefore as Job saith, They (too often) are ready to l'e down with the Sins of their Youth, for want of the true Circumcision, which is the spiritual Circumcision, at Ishmael's age; to show themselves thereby of Abraham's Belief, the Father of the Faithful, Rom. 4. So that all Parents and Governors, should, when their Children be come to be of Ishmael's age, endeavour to bring them to the Minister of the true Circumcision, the Lord Jesus, Rom 15.8. to be Spiritually Circumcised, in order to their Spiritual Baptism: that so thereby they may attain to the Childlike innocent life and state; to be made capable (as Our Saviour saith) to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.  
Now forasmuch as Ishmael was Circumcised, when Abraham, with all his Household were Circumcise●; it is evident, that Ishmael was then personally a member of the Household of Faith, no reprobate at present: therefore that which is spoken to Abraham by the Lord, Gen. 21.11, 12. was only spoken in reference to Sarah her words, ver. 10. and in reference to a higher Mystery, which is declared by the Apostle more fully, Gal. 4.30. (viz.) Cast out the Bond Woman, and her Son, which was Ishmael; it was spoken of Ishmael's rejection by way of office, as he was born of Hagar the Bond Woman, the representative of the Legal Seed of Legal Servantship under the Law of Compulsion, and was not to have that Inheritance of the Spiritual Promises; which was 〈◊〉 to Sarah and her Offspring, Gen. 17.19. Sarah which was the Free Woman, the Type of the new Jerusalem, the Mother of all true Believers, Gal. 4.26. For it is said to Abraham. Gen. 17.20. concerning Ishmael, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful: and will multiply him exceedingly; which are all signals of the Lords good will to Ishmael: And therefore, since he was Circumcised with Abraham at the same time, and had the said Promises made to him; surely it cannot be that he was personally a reprobate at the time of his Birth; for that Signum must relate to the Signatum, which was the personal interest in Abraham's Belief, and household of Faith, by being Circumcised, and had the Promises aforesaid; For that relata, do ex mutuo constare; that is, give respectively being, and existency to each other: therefore 〈◊〉 uno relato ponitur Correlatum; that is, one Relat being declared, the Correlat thereof must necessarily be inferred, because they do ex mutuo constare, that is, arise mutually, as cause and effect out of each other: as Fatherhood ariseth out of Sonhood: if there were no Son, there could be no Father: and if no Father, there could be no Son; therefore they arise mutually out of each other: so in reference to Ishmael, as aforesaid; since he was Circumcised, and that by Abraham upon God's Command, ver. 13. it must follow, that he was personally then a member of the household of the Faith of Abraham, and no reprobate; but only by way of office was he cast out, Gen. 21.10. and what he did, was only by way of office, as a representative of what the earthly legal seed of the Bond Woman doth to the Seed of Faith; even as the legal Scribes and Pharisees did to Christ and his Disciples; even reject Him and Them, and scoff at them, as it is expressed, Mat. 27.29. Acts 2.18. What will this babbler say? Acts 17.18.  
Yet this legal bond offspring of the Jews aforesaid, though they did reject the Christ of God Our Saviour, did expect to be Heirs to Abraham, John 8.33. Rom. 9.8.  
And so much of the first Age, or different time of Abraham's Circumcising his Seed of one of the first Ages; or different times of Abraham's Circumcising his Seed, as of Ishmael his Son by Hagar, and of his engraffing by Circumcision at present into Abraham's Family, or household of Faith; and likewise of Ishmael his rejecton or casting out from being Heir with Sarah her Seed to the inheritance by Faith, which was done by way of office, as he did bear the Image and representation of the Bond Woman's Seed, which was the Seed of 〈◊〉 as the Dutch call it; that is the Law of Compulsion, that compels us to seek a freedom by Abraham's Faith.  
We come now to set forth the other age, or time of Abraham's Circumcising his Seed, and so of all Israel after him; which was at 8 days old, Gen. 17.12. and every Male Child only was to be Circumcised by the Lords Command at that age, no sooner or later. 2. The Male Infant that was not then Circumcised, was to be cut off from the Congregration of Israel, ver. 14. which was durus sermo, a hard saying, in reference to Infants at 8. days old, if it was not intended (as it was) by way of office, and as a representative of a further and higher Mystery than the Infant concerns at present, for that Infants than were not capable of performing, (no not apprehensive) of any duty that related to Circumcisions scope in its Mystery aforesaid.  
Hence Infant Circumcision of the Male only. 2. At 8. days old only; and if at that age it was not then Circumcised, it was to be cut off from the Congregation of Israel.  
Hence we see, that all the aforesaid respects to be oserved by Israelites Male Infants, in reference to their Circumcision in Infancy, was not at present for their own personal concerns; but in reference to higher and further Mysteries to be reprerented thereby.  
〈◊〉 Male only was to be Circumcised, for that in the Male is the Manly nature which figureth forth the strength of the humanity, which the Lord calls for to be dedicated to Him, Psal. 68.28 Thy God hath commanded thy strength. Therefore the Mother of King Lemuel, (i.e. cum quo est Deus, with whom is God) said to him, Give not thy strength to Women, Prov. 31.3. and it's said, Prov. 20.29. The glory of young Men is their strength. Hence, 1 John 2.14. I writ to you young Men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you: and you have overcome the wicked one.  
Hence it was, (we believe) that after the Israelites came out of Egypt, the straitness and bondage, (which figured out the slavery under the Sin) the Lord commanded all the Males (from 20 years old and upward) should be numbered by their pole, Num. 1.1, 2, 3. and no Female, nor Children were to be numbered with them.  
Also in the Five Thousand miraculously fed with 5 Loaves, and 2 Fishes, Mat. 14.22. and of those fed in like manner miraculously Matth. 15.36, 37. no Women or Children, (though fed with them at the same time) were numbered; whose respective enumerations (if they had been mentioned) had greatned much the Miracles aforesaid; 〈◊〉 also it's now more than probable, that the Males at 20 years old and upward, were appointed only to be numbered, Num. 1.1, 2, 3.  
For that the Males, in whom is the strength of the Humanity which God calls for, were most fit for war, in which the Lord intended to exercise the Israelites (Judg. 1.2.) in a Mystery, as the said War figured forth to the Israelites the Spiritual Warfar against Sin and Satan, Ephes. 6.12, 13. That so his Name might become great in Israel, Psal. 76.1. and they renowned for it, according to their name derived from the name Israel given to Jacob, when he had prevailed with the Angel. Gen. 32.28.  
To which War the Spiritual strength is requisite; Therefore the Apostle exhorts the Ephesians, Chap. 6.10, 11. to be strong in the Lord; which we may guests to be the reason that the Lord calls for the strength to be given to him, aforesaid, Psal. 68.28.  
Now for that the weakness was figured forth in the Female; Therefore the Lord appointed no Sacrament, or Mystery to be administered unto them, which surely the Lord would have done, if Circumcision to Males had been a Sacrament or Mystery for Infants personal privileges and benefits; for that there is no respect of persons with God: and St. Paul saith, Gal. 3.28. There is neither Male nor Pemale, but all are one in Christ Jesus. Hence the weakness was also by way of office held forth in the Female as the strength was figured forth in the Male by way of office.  
And therefore the curse is threatened to him who hath a Male in his Flock, and offereth to the Lord a corrupt thing, which is (no doubt) the Female: which figured forth the weakness, that is contradistiact to the strength.  
Now the reason of the said Curse, 〈◊〉 the Female (under the corrupt thing) was, for that the weakness cannot subdue and destroy the strong Lusts; But the manly Nature, which figureth the strength, must do that when it's Circumcised in a Mystery; that is, hath its gross Sins cut off from it; which if they be not, than the Male or manly Nature is weak like the Women.  
Hence it is said to the Israelites, when captived to their strong Lusts, How weak is thy heart since thou dost all these things, even the work of a presumptuous whorish Woman? Ezek. 16.30. And it is threatened to them, (Isai. 13.12. Nah. 3.13, 10.) who were enslaved to their Lusts, that Women, yea Children should rule over them, because they were through viciousness become weak, like Women in passions, and like Children in understanding and government.  
And therefore the Lord commanded the Male only to be Circumcised by the Circumcising knife of the Law, and that in the Infancy or beginning of the fallen Man's state and condition, before the Lusts are grown too strong in him, like the Sons of Anack, as aforesaid.  
Again, the Circumcising Male was to be on the Eighth day after his birth precisely, no sooner, nor later; therefore a great Mystery was intended, for that many Infants might die before the Fourth, yea, the Second day; which Mystery is in reference to Christ himself, whose day that is, who 〈◊〉 us to the true rest, Heb. 4. and therefore his day, and it was his day wherein he was Circumcised, Luke 2. who is called the Minister of the true Circumcision, Rom. 15.8.  
Hence they were Circumcised on that day, in reference to Christ, who is yesterday, and to day, and the same for ever, Hebr. 13.8.  
Also it is said, that the Male which was not Circumcised on that day, was to be cut off from the Congregation of the Lord.  
Which figureth forth (we doubt not) but that those who were not spiritually Circumcised from their gross Sins, upon and in Christ's day, that is, by him the Minister of the true Circumcision, must be cut off from Christ's Spiritual Congregation, for such cannot be capable of Baptism in its Mystery, to the washing away all remaining defilements of Sin, after the gross Sins are out off, as aforesaid; whereby we may have fellowship again with Christ, and no otherwise, as appears 2 Cor. 6.15, 16. ver. 27.2 Cor. 7. and therefore Christ was also Baptised himself (who needed it not) to figure this forth unto us byway of office also. From all aforesaid declared, concerning Infant Circumcising. 2. Of the Male only. 3. On the Eighth day only; and that if the Male was not then Circumcised precisely, no sooner nor later, that Male should be cut off from the Congregation of the Lord; which was a hard case, for that an Infant could not then either further or hinder its Circumcising: nor is an Infant then either apprehensive or sensible of what was then done to it, by or in its Circumcision.  
Hence the Israelites Infants were then Circumcised in reference to others (not their own) personal concerns (at present,) and therefore they were commanded to be Circumcised by way of office only, and good document to grown Israelites only at present, upon the account aforesaid.  
And so much for Circumcision, and Infant Circumcision.  
We come now to speak of Baptism, the other necessary following Sacrament or Mystery ordained by the Lord Jesus, to set forth what is further to be done upon and in the true Circumcised ones, who have their gross Sins cut off by the Ministry of the true Circumcision, Rom. 5.8. and by the true Circumcising Knife of the Law, which Joshuah in his office made use of in a Mystery, as aforesaid.  
This Baptism we are to seek for after we are Circumcised, even a thorough washing away of all remaining desilements of Sin, which remain in their degrees for some time in the Soul, after our gross Sins are Circumcised away.  
And this Baptism through washing is so necessary, that without it in its order and degrees performed, we cannot attain to the Childlike Innocent life and state again, set forth by Our Saviour, to be the next way and means of entering into the Kingdom of Heaven, Mat. 18. Therefore the Apostle exhorts the Corinthians that having these Promises, Rom. 6.27. to purge them from all filthiness of Flesh and Spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.  
Hence Baptism was ordained by the Lord Jesus for the use and end aforesaid, and must follow after Circumcisions use and work in its Mystery is done.  
Hence the Israelites who came out of Egypt, (the straits and bondage under the slavery of Sin, in a Mystery) were then Prophetically Baptised unto Moses, in the Cloud, and in the Sea, as St. Paul saith, 2. Cor. 10.1, 2.  
So that the Circumcised ones who came out of Egypt, as aforesaid, were Prophetically Baptised also unto Moses, which doth clearly hint to us, that Circumcision doth reach (and interpretatively include Baptism, and Baptism also presupposeth Circumcisions work in its Mystery.  
Now since Baptism is owned by us to be a Gospel Ordinance, and sure also those who were Circumcised, were, as aforesaid, Prophetically Baptised also unto Moses; it must be granted (observe it well) that Christ was Moses under the dispensation of Circnmcision, for that it is said, they were Baptised unto Moses.  
Now Baptism is declared to be (Mat. 28.) Christ's Ordinance, appointed by Him, and performed solely by Himself, Ephes. 5.27, 28. Hence is Christ under the Gospel dispensation 〈…〉 to be looked upon and considered to be the true Spiritual Administrator of Circumcision in its Mystery; and so the Apostle calls him, Rom. 15.8.  
Now I say to you, that Jesus Christ was a Minister of Circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the Promises to the Fathers; and that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy, ver. 9 and the Apostle declares the like, Col. 2.11. In whom ye also were Circumcised with the Circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the Sins of the Flesh, by the Circumcision of Christ.  
Whence it sollows from the said expresses, 1. Cor. 10.1, 2. Rom. 15.8. Col. 2.11. that Christ was Moses the true Circumcisor and Baptisor under the Law, and also both of them under the Gospel also; And therefore they are both respectively begun and completed in him only, and are to be looked upon as included in each other, like Ezekiel's Wheels one within the other, Ezek 1.16.  
Hence Baptism was brought in its office next, to be done after Circumcisions work is performed in its office and mystery respectively.  
And thence also it must follow by undeniable consequence, that if Infant Circumcision be a good document and instruction by way of office, as aforesaid; so is Infant Baptism also, and must be so intended by the Lord, and also received by us; for that one essentially and reciprocally depends upon the other. And here it must be granted, that those who were Circumcised, were declared to be Prophetically Baptised in the Cloud, and in the Sea, when they came out of Egypt.  
Now it is evident that some little ones were among them who passed through the Sea, Exod. 10.10, 24. Hence they also were Baptised in the Cloud, and in the Sea, for it is said They were all (without exception) Baptised.  
And by that reason, and upon the account aforesaid, in reference to the Prophetical Mystery, Christian's Infants may be Baptised also, even by way of office, otherwise we deny grown Christians to have as good a document by Infant Baptism, as grown Israelites had by Infaent Circumcision, upon the respective accounts betwixt them, as aforesaid.  
But this aforesaid by the way only as a preparative to our further justification of Infant Baptism by way of New Discovery, which we doubt not but (Christo assistente) to do, after we have set forth more distinctly what Baptism is in its Nomination and Notation.  
Baptism in its Nomination or Notation, comes from the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to wash or cleanse, or dip, and answers to the Hebr. word. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which said word is used Ruth 2.4. and is by Arias Montanus rendered Intinge buccellam in Accto, dip or wash thy morsel in the vineager; which said word the Septuagint hath, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptism or wash thy morsel in the vineager.  
Hence Baptism notes in its nature and signification, a washing or cleansing with that which is most fit to cleanse, as Water is most experimentally known to be of a mundifying and cleansing nature, Ezek. 16.4. 2 King. 5.10.  
And therefore it is a most fit means to figure forth Baptism, our Spiritual washing and cleansing from all filthiness of the Flesh and Spirit, 2. Cor. 7.1, 2.  
Hence the Lord Jesus annexed to his Gospel Dispensation, (which is the Dispensation of Faith, Mat. 28.) Baptism, for that the Belief is the purifying Grace and means through the Word (which is indeed the Christ of God, John 1.11.) to wash away all remaining defilements of Sin, as aforesaid.  
Hence it is said (Ephes. 5.26, 27.) Christ gave himself for his Church, that he might sanctify and cleanse it through the Word; and it is said, John 15.3. Now ye are clean through the Word I have spoken to you. And it is said, Acts 15.9. He purified their hearts through Faith.  
Thus we have in brief offered to consideration, what Baptism in general is; and upon what account the Lord Jesus brought it in, and also annexed it to his Gospel Dispensation, and how it presupposes Circumcisions work, before it can have its proper operation in its Mystery upon the same real object that Circumcision was conversant about, which was the Male Infant to be Circumcised only, and that on the Eighth day only; and that if it were not Circumcised in that day, than that Male Infant was to be cut off, as aforesaid.  
Hence what the Male figured forth, which was the Manly Nature, must be also considered to be Baptised or washed, and that by Christ in his day figured forth in the Eighth day, and if the Manly Nature be not Baptised then, by Christ in his day, it must be cut off from Christ's Spiritual Congregation, which is the Kingdom of Heaven.  
Yet our Saviour specifies and recites none of these in his commission for Baptism by any intimation written, though they must be necessarily understood to be Baptised also, because in the same nature wherein the work is to be 〈◊〉 (which is in Circumcision, as aforesaid) in the same it must be completed and perfected; and therefore all aforesaid must be understood and intended to be Baptised also upon the account aforesaid, 〈◊〉 the near relating and essentially depending of Circumcision and Baptism (upon the account aforesaid) betwixt themselves in reference to the respective uses they are for; respectively to the same scope and end; yet as aforesaid, Christ mentions not a tittle to that purpose in his Ordinance of Baptism.  
Hence it doth inevitably follow, that the Lord Jesus doth forbear to specify that again à parte post, which is so clearly expressed in the parte ante, that is expressed and appointed in Circumcision, as aforesaid.  
Hence upon the like reason we may, and aught to believe, that the Lord Jesus did intent to allow and warrant Infant Baptism by virtue of his Command for Infant Circumcision, upon the reciprocal accounts being a like useful, respectivelly to the same scope and end, as a foresaid.  
The Lord may (we hope none will deny it) make use (when he pleases) of those rules and maxims he hath taught us to make use of upon all occasions, to prevent multiplicities and tautologies of things, which must be understood to relate together, as specials under one general, as every species doth under one genus, and every member relates respectively, in its communication to the integral or whole, to make up its integral, what it is, or aught to be.  
Hence genus, or the general, is quoth communicate totam suam essentiam suis speciebus, that is, the general communicates its whole essence to its specials under it, as Animal doth. 〈◊〉 whole essence of vegitative and sensitive life or virtue to Man and Bruit, alike vegetable and sensible; so do all members of the integral or whole, communicate their essence respectively to the whole: hence, since generals have their influences in and upon all specials and particulars under them respectively, they need not be taught and expressed in every special or particular under them respectively, but only in one, for that the general is the same to every special in its communication respectively, as it is to one; and therefore to express it more than once, is but dem per idem, and à frustra (to little purpose) qnod potest fieri per pauciora.  
Now that wise Artists make use of the said rule upon due occasion, We shall give you but one instance among man,; Ramus in his Logic, (the best, we believe, secundum regulum, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & methodum, that ever (of the many that have) appeared to us) when he hath set forth argumentum as it is in its use, 〈◊〉 〈…〉 and distributed it into its consentany and dissentany affections respectively, he never repeats argumentum again, neither in cause nor effect, subject, nor adjunct, etc. though it must necessarily be understood under all the respective heads and topics of Logic, it being the genus generalissimum to them all respectively, yet he doth not repeat it again, causa est argumentum cujus 〈◊〉 est, effectum est argumentum quod è causis existat 〈◊〉; but only saith, causa est cujus 〈◊〉 est, leaving out argumentum, and so out of the rest; because it being the general, it must be understood upon the account aforesaid, to have the same influence into all the specials under it respectively that it hath to one of them.  
Now shall we believe otherwise, but that the God of all Arts and Wisdom (which teacheth others, as aforesaid, to make use of the said maxim) may and doth make use of the said rule (in his divine records, commonly called the Scriptures) as he thinks fit to his intelligible and rational creatures for brevity's sake, when parallel respects of things (as Circumcision and Baeptism are respectively to the same end in general, as aforesaid,) do necessarily, and in all conveniency infer the same to be alike to the respective uses, though dissenting in themselves, as all parts and members are which relate to the whole of which they are members.  
Hence Circumcision and Baptism (the two necessary Ceremonies for the use and uses aforesaid,) and so necessary and essentially depending on each other upon the account aforesaid, Circumcision being the principium, the other finis of the same, and to the same design, as aforesaid; and for that Infants, as Infants, whether Israelites, or Christians Infants, are all alike in all respects to their respective Circumcision or Baptism aforesaid; We do affirm, that Infant Circumcisions command, may, and aught to be thought to be allowed its practice 〈…〉, without a new command upon the account aforesaid, that Generalia generaliter & semel docenda.  
The Lord himself declares it, by what is expressed, Mark, 13.37. That he intends that we should take his command, given but to some expressly, to include all others in like case to be considered to do, or allowed to do the same by virtue of the said command or injunction which is appointed thereunto; for when the Lord Jesus had given an injunction to watch, he explains his intent further, (least others ●●fter times should think the said injunction concerned not them, but only his present Disciples, to whom he then spoke) he saith what I say to you, I say to all, Watch.  
Hence we see it was meant further than to those to whom it was literally spoken at present, the reason is granted, a pari, because all are one time or other subject and liable to the like dangers and temptations respectively, that his then present Disciples were, which he warns to take heed of the then dangers.  
And therefore, since Infant Baptism is a parallel in all respects, as aforesaid respectively, with Infant Circumcision to all intents and purposes, that they are, and may be applied unto, as aforesaid.  
We do with confidence assert, that the Lord did intent that we may upon all due occasions, Baptism Infants under the Gospel, as the Israelites did Circumcise their Infants, by his command under the legal dispensation; for that one command doth (upon the account aforesaid) give alike allowance to all persons and things alike considerable, and to be concerned as Infant Baptism, and Infant Circumcision respectively, are to be considered in reference to each other, and their end for which they are respectively appointed.  
Now it being so the rule, à quatenus ipsum ad de omni effi●ax est illatio, justifies Infant Baptism upon the account of the said rule; for that the said rule declares, that from one thing or person as such, arises a prevalent influence to include all to be granted, in like manner to be owned as such, and so under the same consideration to be considered respectively.  
As Abraham is declared to be justified only as a Believer, Rom. 4.22.  
Hence every true Believer may assure himself upon Abraham's account aforesaid, to be justified also, without being particularly named that he is also justified; the reason is for that an identity and sameness in things, must necessarily be owned alike to all intents and purposes, in whomsoever, or wheresoever it is found respectively, which is the aim and scope of the rule aforesaid, à quatenus ipsum, etc. in the sense and latitude thereof.  
And it's observable which is expressed Rom. 4. ver. 23, 24. that it was not written for his sake alone, but for us also who believe. And the reason must be from, and upon the account of the said rule, that quatenus ipsum ad de omni, etc. and may we not say therefore, à pari, that Infant Circumcision was not written for Israelites Infants alone, in abstracto, but for Christians Infants also in concreto.  
Upon the like account to warrant thereby Infant Baptism from Infant Circumcision, though that be only commanded expressly, and not Infant Baptism in like manner expressly; for that à quatenus ipsum ad de omni efficax est illatio.  
Now Infant Circumcision was commanded only, as Israelites Infants were in Infancy, such and such, so and so. Therefore there is no more reason to disallow of Infant Baptism than of Infant Circumcision in themselves respectively, to be considered in their respective Infancies; and as for the command of Infant Circumcision only, that doth not hinder, but confirm the allowance of Infant Baptism upon the account aforesaid, especially since no prohibition (in any case) is given against Infant Baptism.  
So that Infant Baptism may be practised by way of office, and as a good document, be as useful to grown Christians upon the account aforesaid, as Infant Circumcision ever was ordained by way of office likewise, and not otherwise, as aforesaid.  
Hence it's more consentaneous, and agreeable to reason, for Christians to Baptism their Infants, in order to the coming again to the Childlike innocent life (which is the sole end both of Circumcisions and Baptisms Ordination respectively, as aforesaid,) for that Infant Baptism is the more lively and perspicuous exemplar of the two, of the attainment unto the Childlike innocent life; because Christian's Infants are as innocent as Israelites Infants could be, and Baptism being a thorough washing (after Circumcisions work in its Mystery is performed,) from all remaining defilements of Flesh and Spirit.  
Hence upon the aforesaid account, Infant Baptism is a more significant and useful document and instruction, in order to the Childlike innocent life and state, than Circumcision; therefore it cannot in reason and equity be denied, but that the Lord did intent its practice as well as Infant Circumcision, but did not command it expressly, because needless upon the account of the rules aforesaid, generalia generaliter & quatenus ipsum ad de omni.  
And therefore we cannot in reason think, that God gave grown Israelites such a good document and instruction, in order to signify to them the first step unto the Childlike innocent life, by commanding them to Circumcise their Infants by way of office only, (as aforesaid) to mind and admonish them upon all occasions thereof: but we must with like (if not with more) reason think, that the Lord doth allow of Infant Baptism, to mind and admonish grown Christians upon all occasions, duly to endeavour after the completing the Childlike innocent life, as Baptism in its Mystery doth set forth by a thorough washing from all remaining defilements of Sin, after Circumcision in its Mystery hath cut off the gross Sins; and therefore the Lord (to his Honour be it spoken) cannot but allow of Infant Baptism to be administered also by way of office and as a good document, and respectively to grown Christians, by allowing them also to Baptism their Infants, as the Israelites were commanded to Circumcise their Infants upon the like, and no other account, as aforesaid.  
We cannot persuade ourselves otherwise than as aforesaid, unless we do charge the Righteous and Just Lord to be more neglective and injurious to grown Christians, than he was to grown Israelites, by not allowing grown Christians alike (if not a more significant) document and instruction (than Infant Circumcision was) by Baptising their Infants, in order to the completing the said Childlike innocent life thereby.  
We hope they will not impose upon us to believe, (for fear of unthought of evil consequences to follow thereupon) that God did command Infant Circumcision, and did intent to disown Infant Baptism only upon his own mere authoritative will and pleasure without any further reason but his mere Will for the said commanding Infant Circumcision, and disowning Infant Baptism, which is as useful and significant to all intents and purposes, as ever Circumcision was, for no other reason, but because he would: this we cannot yield unto, for that Gods Infinite Wisdom is previous and foregoing to all his Wo●ks, as it is expressed, Psal. 104.24. O Lord how manifold are thy Works! in wisdom thou hast made them all. Hence in great Wisdom (and no otherwise) did the Lord ordain Infant Circumcision.  
And therefore he could not out of mere will and pleasure disown Infant Baptism; for that if he do, he doth disown that which is as rational and useful upon the account of all like respects betwixt Infant Circumcision, and Infant Baptism, as ever Circumcision was.  
This they dare not stand unto, and therefore ask them why the Lord should own Infant Circumcision, and command it, and yet disown Infant Baptism, which Christians Infants are as capable of to all intents and purposes, as Israelites Infants were of Infant Circumcision.  
Ask them the reason aforesaid, they answer (for a shift, as we have heard from some, not knowing a better reason for it, for want of searching into Divine Writ for a better:)  
That God (say they) did it to distinguish Israelites Infants from Heathens Children; whereas indeed that reason for it, is more frivolous, than Infant Baptism is; for that Heathens seldom see (unless by accident) Israelites Infants in that age, to show their Circumcision; and we judge that the grown Israelites Circumcision was more advantageous for that purpose, for that they could give the grown Heathens a particular account of their Circumcision; Wherefore their God commanded them to be Circumcised, but yet take their aforesaid reason for Infant Circumcision as it is, and then retort it upon them, and tell them that they confess thereby that God commanded Infant Circumcision by way of office only, for that is no more (by their Confession) than a representative to Heathens for the end assigned, as aforesaid; and it's all we aver, and say, (but in a better sense) that God did command Infant Circumcision by way of office only, and to be a fit document and instruction to grown Israelites, as hath been demonstrated upon the accounts and ends set forth, as aforesaid.  
And Infant Circumcision being so commanded, we say it's commanded upon no other grounds, than upon what Infant Baptism may be practised, that is, by way of office and good document unto grown Christians, as hath been often (for memories cause) expressed, and urged.  
Now it being so, that Infant Baptism is not urged for its practice, but only by way of office, which is the same that contradicents to Infant Circumcision confess, as it's proved from their own confession is commanded for.  
Hence we say that there was no need for a new command for to warrant Infant Baptism upon the account aforesaid, for its Administration; for that there is one before, viz. for Infant Circumcision administered by way of office only, and it being so; the ancient practised rules attest and warrant another thing to be done by way of like office also, as Infant Baptism is with Infant Circumcision, as aforesaid, which said ancient maxims are these ensuing.  
Generalia generalitèr, & semel docenda: à quatenus ipsum ad de omni efficax est illatio.  
1. General's are to be taught generally, and at once.  
2. That from such and such, so and so, ariseth a prevalent Inference, and concluding of another like thing, as such and such, so and so, in like manner both these rules are founded in the head of comparates in Logic, à paribus from likenesses betwixt things that are to be considered as adequate and alike respectively, in reference to each other, as Infant Baptism is with Infant Circumcision by way of office, as aforesaid.  
We can give many instances for the practice of the first named maxim generaliter.  
Ramus (mentioned before) never names argumentum but once, (after its distribution) though it have its influence in and upon every head of Logic, because its genus generalissimum, the chief general to them all as specials under it, for genus communicat totam suam essentiam suis speciebus, that is, the general communicates its whole general essence to all specials under it.  
Instance: Animal doth in like manner communicate the vegitative and sensitive virtue and life to Man and Beast.  
And therefore to express a general more than once, is needless; for that it's idem per idem, the same by the same; and the rule is, frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora; it's a frnstra, and 〈◊〉 to little purpose to do a thing by many things, which may be done by fewer.  
Hence the said rule for and by teaching generals at once is practised, to prevent needless tautologies, and repetitions of things alike to be considered, and may be understood by one, and at once.  
And is it not a needless repetition to recite a new Command for warranting Infant Baptism, when the Lord hath given one before for Infant Circumcision, which was administered upon no other nor better account, than Infant Baptism may be administered also?  
And since it is ●o betwixt Infant Circumcision, and Infant Baptism respectively, that rule also, à quatenus ipsum ad de omni, justifies Infant Baptism, though it have no express command for its practice, yet it's as truly warranted as Infant Circumcision is, though it be commanded; yea, and by virtue of the said command, for that Infant Baptism is such and such, so and so, as Infant Circumcision is such and such, so and so, in reference to the same use and end respectively, as aforesaid.  
It's said that Abraham was justified only as a Believer, Rom. 4.  
Hence every true Believer may assure himself (upon the account of Abraham's Justification) that he is Justified also, though he be not named by an express to be Justified also.  
And it's assured him from the rule à quatenus ipsum, as aforesaid; for that he is such and such, so and so; and therefore needs no new naming of him justified, but his true Belief by Faith is sufficient, as Abraham's was.  
For that an identity and sameness must necessarily be owned in one as well as the other, where it is found.  
But because the contradicents to Infant Baptism, do so tenaciously adhere to the having a particular Command for their practice of a duty to be done upon Scripture account and liking, as they do for the practice of Infant Baptism; or they will not (as they do not) own the practice of it.  
We shall offer to their serious consideration that express, Deut. 25.4. concerning Oxen, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Ox when he treadeth out the Corn.  
The Apostle makes use of the said naked command, concerning muzzling the mouth of the Ox in the case aforesaid; saying, 1 Cor. 9.9. Doth God take care for Oxen? (as to fill his Divine Records with Commands for them, which are intentionally written for more Heavenly concerns than Oxen,) or saith he that altogether for our sakes? for our sakes no doubt this is written, (saith the Apostle) who would have thought the said Command concerning the Ox, had been intended (unless the Apostle had declared so much) 〈◊〉 to be a Command in special, concerning the livelihood of Evangelical Ministers, of which there is not a tittle in the said Scripture, neither before nor after; yet the Apostle doth apply it to be chief intended for the providing and giving livelihood to Evangelical Ministers; so also, 1 Tim. 5.18.  
Now wh●t is his warrant for so doing? surely no other, but only from argumentum de comparatis, viz. à minori ad magis; that is, from comparates of the less to the greater, which is, that if the Lord commanded so concerning the Ox, He meant it to be understood more especially concerning Evangelical Ministers livelihood, though he did not express so much therein.  
And may We not say the like for and concerning Infant Baptism, from God's command for Infant Circumcision?  
That God intended thereby his allowance, or warrant for Infant Baptism.  
For can we think that God had such care for Infant Circumcision, as to command that, and altogether pass by his taking notice of Infant Baptism: whereas it's as rational, useful, and documental in being administered by way of office, as ever Circumcision was, which was administered only by way of office, as aforesaid; and Infant Baptisms Administration by way of office, doth represent and hold forth a more lively and perspicuons document, in reference to the end both of Circumcisions and Baptisms work, for which they were brought in respectively, as aforesaid.  
Hence à minori ad magis also; that is, from the less to the greater, betwixt Infant Circumcision & Infant Baptism; for that Infant Circumcision being the less significant by way of office, than Infant Baptism, upon their respective considerations is, in reference to the attaining unto the Childlike innocent life and state.  
It cannot in reason be denied, but that God did intent by his command for Infant Circumcision, to warrant the practice of Infant Baptism also without a command; or truly, as the Apostle tells the Cor. that God intended there should be the allowance of Evangelical Ministers livelihood; by his only commanding not to muzzle the mouth of the Ox, though he did not give command for it also, as he did for the Ox.  
All aforesaid for the adjusting Infant Baptism, upon the 〈◊〉 considerations aforesaid, in reference to 〈…〉, must (as we persuade ourselves they will) be yielded unto, or we shall at last entangle ourselves, as Pharaoh said, the Israelites were entangled, Exod. 14. in such ensuing evil consequences by our not yielding, as will infer many unworthy (we are afraid blasphemous) reflections upon the Lord Jesus, by his neither commanding, nor forbidding Infant Baptism; for that all the long & violent contests among conscientious Christians have been thereupon, because the Lord hath not forbidden, nor commanded it.  
Hence, one party disowns it, because it is not commanded: the other party pleading for it, and practising it, (as they may) because it is not forbidden.  
Now, if the Lord had pleased to have commanded, or forbidden Infant Baptism; surely the sad and known contests about it, had (we are more than confident) never been.  
Hence we do ex fine rei, and upon the matter, make the Lord to be (absit bl●sphemia dicto) the first author of them all, for it's a true maxim, Quod est causae causae, est causa causati: in causis immediatè dependentibus inter se.  
That is, the cause of a cause immediately depending on each other, is the first cau●● of the thing caused thereby.  
Now since all the contests that have been about Infant Baptism, for that the Lord hath neither commanded it, nor forbidden it, as he might ●a●ly have done either.  
Hence we make him causam, at lest causam sine quânon, of all contests about Infant Baptism.  
There is a story (whether true or feigned it matters not, for ficta arguunt fidemque faciunt, as that of the Trees) Judges 9.8. (that went forth to choose a King) of a very strife lover Parent, who when he looked to die, made his last Will and Testament so dark and ambiguous for sense and meaning, on purpose his Children should not know in express words his respective intentions towards them in reference to his last Will and Testament; saying to himself, it doth me good to think how my Children will contend and quarrel among themselves after my death concerning my words towards them in my last Will and Testament.  
We forbear the application relatively to Christ's last Will and Testament.  
But yet if the Lord Jesus did not intent that his command for Infant Circumcision should adjust the warrant for Infant Baptism, without more ado; We infer, the Lord Jesus to deal ex fine rei upon the matter, as darkly and ambiguously in his last Will and Testament (in reference to Infant Baptism) as the strife lover Parent did in his last Will and Testament, as aforesaid: As if the Lord Jesus were pleased (by his neither commanding nor forbidding Infant Baptism) with all the said contests and strifes that have risen among his Children and Disciples about it.  
This must follow 〈◊〉 upon the Lords own testimony in another case, à pari, Prov. 8.36. where it's said by the Spirit of God, all that hate me love death, that is, the damnable death.  
But who loves that? for nemo vult sui destructionem, said a Heathen.  
Yet because he that hates God, which consists in a separated life from God, doth bring the said inevitable death upon himself, as if he loved it.  
And so we frequently use the expression of loving that misery and punishment we bring upon ourselves (knowingly and voluntarily) which is annexed by assignment unto the same.  
As when we say to a Thief taken in the fact, that he longed to be hanged, when he desires nothing less in his affections.  
Hence à pari, it must (ex vi consequentiae) follow, if the Lord doth not command, nor forbidden Infant Baptism, by reason whereof all the contests and strifes about it have risen, that he is charged (if the command for Infant Circumcision was not intended to warrant its practice) to be at least the causa sine qua non, that is the cause without which the contests about Infant Baptism had not been among conscientious and professing Christians.  
Hence we do stick to it, and affirm with more than confidence, that God intended his command for Infant Circumcision (upon the parallel respects betwixt Infant Circumcision and Infant Baptism, as aforesaid) should declare 〈◊〉 allowance of the practice of Infant Baptism, about which there hath been such bitter opposition, by reason the Lord hath neither commanded it, nor forbidden it.  
God hates, especially among his conscientious Disciples, all such contests and quarrels; For first, he is (as he is truly styled in a known place) the Author of Peace, and Lover of Concord, and calls all his Disciples to peace.  
And is the true Joseph, who warns his Brethren not to fall out by the way, Gen. 45.24. but endeavour to keep the unity of the Spirit, and the bond of Peace, Ephes. 4.3.  
Hence, surely the Lord Jesus would not have been so negligent, careless, unmindful (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) as neither to command, or forbidden Infant Baptism, to have prevented the strifes aforesaid (between two well meaning parties) about it; for that they are so contrary, (especially to break forth among his professing Disciples,) to his own inclination to Peace and Concord, so much, and in divers places declared in the Scriptures.  
Upon all which aforesaid, let us pensitate and weigh that good and wholesome express in Public Baptism.  
Doubt ye not, but be well persuaded for the time to come, oh ye contradicents of Infant Baptism! that God allows and owns that charitable work of ours in bringing Infants to his Holy Baptism; for that they are (being Baptised) as good a document of remembrance to grown Christians upon the account aforesaid, as ever Infant Circumcision was, though commanded; but yet commanded upon no other account, but by way of office, as aforesaid respectively, by which Christians Infants ought, and no otherwise to be Baptised.  
We shall not presume to trouble the contradicents to Infant Baptism further, by multiplying more seeming arguments in specie for it, which yet in re verâ will be but repetitions, and idem per idem, contrary to the maxim, generalia generalitèr, & semel dicenda.  
Therefore we desire them seriously to examine what we have here offered to consideration, in reference to the Justification of Infant Baptism, by our (through God's direction) New Discovery of the way and means thereof, as aforesaid.  
Yet give us leave to say, for a further illustration of the more than probable intention of the Lord to wrap up his allowance and owning Infant Baptism in his command for Infant Circumcision, and especially not prohibiting it, without a repetition of another command for Infant Baptism; for that the Spirit of Wisdom doth frequently in Holy Writ fold up for many causes very much in little, or in half that which is intended, and must be explicated respectively to make the sense and scope of the portion of Scripture (where it is) full and complete, to the purpose that the said Scripture is appointed for.  
And there are many instances thereof in Holy Writ; but we will offer but two at present. One is in Psal. 1.6. where it's said, the Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked shall perish.  
In the first part of the said Verse, there must be supposed to make the sense thereof full and perspicuous, the contrary to that which is expressed in the latter part of the Ver. (viz.) the way of the wicked shall perish, which is, the way of the righteous shall be preserved, for preservation is contrary to perishing.  
Hence two axioms in the said part of the Verse, one apparent, the Lord owns the way of the righteous; the other latent, which is this, the Lord saith, therefore the Lord preserves the way of the righteous; the reason is, because the righteous and wicked are contraries; and therefore, if the way of the wicked shall perish, therefore the way of the righteous shall be preserved; and it's for that the Lord owns the way of the righteous, therefore his way shall be preserved.  
In the latter part of the Verse is positively attested, that the way of the wicked shall perish, the reason is clear, when the contrary to the first part of the Verse is added and expressed, which is, the Lord disowns the way of the wicked, as he owns the way of the righteous upon the account that whether we are wicked or righteous; therefore he disowns the way of the wicked.  
The Proverbs of Solomon are full of such latent and tacit disposures of Scriptures; but we shall give you but one instance of the very many so couched there, as aforesaid; which said instance is in Prov. 13.10. Only by pride, (or rashness rather) cometh contention, but with the well advised is wisdom.  
There must be these axioms laid down in the first part of the Verse.  

1. Folly is the attendant of Pride or Rashness.  
2. Therefore by Pride, (or Rashness rather,) cometh contention. In the latter part of the Verse these two axioms. 

1. Wisdom attends the well advised.  
2. Therefore with the well advised there is peace and quietness.     
In the first part of the Verse is supplied Folly, the contrary to Wisdom, specified in the latter part of the Verse.  
And in the latter part is supplied the contrary to Contention in the first part of the Verse.  
Which contrary is Peace and Quietness; and so the full sense and scope of the said Verse is laid down 〈◊〉 the demonstration of the cause of Rashness, viz. Folly with Rashness is the cause of all contention.  
In the latter part of the Verse is laid down the cause of well advisedness, which is Wisdom; and that being with the well advised, it causeth and preserveth Peace and Quietness, which is the contrary to Contention in the first part of the Verse.  
Thus it appears how the Spirit of God doth in Holy Writ contract and wrap up many depending axioms, which are requisitely to be supplied to explicate the intended sense and scope in them for brevity's sake.  
And the ground and warrant of the contraction by latent and tacit disposures of them in the portions of Scriptures where they are, is from the rule of contraries in Logic; for that contraries are such opposites, that uno affirmato, alterum negatur, and uno negato, alterum affirmatur, because they do ratione & re inter se dissentire.  
That is, contraries are such opposites, that one being affirmed, the other must be denied, and one being denied, the other must be affirmed; because such opposites both in Logical respect, or respective reasonings; and in also their respective natures & beings, oppose one another, as the righteous and wicked do.  
And therefore where such opposites are disposed together, the intelligent can draw forth for the respective uses, such latent and tacit axioms out of those that are mentioned and expressed in the said Scriptures; As the Lord knows or owns the way of the righteous, therefore he disowns the way of the wicked, because the wicked is contrary in his way to the way of the righteous.  
So the way of the wicked shall perish, as it is expressed.  
Therefore the way of the righteous shall be safe, or preserved; for that the wicked and righteous ones ways (owned and disowned) are contraries, as in the first part of the Verse declared.  
So in Prov. 13.10. By Pride or rashness cometh contention, therefore with well advisedness, or with the well advised is quietness and peace; for that rashness and well advisedness are opposite contraries; and therefore, if by rashness cometh contention, it must follow a contrariis contrariariorum consequentiis that is, from the contrary consequentials of consequences; from well advisedness comes peace and quietness.  
So if Wisdom is the attendant of well advisedness as it's expressed to be in the Verse, with the well advised is wisdom; for that is the cause of well advisedness, and the guide of the well advised.  
Therefore by the rule of contraries, as aforesaid, Folly is the attendant and cause of rashness, for that is the opposite to Wisdom.  
Now if all such portions of Scripture (wherein such latent and tacit disposures of axioms are contained, as are in Psalm 1.6. and Prov. 13.10. (in which Book multitudes are contained) were expressly, v●●●, & uno intuitu, laid forth, that is, opened at once, and together; how voluminous and big would they swell the Bible unto? even too big for a Pocket reception, and a Vade Mecum upon the account aforesaid. Neither could the Bible be read over so soon and often, with all the axioms relating to the said respective portions of Scriptures, and explained (as they must be) to make the intent and scope of them appear to open view, as they do being disposed as they now are, by the supplies added out of each contrary, as aforesaid.  
Therefore the Lord in great Wisdom, disposed multitudes of Divine axioms in Holy Writ for brevity's cause, and ends and purposes aforesaid.  
And may we not (in like manner) think that the Lord omitted his Command for Infant Baptism, though he allow and own it upon the respective accounts aforesaid betwixt it and Infant Circumcision, in reference to their respective Administrations for brevity's cause, and to avoid needless repetitions; which if he had commanded it expressly, yet it had not been (nor could be) upon any other account than that which he gave for Infant Circumcision.  
for which it was to be done by way of office only, and good document to others concerns at present, not their own; and therefore since Infant Baptism may be done by way of office also, and to as good purpose as ever Infant Circumcision was, it was needless (with reverence be it spoken) for the Lord to repeat a new Command for Infant Baptism also, for that upon the account aforesaid, it had been (we believe) but a tautology idem ad 〈◊〉 idem that is the same to which went before ex fine rei upon the matter, if he had given another Command for Infant Baptism also.  
Thus we have offered to consideration the several grounds and reasons why the Lord might omit (upon rational grounds,) to give a Command for Infant Baptism, and could give no prohibition against Infant Baptism upon the account before demonstrated betwixt Infant Baptism, and Infant Circumcision, we have now we hope sufficiently argued the demonstration of Justification of Infant Baptism by a New Discovery; which Discovery is found out by the consideration of those two great and useful Sacraments or Mysteries, (viz.) Circumcision and Baptism, which the Lord appointed and brought in, and annexed to his respective dispensations Legal and Evangelical, for such uses and ends as are before declared, and that for the removing of two great impediments, (viz.) the gross Sins, first by Circumcision in its Mystery; and then the remaining defilements (that for some time continue until w●shed away, (viz.) by Baptism in its Mystery, both which the gross Sins and remaining defilements of Sin, do impede and obstruct (until removed) the coming back again to the Childlike innocent life and state which our Saviour declares to be done for an entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven; Therefore he sets a little Child in the midst of his Disciples, Matt. 18.3. and then declares so much unto them, as aforesaid.  
Hence Circumcision and Baptism upon the account aforesaid, were brought in by way of office only, as representitavely documental, and teaching in their respective Mysteries in reference to the ends and purposes they were appointed for, as aforesaid.  
And for that our Saviour declares the Childlike innocent life to be the pattern and exemplar to which Circumcision and Baptism in their respective operations do relate and tend unto respectively,  
Hence the Lord ordained Infant Circumcision to represent the said Child l●ke innocent life and state by way of office and good document as aforesaid, to grown Israelites at present, to mind them thereof what rule of life they must look unto, and also by both Circumcision and Baptism to relating and depending operations respectively, as aforesaid; and therefore both are to be received only by way of office, and that in reference to others, not themselves at present.  
And We believe also, that most of the Bible, especially the Historical parts of it, of things done, or not to be done; or otherwise of consequence, are not w●itten for such use and end as the letter of them seems to express; but for higher concerns by way of office designed by God thereunto, though they be declared in literal expresses, yet not to be done upon literal accounts only, as they seem to hold forth.  
For can We imagine that the Holy and Infinite Wise God, who knows things (intus & in cutè,) passed, present, and to come, would cause a Volume to be compiled of so low and sordid things, as the letter doth express and for no other Mysteries under them, and to cause it to be called his Holy Bible, and Sacred Word of his, most profitable for instruction of good manners according to Divine Truth, and reproof of evil manners, comfort of dejected ones for want of his Divine and Heavenly presence; to make them of a Holy and Heavenly life, and to exhort them that are too slow in pursuing of good, and and to dehort th●● whose feet are too swift to run after evil, 2 Tim. 3.16, 17.  
Thus we cannot imagine, that the Lord would suffer his said Volumn to b● filled with so many expresses, as in letter they seem to look to be done the clear contrary way.  
Therefore We believe, they all hold forth something or other by way of office and good document, to represent the way and means by which the fallen Humanity is to be made (through their Mystery) better towards its amendment to piety again, or whereby the wicked and persevering evil Humanity grows worse and worse, according to that 2 Tim. 3.13.  
And so was that of Lot's daughters practices, in reference to entice and persuade their Father, and his yielding and complying with such a wickedness, as the letter of the Scripture seems to hold out; for that it is so contrary to Nature, and against the Law of Naitons, like that as is mentioned, 1 Cor. 5.2.  
Yet neither they, nor Let their Father have any reflection of evil for what they did respectively, but all passed over in silence, without mentioning any failing in them, but declaring their respective fact, without mentioning more than what they did.  
Therefore some better Mystery was intended and designed under what was done, than what the letter seems to hold forth; nor was that true in the letter Ver. 31, That there was not a Man in the Earth (if we take the Earth for the habitable World) to come in unto them after the manner of al● the Earth; for there were then many they might have married with, and some of Abraham's Seed also.  
Hence some further design must be intended then that under the letter, and that of a good document, for that God (saith St. James, Chap 1.) tempts no man to evil.  
Jacob Beh●m (no ●uch contemptible Writer as many account him) tells us in his Mysterium magnum on the said Scripture, of a more sublime and documentally useful design the Lord had in ordering all the said transactions betwixt Lot's daughters, and of Lot their Father to be as they are Recorded.  
And who can persuade themselves, that Lot, who is called a righteous man, and vexed his righteous Soul, 2 Pet. 2.7. with the unclean conversation of the Sodomites? should do such an horrid evil as the letter doth express? for then the Poet's Verse he had verified in himself; Turpe est doctori cum culpa redarguit ipsa. For he that was vexed with the unclean conversation of the Sodomites, committed a more foul uncleanness himself, if the letter be there true of what they did without a Mystery; Therefore we ought to decline such like conceptions of such Holy Men as Lot is recorded to be.  
And surely Holy Men of God (who spoke that, and all Scripture, as they were moved by the Holy-Ghost) would not have recorded those facts of Saints; and if they had; then with some monition annexed to the publication of them, but nothing of blemish to them is hinted in the said Scripture.  
If the words that be here published by Holy Men, be to set forth Lot's Daughters, and Lot's practices as their unnatural wickedness.  
Then those Holy men who writ them, did most contrary to David's advice, 2 Sam. 1. Tell it not in Gath, nor publish it in Askelon.  
Not in Gath, wrath's Wine press, where profane persons squeeze out the dregs of highest reproach (upon all occasions) of facts recorded in Scripture, done by most eminent Saints of God.  
The Natrative of jacob's having so many Wives together; and the Patriarches so many Concubine's: How do carnal and vicious men abuse it to a liberty of the Flesh, even to the committing great folly in Israel?  
They thereupon take 〈◊〉 liberty to have many Wives together, if not in one place, yet in many and in divers Countries; at least many Concubines, because the Ancients had so, when as in the beginning God appointed to the Man but one Wife; and the reason is given, Malipiero 2●. 15. Because he sought a godly Seed; and Our Saviour told the Pharisees upon their cavilous query to Him, Matt. 15.4, 5, 6, 7, 8. that from the beginning it was not so; Therefore it's altogether contrary to the first Institution of Marriage in the Innocent state, and after the fallen humanity returns to his God again, it will be in the said case as in the beginning, Mat. 15.4, 5, 6.  
But because they find in Holy Writ, that the old Fathers had many Wives, and that the Wives laid their Handmaids by their Husbands, therefore they pervert the Divine design of God to a carnal (and sometimes profane) abuse, and meaning quite contrary to Gods said design in his permission aforesaid, whose ways are not the carnal Man's ways: nor His thoughts their thoughts, Isai. 55.8. As it was told by a very sober person in the presence of divers, that Sarah (whom St. Peter specifies, 1 Pet. 3.6.) to be an Exemplar of Piety in her Conversation, was the first Bawd who gave her Maid-Servant to her Husband Abraham, Quis talia fando temperate?—  
For that it was told in Gath, (as the letter expresses it) wraths Wine-press to squeeze out reproach against the Saints of God, whose ways are not their ways, but above their sight, as they stand recorded in Scripture; and what was told in Askelon, where false weights are used; (as Askelon signifies) which those the malicious and envious Jews used betwixt Christ and Barrabas, in that they rejected Christ, and chose Barrabas a notorious robber; it falls out so oftentimes, that a less offence is aggravated against Saints that fail, as Gal. 6.1. are spread abroad with great insulting, when notorious practices of vicious men are hid, if possible; but if they cannot, then lessened and excused with and by the recorded sayings of the Saints, as Noah, Lot, and David, etc. who stand recorded upon higher accounts by the Spirit of God's direction, than they are capable to understand in the blindness of their understandings; Thus the fleshly reason doth abuse the respective Narratives of the Saints actions of such and such, as aforesaid.  
For the said Fathers had their communion with God, and his Heavenly Spirit, and performed their Services in the Hour of God, the heart of Humanity, Hebr. 3. in and through the Spirit of God, neither could they perform any Services acceptable to God, without the Heavenly Spirit, 1 Cor. 2.14. Rom. 8.5, 6, 7, 8.  
But the earthly Spirits of natural reason take no regard (as a German saith) to the Spirit of the Lord, if so be they have but the letter, they are content to rest in its naked express, and thereupon take the things recorded only as the letter expresses them.  
Whereupon it comes to pass, that the carnal figurative man thinks the Divine and Spiritual Ordinances, are for the most part made use of for an earthly lust in the Flesh; and then declare and say, the Lord so meant and intended it, for that the Holy Scriptures hold it out in the express letter of them.  
And so it doth, that men are trees, and Herod a Fox, yet they are to signify some further considerations as they will confess, which yet in many other things they will not yield that higher Mysteries are under them, but stick to the letter, and mistake thereby most of the Ordinances and Services which they take out of the letter, and say, the Scripture is written (as it is acknowledged) by the Holy Spirit, which must be our rule; and he that will deny it, that the Holy Spirit hath not so meant it as they fancy, through the blindness of their earthly reason, than he must be a Seducer and an Heretic that saith otherwise than they say; whereas under the said letter other things (as St. Paul tells the Jews, Gal. 4.4.) are meant; and Jacob Behem declares, that Divine and Heavenly Mysteries are meant by and through the practices of Lot's Daughters, and of Lot himself, as he saith, for that the ancient Fathers recorded in the Old Testament, had their communion with God, and his Heavenly Spirit, neither could they perform their Services in the House of God, the heart of the Humanity, Hebr. 3.6. acceptable to God without the Heavenly Spirit, 1 Cor. 2.14. Rom. 8.5, 6, 7, 8.  
But the earthly Spirits of natural reason take no heed that there is further meaning and intention of the Spirit of God under the letter; but if they have the plain letter express, than they are content in and with their Services (without minding whether the Spirit of God have a further and more secret meaning under the letter, yea owned) as it had under the two Mountains, Gal. 4.24, 25.  
And they say the Scriptures are written by the Holy-Ghost; and it's confessed so they are: but yet the Spirit of the Lord must open that within the vale, (2 Cor. 3.13, 14, 15.) before they can know the mind of God in the said Scriptures, Rom. 2.10, 11. which are, and must be our rule of direction.  
Yet they are so confident they know the Scriptures sense, by what the letter holds out, as they will not departed from it, though they may read in the same Scriptures how the learned Scribes and Pharisees mistook the letter of the Scriptures, to the causing of great contentious among themselves concerning Christ, that he could not be a Prophet, see John 7, ver. 40. to ver. 53. what bandying there was among them about our Lord; some whose hearts were opened, (as Lydia's was) did affirm him to be the Prophet; some that he was the Christ: But the Scripture learned denied it upon the account of the place from whence he came, (viz.) Galilee; therefore he could not be the Christ, for that the Scripture saith so, affirm the learned that Christ came of the Seed of David, and out of the Town of Bethlehem; and how incensed were they against Nicodemus, for wishing them to consider their Law that condemns no man before it hear him, and know what he doth.  
They asked him if he were of Galilee, and bid him search and look, they meant in the Scripture letter surely; For out of Galilee ariseth no Prophet. But if these learned men had not been blinded in their carnal reason, but understood that the Lord appointed all these names by way of office as significants of further Mysteries under the said literal names, than they would not have been so confident in their we say, and no say, for in their Mystery; all these aforesaid specifications, (some whereof they owned, but ignorantly) the other they denied, that a Prophet doth not arise out of Galilee, which yet there doth arise Prophets; and Christ the Prophet also there, as Galilee in its word signifies Conversion or turning about, and in reference to God's design to the new life by repentance; therefore so much is spoken of Christ's appearing to his Disciples in Galilee, that is, in their turning about to him; and so much is expressed of Christ's going into Galilee, and Preaching in Galilee.  
So it was also true that Christ was of the Seed of David in the Mystery, as David in his office figures forth, which is the lovely Service.  
So Christ came out of Bethlehem, the house of Bread, as that Town in its name figureth forth; and doth not Christ say of himself, John 6.49, 50. that He is the Bread that came down from Heaven? so of the City of Nazareth was Nathaniel also mistaken in, and that out of the letter.  
When Philip said to him, John 1.45. of whom Moses in the Law, and the Prophets did write.  
Jesus of Nazareth the Son of Joseph: Nathaniel replies, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? this he gathered from the letter only, for that it was a contemptible City; and yet Matt. 21.11. the multitude confess that he was Jesus the Prophet of Nazareth of Galilee, and to that City was the Angel sent to Mary, Luke 1.26. It was a City of Galilee; Now all these had under their respective literal names, their respective Mysteries contained. And can we think otherwise, when the Spirit of God causeth the said respective names to be so punctually recorded, it cannot be without such a design; for as the Apostle saith 1 Cor. 9 Doth God take such care for Oxen, as to cause Moses to write a Law for them, without a further or higher concern than Oxen.  
And so doth the Spirit of God cause so many Scripture names for cyphers, only to be written without a design of greater Mysteries under them, which the learned Scribes were ignorant of, and therefore denied Christ to be a Prophet, and the Christ of God, for that he cometh out of Galilee; and out of Nazareth they thought no good thing could come.  
And Nathaniel thought so for a time, that no good thing could come out of Nazareth; whereas Nazareth signifies Separation, and Christ is said, Heb. 7.26. to be Holy, harmless, separate from Sinners; and therefore in the Mystery of the name, he cometh a Prophet out of Nazareth, and so ariseth a Prophet out of Galilee, which in the Mystery of the name signifies a turning about, as aforesaid; and therefore Nazareth is a City in Galilee; for Galilee in its Mystery signifies turning about; Nazareth which signifies Separation, must be a City there; for Separation is the end and scope of turning about Acts 26. from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God.  
We have made the large digression aforesaid; for that we think it correspondent to our aim in every particular, which is to persuade God fearing people to search by Prayer and Meditation, whether (as we have before offered to consideration) the greatest part of God's Holy writings, from the first of Gen. to the last of the Revel. are not to be looked upon, and enquired into as to be written for our learning of higher Mysteries than the letter holds forth unto us) which will be consented unto by us, when the Lord opens our thoughts to consider and apprehend, that they are mostly by way of office, and as representatives (as the two Mountains were, Gal. 4.) of higher Mysteries to be owned and received by the Jews.  
And now we return to offer to consideration the Divine and Heavenly reason, that the Holy God had in permitting the old Fathers recorded in the Old Testament, to have so many Wives; and to take Handmaids to their bed, and have so many Concubines; which was a kind of needfulness (consider at is consider and is) in reference to the fallen humanity, being fallen from God, whereby the true marriage with one Man and one Woman was broken off, which otherwise had never been, that the Man should have had more Wives than one (as appears by Mal. 2.14, 15.) given him of God, for to beget of the same one 〈◊〉 of fruit, or Children; and the reason is for that causa qua causa semper facit idem.  
Hence the many Wives came in through disobedience, and figured forth, that when the Man fell away from that Heavenly Deity, he then begat with his Wife two sorts of births of dfferent natures, by reason whereof, one killed the other, figured forth in Cain, Gen. 4.8. who killed his Brother Abel, the breath of God; and therefore if if the revolt from God had not been committed, than the only Marriage which God made in the beginning had not been broken; neither had the Handmaids been needful to bring forth Children.  
But when the only God saw that his Marriage that he had made in Unity and Concord was broken off, and that from the Apostate and corrupt generation ●here came forth always strife and contention, figured forth by and in the struggling in Rebeccahs' womb, Gen. 25.22, 23. which Gods pure and Holy Spirit could not endure that there should be always strife and dissension in the humane being; and therefore he looked upon the Power and Omnipotency of his being and Spirit, for to beget thereout Ministers and Servants (through his most great Wisdom) to set up, and by degrees to re-establish through their service, the only Marriage again, by the begetting of Divine Children in a figure.  
To this end the Lord at first chose Abraham for a Servant, and a Father, to make him fruitful as well Divinely as Humanely, Rom. 9.9. Out of whose fruitfulness there was brought forth Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon, Moses, and many others, in whom the manly being was in strength to be serviceable to God.  
And this manly power (understand it Spiritually) saith the German aforesaid was inclined to generate; Now he could not generate without the help of a Female, that is, (saith the aforesaid German) love to the fruitfulness of God, Truth, Comprehension, and Understanding, which are all Feminine.  
Now these Women had yet Handmaids, by whom they were served, and whom they might bring to their Husbands for to conceive by them.  
For they well knew that they should not at first conceive by their Husbands, unless they laid (so the Deity ordered it,) their Handmaids (which are Faith, Hope, and Love, God's obedience in figure) with their Husbands; otherwise they could not bring forth any Fruits (Spiritually) in the Humanity.  
Behold for this reason the Women laid a Handmaid with their Husbands, to the end that he thereby should engender and beget increase or fruit, which is a serviceable work, whereby the earthly lusts are broken and destroyed.  
Now for this end Sarah laid her Handmaid called Hagar by her Husband, (and she is a growing and increasing Woman coming out of affliction, for she came out of Egypt) of her, Abraham begat an illegitimate Child, before Sarah can bring forth a legitimate Child. Hagars' Child was named Ishmael, and called Gal. 4. The Son of the Bondwoman, Hagar, aforesaid.  
So Rachel the lawful Wife (for whom Jacob served 7 years) had Leah, which is a Labratess, who was laid first with Jacob, Rachel's Husband, with whom the Husband must first beget fruit, Gen. 29.32. and her first born was Reuben, the Son of Sight, which is the first fruit to be brought forth, Acts 26.17, 18. To whom I send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, which was the first thing Ananias said to Paul, Acts 9.17, 18. Brother Saul receive th●y sight. Then was brought forth (Gen. 29.33.) Simeon, Hearing, which is the next to Sight, and then Levi, ver. 34. one adjoined; for after the Seeing and Hearing with the eyes and ears of their understandings, which the Apostle prays for in the Ephesians behalf, Chap. 1.18. then there is way made to be joined (in a further preparation) with the Deity and Humanity. And then is born Judah, Confession, in which God is owned, according to that Psal. 76.1. In Judah is God known or owned, his Name is great in Israel; that is, his Being is great in the prevailer, as the Angel interprets the name, Gen. 32.28.  
These therefore are the Administrations that go before in reference to the preparation, for the Deity and renewed Humanity to be joined together, even as our Saviour set forth several Administrations (in reference to his own office to be done by him) under the names (in a Mystery) of his Disciples; as first, he assigns Simon, it notes obedience Matt. 10.2. For that the Sinner is first called to obedience, which is the obedience of Faith, Rom. 1.5, 6, 26. And therefore is called Peter, that is, the Rock of Faith sounded on the obedience. The next sent forth is Andrew, which notes Virility or Strength, which is next to Simon Peter, the obedience of Faith, which brings forth the strength, as appears Hebr. 11. tot. cap. And we are commanded to be strong in the Lord, Ephes. 6.10, etc. hence called Simon Peter's brother in the Mystery. The next in his office is James, the same with Jacob, the subduer of the sin, the next to Andrew the strength, for then able to overcome by wrestling, as Jacob did, and he is the Son of Zebedee endowed, or a good dowry, as Jacob had when he wrestled and prevailed, Gen. 22.28.  
Now because all this, as Paul saith (1 Cor. 15.10.) is through Grace I laboured more than you all; yet not I, but the grace of God in me.  
Therefore John, the Grace of God is next, and is the Brother James sent to Preach in the wilderness of Judea, Matt. 3.1. in that bewildered state (after they come out of the house of Bondage) of the confused thoughts in the repenting Sinner, that leads him from one by-path to another.  
Hence God in great Mercy and care to the repenting Humanity, sends John the Baptist, as the forerunner (to the thorough washer the Christ of God, Ephes. 5.27.) to wash away the remaining defilements of Sin, first in the River of Judgement, ver. 6. and this John is the Son of Zacharias, the remembrance of the Lord, Luke 1.72. for the Lord remembered his oath, ver. 73.  
And his office was to prepare the way of the Lord, by pulling down the high Mountains, the high thoughts of carnal reason, to make straight the crooked ways, the subtle wind and turn of the carnal reason, as those subtle Jews had, Luke 20.20, 21. the rough ways smooth, the boisterous and rugged thoughts in the carnal reason, as were in Paul before his Conversion, Acts 9.20. & Acts 16. in the Jailor. Then shall all flesh see the Salvation of God, Luk 3.6. Isa. 62.1.  
Hence we see how our Lord sent forth his own Administrations in and by way of office, in reference to his own design.  
And therefore it need not seem strange, that the Lord should permit and order some things to be done (in an extraordinary way) by the Old Fathers, Abraham Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon, to take to themselves so many Wives & Handmaids, by whom they begat so many and divers Children, even to figure forth in a Mystery; the breaking thereby the many Lusts by degrees in the yet unrenewed Humanity.  
And therefore Abraham begat a Son of Hagar, as aforesaid, called Ishmael, to figure forth the Servantiship under the Law, which must be cast out when Sarah the Belief, hath brought forth Isaac the true Joy, Gal. 4.25. then must Ishmael be cast out, for that he was the figure of the Servantship under the Law, Gal. 4.30.  
So that it appears, that Sarah her giving Hagar, was by way of of office, that 〈◊〉 the Seed of the Servantship under the Law was first to be begotten by Abrabam, to figure forth it to be first brought forth, before the freedomship which is in the Belief, Gal. 4.1, 2. The like is to be said of the rest, as aforesaid.  
Hence they are to be looked upon as Spiritual Wiv●s, Handmaids, Concubines in God's design, though they were also creaturely Wives whom they laid with their Husbands, to bring forth Children in a Mystery by them, and not to satisfy their Lust thereby, as the carnal men of the world think, and thereby practise it; and justify themselves in so doing, upon the Old Fathers having many Wives, as aforesaid.  
But this cannot be owned in reason, that the Lord should wink at this in such Holy Men as the Old Fathers were; nor that the Lord did connive at it to replenish the World thereby the sooner; For that God had rather begin the World anew as he did after the Flood, which was destroyed merely for that cause, Gen. 6, 4, 5, 6, etc.  
And it's said that the Lord sought a Godly Seed, Mal. 2.15. Therefore there could be no such connivance from the Lord upon any such account aforesaid; neither would the Lord have suffered his Holy Prophets to have stuffed his Holy Scriptures with such stories, to the giving a liberty to the Flesh, and so to the corrupting of good manners, and bringing in an ungodly Seed.  
This cannot by sober Men be yielded unto, for that the Scriptures are Spiritual, and have for their scope, Spiritual things and designs, for that God is a Spirit, and will be worshipped in Spirit and Truth, John 4.23.  
Therefore if we look upon their Wives, as creatural Wives only in God's design and aim, we err and mistake, not knowing the Scriptures what they mean in their Mystery, nor yet the Holiness of God, who is said (Hab. 1.13.) to be of purer eyes than to behold Iniquity.  
Besides, these Husbands had more Concubines, which figured forth also by way of office, Ministering Spirits which move to and fro, and are also Feminine by whom the Husbands especially were served in the divided times, for they were no longer to continue but until the lawful Wife became pregnant by her lawful Husband, and then the Handmaids with the Concubines have performed Spiritually (and in their Mystery) their Service to a Divine fruitfulness, as Handmaids.  
Marry the Mother of our Lord who calls herself a Handmaid, (Luke 1.38.) was the last Handmaid, because she brought forth the Christ of God the Saviour, who is the end of the Law and Prophets, and of the Types and Figures; Therefore when he comes and is born in us out of Mary, that pure Virgin Doctrine, God saith, Cast out the bondmaid with her Son, Gal. 4.27. as it was said when Sarah the lawful Wife had brought forth Isaac the Son of true joyfulness, than Sarah caused Abraham (Gen. 46.10) to Cast out the bondwoman and her Son.  
Hence it's apparent that Sarah gave no more Hagar her Handmaid to her Husband.  
And when the Handmaid with her Son is cast out, then God sets up in his Christly being the decayed Marriage in its former State and condition even as it was ordained of God at first; namely, one Man and one Woman inward in the Spirit (2 Cor. 11.2.) and outward among the creatures, 1 Tim. 3.2. Titus 1.16. 1 Cor. 9.5.  
He that will not in this last part of time be obedient to this Christly Marriage in the one only being; but will choose false Marriages, and marry Wives and Concubines to the satisfying of his fleshly desires, because they read the Old Father's aforesaid had many, (but in a Mystery only, as aforesaid) let him take heed, for such an one will be judged in the sight of God for a Whoremonger, and shall not, according to the Word of the Lord, have any portion in the Kingdom of Heaven, 1 Cor. 6.9, 10. for that they are mistaken in the ground and motive of their practice of having many Wives and Concubines, because the Old Fathers had many; but it was practised and allowed them upon another account aforesaid, and not to satisfy their Carnal Lusts and desires thereby.  
And as many mistake the reason of God's allowance to the introducing great licentiousness; so not a few mistake the Apostles testimony of Gods loving Jacob, and hating Esau, before they had done good or evil, whereby they seem to introduce great partiality in God, (to Gods great dishonour) with whom there is no respect of persons; and can there be more partiality appear then in this, to love some before, or without preconsidering they had done good, and hating others before (or without preconsidering) they had done evil.  
The mischiefs these may introduce, (ex fine rei) are presumptions in some upon their false persuasion to think themselves beloved of God with love of acceptation, before they have done good personally, as God requires, so upon Gods hating Fsau before he had, or is preconsidered to do evil personally; what can it evidence in God, if it were (as it is not) so, but highest severity without Justice in Gods doing it? and then St. James' testimony is not true, Mercy rejoiceth over Judgement, James 2.13. But severity to some before they do evil personally, rejoiceth over Mercy; and what can it produce in such as think upon their eternal state, but distractions, doubts, and fears, yea desperation itself, as stories, and not a few witness so much?  
Therefore we assure ourselves, that Gods loving and hating Jacob and Esau before they had done good and evil, is declared only by way of office, and as respective representatives of two dissinct beings under those two names; for in Jacob the Breath of God is in him, and that God loves before it do personally good, because it comes out from God; and Esau signify the Earthly being, and 〈◊〉 God hates that before it have personally done evil, for it comes not forth of God; but God did not personally hate Esau, nor did Esau continue hatred to Jacob, for Gen. 45.6, 7, 8, 9 Esau was personally reconciled to Jacob, which shown his good nature, by which the Apostle, (1 John 3.14, 15.) declares a passing from death to life; and where did Esau personally do to Jacob, as is expressed, Obad. ver. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. or to any that were with him; and did not the Lord also promise many blessings personally to Esau, Deut. 2.5. Now where are any blessings given by promises to any reprobates or wicked men, as such? though it is granted, that God gives them many blessings, as Rom. 2.4. to lead them to repentance (but not by promise) upon the account aforesaid, unless they repent, Acts 2.37. Therefore Esau was not at his birth a reprobate personally, and that upon the account of God's blessing him, as aforesaid.  
Hence that (Rom. 9.11.) is meant of Esau in his office only, and as a representative of the earthly nature and old world, Esdr. 2.6, 7, 8, 9 which God hates before the said Esau had done evil personally; and so all that is spoken of Esau, (Obad. ver. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14.) is spoken of Esau by way of office, and as a representative of the earthly nature, that is, cruel against the Israel of God.  
And therefore it being so as not spoken of Esau personally, there can be no absolute reprobation and rejection demonstratively proved from what is said, Rom. 9.11. concerning Jacob and Esau before they had done good or evil.  
Which very expression demonstrates it to be most contradictory to God's Mercy and Justice, (his two ruling attributes) and also to his Decree to reward or punish all mankind according to their works, 2 Cor. 5.10. and it's said, Lament. 3.29. the man suffers only for his Sin. Rev. 2.17. yet God saith, Ezek. 18.32. that as he lives, he desires not the death of a Sinner.  
Now if that be true, that God reprobates any in Decree, before they are preconsidered to do evil, than the Lord loves (absit blasphemia dicto) their death, contrary to his said asseveration or Oath, Ezek. 18.32. Further, none dare say that God doth actually punish before the Sin is committed, and can he pass a Decree to reprobate Esau personally, before his Sin be considered as preexistent? this is most illogical and irrational, for that then the Act is in exercito, before it hath its object considered in reference to it, ut versatus circa objectum.  
And Sin is declared in Holy Writ to be the only object of God's anger, who hates Iniquity, and loves Righteousness, Heb. 1.9.  
Hence that of loving Jacob, and hating of Esau before they had done good or evil, cannot be meant personally of them, but only by way of office as they stood in God's design, the representatives of elect and reprobate, under the significations of their respective names of Jacob & Esau, as aforesaid; Jacob having the Breath and inspiration of the Divine being in the renewed Humanity, to tread down Sin to a prevailing over it; and Esau as the Earthly being brought forth in the fallen Humanity, to the persecuting and rejecting the breathing or inspiration of the Divine being, which since the fall of the Humanity is the youngest, and brought in to rule over the elder; that is, Esau in Mystery the Earthly being, John 1.4.  
Thus we have offered to consideration, now conducing it is to come to the true knowledge of the Scripture Mystery, to make diligent search into the Scriptures, and that with most humbe Prayers to the Lord to give us to understand whether the greatest part of Holy Writ be not to be looked upon by the Lords own design, as to be interpretatively spoken and delivered to us by way of office, and as representatives and significancies of other Mysteries, than the letter of the Scriptures hold forth literally unto us; for otherwise we shall be much put to it to make some Scriptures true; for where did Esau personally serve Jacob? yet it's said, the elder shall serve the younger.  
And if some Scriptures be not to be understood by way of office; how barren and low in express and matter, do they seem to be in their sense and scope? Yea some ridiculous (absit blasphemia dicto) as that of Jacob his clothing of his Son in a party coloured Coat, as great personages have done their Naturalists, we heartil, wish that themselves would behold their Naturalists Coat, (who are the innocent ones in great measure) and improve the spectation of it, to mind them to return to the end and scope of joseph's party coloured Coat, which was to figure forth the various and divers virtues expressed, (and we exhorted unto) 2 Pet. 1.4, 5, 6. that the Joseph, the growing to perfection is clothed with, Phil. 3.14, 15.  
And some passages in the Books called the Apocrypha are smiled at, fit for nothing but (movere cachinum) to move laughter; as that of Tobit and his Dog attending on him.  
Now Tobit in its name signifies Goodness, and what serviceable creature is there more ready to wait on his Master than the Dog is? and therefore is not the Dog the fittest document and representative of the good will, which will always wait upon Tobit the goodness in the renewed Humanity? Hence in the Mystery, and by way of office and good document, Tobit and his Dog are not so contemptible, but a most useful meditation.  
And Shingler in his Penteglotte intimates, that the Book of Tobit was written in Hebrew, and most call that Book and others Apocrypha, because not written in Hebrew, though in truth that is no reason, if leisure would permit to argue it; but whether it be a reason yea or no, yet we think the truest reason for that those divided Books are called Apocrypha is, because their Mysteries (for want of Faith, and diligence with Prayer to read them) are hid from us.  
It might seem as strange to read of our Saviour's mixing clay and spittle to open the blind man's eyes; if it were not understood to be by way of office and Mystery, as it was; for carnal reason cannot but think that mode to be the ready way to have continued him blind; but the foolishness of God is wiser than Men, 1 Cor. 1.25. ver. 27.  
And how ridiculous was it (absit blasphemia dicto) to carnal reason to see Christ riding upon an Ass to Jerusalem, and garments spread under him, and all the People shouting with acclamations before him, and strewing Palm-branches in the way, crying Hosanna to the highest; this was strange to the letter learned Jews; hence that was by way of office and good document of higher Mysteries  
If all were not appointed by design from God by way of office, and better Document in Mystery than the blind reason can comprehend, they had been betrer (pardon the expression) left out; what is the reason why the carnal wits say, they can get as much good or more at a Play, than hearing a Sermon, which is or should be a discourse upon some portion (more or less) of the Scriptures, profitable for Doctrine, for correction to mend them that are too much lifted up in false persuasions of their safe being, to raise them up which are too much (though there are but few of them) cast down in doubts and fears; and also profitable for Exhortation to virtue, and Dehortation from vice; this should be the mode of a Sermon out of the pattern of healing words, 2 Tim. 1.13. which is the speaking as of the Oracles of God. 1 Pet. 4.11. And as for the Predicant he must do it (saith the Apostle there) as of the ability which God giveth for the end there expressed; the original is more significant, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. the words properly and most fitly are as out of the strength which the Lord than supplies, for it is an old saying, Spiritus non semper tangit corda Prophetarum, God's Spirit doth not always touch the hearts of the Prophets, as it did Christ, whereby he always spoke as one having authority, and not as the Scribes, Matt. 7.27. Now whether one can get as much good at a Play to his betterment, and to the good life, that's the state of the Case; they may speak as good words as significant to their purpose, and with as much 〈◊〉 to the sensible affections as the Predicant can do; but if that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord supplies (which comes forth from God) be absent, that is the enquiry, if it be absent, than it is not God's Ordinance, ut finis cui; and so it passeth away as like water through a sieve; one would have thought that Dives argument used to Abraham had been a most prevalent one to warn his Brethren to amend their lives, by desiring him to send one from the dead to tell them of his torments, who wanted now a drop of water to cool his tongue, that abused his plenty of the best Equors in his life time; but Abraham tells him they have Moses, and the Prophets, yet Moses was not then living for them to hear; But let us hear them, and if they hear not them, saith Abraham, neither will they be persuaded though one a●se again from the dead.  
And we see it verified among ourselves of late; what hath the fore wasting Plague, the raging and violent Fire in this City, and the late War? what have these, we say, reform the generality of the People? testify it that can; Hence that which Abraham said is most true, If they hear not Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one come from the dead again.  
All this we have spoken, is to remove the empty pretence aforesaid, and to mind us of that, 1 Cor. 1.21. and when the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of Preaching to save them that believe; and all this cannot be true out of the letter only, but it is and must be out of the Spirit.  
The truth is, if we come to be persuaded that God designed most of his Holy Writings to be looked upon, and applied or spoken to us for higher Mysteries than the natural Creation, we should find more benefit by reading of them, than we have words, or time to express; as for instance, if we look upon the 1. or 2. of Genesis, which treats of the Worlds and Man's Creation, to intent another Spiritual World also; and the new Creation spoken of 2 Pet. 3.13. But we look for new Heavens and new Earth, according to his promise wherein dwells righteousness; would it not raise up your thoughts above this imperial world?  
Secondly, By looking upon something in the Scriptures beyond and under the letter; it would preserve the Saints honour from that reproach which is cast upon them by something which the letter of the Scripture hold forth they did; as what Lot and Noah did in reference unto those evils that the Scriptures relate in the letter they did; So what Abraham did in having a Child b● Hagar the Bondwoman; so Jacob in his reproach for his many Wives, which yet are not to be looked upon as creaturely Wives only, but in higher Mystery; so Solomon as having so many Concubine's, which are not yet to be looked upon as creatural only, but in a Mystery.  
Thirdly, It will make the Scripture true in every part of it, which otherwise in the bare letter cannot be made true; for where did Esau the elder Brother serve Jacob his younger Brother in the letter, yet in a Spiritual consideration he did?  
Fourthly, It will make the whole Scripture (which was written for our learning) Rom. 15.4. or concern and instruction to all, which otherwise cannot in the letter of personal concerns to all, at all times, and all places.  
Fifthly, it would preserve the Holy Scriptures from seeming contradictions in themselves, that yet were designed by Divine Providence to be most true in the sense the Holy Ghost spiritually intended them to be considered; for instance, Judas Iscariot was chosen by Christ knowingly; as all his Apostles besides were, and he did, and would have verified his name true which way soever he had persevered in, he being as chosen of Christ by way of office as other Disciples were; for Iscariot signifies a death and killing, and by betraying his Lord and Master he was a Judas Iscariot indeed, a professed Murderer, for he murdered and killed the just One, James 4.6. and being himself an instrument to do it by others; But if he had continued in the obedient life to his Lord, he had been also a Judas Iscariot, a professed Son of murdering and killing, the wicked nature in himself, and an instrument to help to do it in others; So that Christ chose him by design and way of office, which he might have performed the best way through grace, as he did the worst way through Satan's temptation; and we believe most of the names of Men, and others in Scripture, are designed by God to have a twofold scope and end in their nomination, as Cain which signifies a possession, and so he was of the earthly wicked nature, by killing his brother Abel, that is, a Divine breathing (for Abel signifies the breath) of God, being in him; but if he had preserved ●bel his Brother, as the Heavenly breathing of God in himself (as his Brother) he had still been a Possession, but then a Possession of the said Heavenly being to his growing up to eternal life, (and as a Divinely Spiritual German saith, the names of the 7 Churches of Asia (are to be considered by way of office) have a twofold and contrary significancy intended to be in them by the Lords own design; We will instance but in one for brevity sake, Ephesus the first Commonalty or Church, signify a Desirableness; As the man's elicit act consents to the Grace of God: so that Ephesus, which signifies Desirableness to good, as the takes part with his Brother Abel, the Breath of God, which is in all men that come into the World, John 1.9.  
And also Ephesus signifies Desirablenesses to the evil, as he takes part with his Brother Cain within him, the wicked nature to be his Possession.  
Hence the Scripture names are designed to be considered by way of office, and great documents in Mysteries, as aforesaid.  
If the Holy writings were more strictly looked upon, and owned to be for other Mysteries than the letter seems to express, there would not have been such doubts and contesis about the sense of the Scriptures, as there are among many men (yea understanding and learned men) raised as there are, nor yet against Infant-Baptism, any more than against Infant-Circumcision, for that they are born to be done by way of office and good document to others concerns more than their own; and Infant-Baptism may be administered to as good purpose upon the account aforesaid, as ever Circumcision could be.  
If Simon Peter were owned, as our Saviour chose him by way of office as he did, there would not have been such Volumes written as there have been about Peter's personal Supremacy, pro & con, as being the chief and first Bishop of Rome. For Peter is and must be the first Bishop or Administration by way of office of all the rest, because he is in his name the Obedience of Faith, which is the substratum and foundation of all things, Hebr. 12.1. as the adjunct occupate that is conversant about them, in reference to his office, and no personal Supremacy can be derived from Peter's, merely personal respect to continue always Supreme in his person; for that our Saviour blames his Disciples for seeking any superiority over one another as personally relating to them, in respect of their mere persons, that they are to be considered by way of office both in faithfulness and order.  
So that where ever the Obedience of Faith doth most appear by way of office, performed by Spiritual men in office; there Peter's Supremacy appears, and is set up as well in one Christian Nation and Government as in another, else how could the Lord remove the Church's Candlestick out of its place, if the the abuse of a Spiritual office were not the provoking cause of it? as he doth threaten, Revel. 2.5.  
God is so far in love with Obedience of Faith, that every Nation (as the Scripture saith) that fears God, and worketh Righteousness, is accepted of him; And therefore the Spiritual Supreme Governor of every Nation that works Righteousness, doth as truly exercise in and under his own Government. Peter's Supremacy, that is, he being first in the Obedience of Faith by way of office, as aforesaid, as another Nation doth.  
The great contest about Transubstantiation in the Lord's Supper would soon vanish, if it were known in the Mystery, and in reference to Christ's Spiritual Body and Blood, as appears by John 6.53. to 63. where our Saviour tells us, it's the Spirit that quickens, the Flesh profits nothing; what Flesh do you think that is that profits nothing? and what Flesh must that be which Christ saith, ver. 54, 55, 56. Who ever eats of it hath eternal life: and he dwells in Christ, and Christ in him; which therefore must declare indeed, a Transubstantiation of Christ's Flesh and Blood, but not of bodily Flesh, for that (saith Christ) profits nothing, ver. 63. And St. Peter saith 1 Pet. 18, 19 Ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as Silver and Gold from your vain conversation, but with the Blood of Christ, etc. And was not Christ's Body and Blood perishable, for that it was spilt on the ground in his Crucifixion?  
Hence the Miracles pretended to be seen of Christ's bodily Blood and Flesh in the Consecrated Bread, to what purpose are they published, and the People persuaded to believe them, if the corporal Flesh be that which Christ saith profiteth nothing?  
There hath been great endeavours and undertaking by some, to reconcile all divided and opposing persuasions to be united in the bonds of operative love to God and our Neighbour, for that our Saviour saith on those two Commands hang all the Law and the Prophets; and therefore what ever doth not promote, but destroy the said operative love to God and our Neighbour (as all divided persuasions and opinions do by persevering in them,) is not worth the contending for; Yea those persuasions are to be abhorred, which attempt to promote themselves by bloodshed, and the poisoning one another, For the wisdom which is above is peaceable, Jam. 1.17. and the wisdom from below is earthly and devilish, ver. 15. upon which the said attempts are to be abhorred, by which any divided persuasion sets up itself as religious.  
There hath been & is the like contest about many Scripture senses and meanings out of the letter, which seem to thwart and cross one another; whereupon some take the sense this way, and some take it that way, and so contend about the letter sense and meaning; but if we did frequently look for something further under the letter in reference to higher Mysteries, than the bare letter seems to hold out, we should forbear the hot contentions that are about the letter sense; when we might think that something further is intended under the letter, which we at present apprehend not for want of Spiritual eyes to see further than the letter; for the Apostle saith, 1 Cor. 2.11. No man knoweth the things of God, but the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, ver. 14. Yet the Scripture letter is not to be rejected, (that's not our meaning) but also to look for something further under the letter, which may be of greater use and concern to us, than that which the letter seems to hold out.  
We say again, that we do not reject the letter of the Scripture, for how could any Mystery be demonstrated but out of the Scripture testimonies? We see that the Apostle, and our Saviour himself confuted all gainsayers to their Doctrine, out of the written testimonies of Moses, and the Prophets; Therefore we reject not the Scripture letter in his due place and scope, but we wish only that the Scripture in the letter were looked upon for the most part to contain in them more Spiritual concerns and higher Mysteries by way of office and representative documents, than the bareletter holds out, as Jacob and Esau, as hath been before declared, Rom. 9  
If we do not look upon the Scriptures in many places of them, to intent higher Mysteries than the letter holds forth, than the Apostles speech of the letter 2 Cor. 3.6. may be often verified and made true, that the letter killeth.  
It killed our Saviour, his Apostles, and the Prophets, Matt. 23.34, 35. and all the Martyrs since Christ and his Apostles fell asleep.  
It's merely the letter without looking further, for what the letter is intended for a further consideration, to hold out something further by way of office; that hath been the occasion of much mischief and wickedness, as poisoning and blood sheds by mistaking the letter, as the literal indulgencies given to many for doing and promoting such wickedness, as aforesaid; whereby they are encouraged by hopes of pardon to do the greatest wickedness they are put upon, which hopes arise from the said indulgences offered unto them upon a verbal and outward confession only; whereas the Scripture tells us, he that confesseth and forsaketh his Sins shall have mercy, Prov. 28.13. and not every one that cryeth Lord, Lord, shall enter into his Kingdom, Matt. 7. Therefore God must needs hate all such ways and means to promote Religion by such like practices; for the Apostle saith, Rom. 3.8. We must not do evil, that good may come of it, whose damnation is just.  
Hence we must be sure that we do not abuse the Scripture, either in the letter or Mystery of it, that may incite us to do any mischief to others; for that is against the command, Thou shalt love thy Neighbour as thyself.  
Which if we did believe those mille machinationes, & noscendi arts, would soon be given over, as they did who used curious arts, burnt their Books in the sight of men, Acts 19.19.  
We must take heed that we do not in the sticking to the letter-sense, hold forth out of that letter any thing that tends to the reproach of the high Saints of God, as that of Lot and his Daughters aforesaid, what they are pretended to do; So of Abraham and Hagar aforesaid, of Jacob's many Wives, and Solomon's many Concubines aforesaid; and so the rest of the Patriarches.  
This must be granted without contradiction, that as the Lord created the Humanity innocent; so upon its Fall and Disobedience, the whole intention and design was to magnify his great attributes of Mercy and Bounty to the said fall●n Humanity, by bringing it back again to its first innocent estate, but yet by such ways and means as he in his infinite Wisdom thought fit and advantageous thereunto; and those ways and means he would not discover and lay open to all, but keep them to his own revealment to whom he pleases, as even to the Babes and teachable ones, and not to the wise and learned, and profane men of the world, Matth. 11.29. Father I thank thee, because that thou hast hid these things from the wise, and men of understanding, and hast opened them unto Babes, Matt. 11.29.  
Hence it cannot be, but that the Lord did intent many other things under the letter, than the letter itself doth express; and also did intent other things to be acted and done, or not to be done, by way of office only, and not for their personal concerns at present who did them, as he bid Hosea to take a Harlot to Wife, Hosea 1. What! was the Lord so much pleased with such a reception? surely not, since he abhors the practice of Whoremongers and Adulterers, but the Lord assigned that to him by way of office, as he represented the (for so his name signified a Saving) Lord himself by that said office, even his willingness to take the Apostate adulterated Humanity unto himself again, which is become an Harlot from him, Jerem. 3.1. Hosea 2.9.  
But the danger of what we have proposed of looking beyond the bare letter, for some Mystery under the said letter, is the turning the Scripture into allegories, and so make the Scriptures a Nose of wax, as is pretended by doing so, as aforesaid; but do not they more truly turn them into a Nose of wax, that in their respective religious persuasions are as truly opposite disparates, alike opposing one to another in what they contend for; as a Lion, a Bear, a Fox, and many other devouring creatures, are disparates in their respective natures, one to another; for as the aforesaid devouring creatures do alike oppose one another in their respective Nature all of them, as one doth to one; so are all the divided persuasions aforesaid (we name none) opposite disparates to all others as to one of them.  
And yet they all pretend their Scripture letter to justify them all respectively; which cannot be that it should, for that the Scriptures are from the Holy Spirit of God, and the Spirit is but one, and moves uniformably to one thing; and therefore if there be 13 divided persuasions, as religious ones, then 12 of them must be mere fictions, and not dictated by and from the Holy Spirit, but out of their own good think; though every one pretends the letter for the ground of his persuasion, as once two great parties, Armenians, and their opposites, did both pretend to the Nine and Thirty Articles of the Church, to justify (though opposite to each other) their persuasions; whereupon King Charles the I. took occasion to say, it was some satisfaction to him in reference to both the divided persuasions aforesaid, that they did respectively fly to the Nine and Thirty Articles for what they held.  
Now do not these make the Scriptures a Nose of wax, more truly than they do which are charged to do it? by turning the Scriptures into allegories, turpe est doctori cum culpa redarguit when the Kettle doth call the Pot, etc.  
But what are Parables? (which are specified in the Scriptures) what are they but Allegories that contain other things and Mysteries than the letter holds forth? and Matt. 13.34. it's said that Christ spoke nothing to them without a Parable, and he had his end in it; to reserve the Mysteries under the letter to his own revealment and discovering as he thought fit, and well knew who are fit to receive them, John 16.12. I have many things to say to you, but ye are not able to bear them now.  
And secondly, Our Saviour would not discover them to the wicked World, which were not worthy as yet to be taught by him, and would not use them aright, to the ends for which that under the letter is intended; Therefore he says to his Disciples, Matth. 7. Give not Holy things to Dogs, nor cast Pearls before Swine; that is, those Mysteries aforesaid under the letter, to those that are of currish and snarling dispositions, and of a swinish nature, that are upon all occasions wallowing in the mire of this Word, and tread the said Pearls under their feet.  
Trismegistus said to his Son, to whom he communicated and taught his secrets, My Son Tatt, hid these things from the wicked and profane world.  
Our Saviour never intended that proud and selfwilled men in their own eyes, should have his secrets revealed unto them, Matth. 11.25, 26. I thank thee O Father, Lord of Heaven and Earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to Babes.  
So that it's not the self-wisdom, nor great letter-learning that makes us capable of understanding the Mysteries contained in the Scriptures; but there must be humility, and innocency of life, to move the Lord to cause us to understand those Mysteries, for that they are contained under the letter, which though the learned do understand and see what it holds forth in its axiomatical disposition, yet they can see no further than that; we well remember that Arch-Bis●● Usher Preaching in St. Mary's in Cambridge upon the Text, 1 Sam. 12.24.25. which upon an occasion of a Fast kept when King Charles the I. was in Spain, and all the People sighed, and longed for His Majesty's return; He took his Bible and clapped his hands together, and said in this manner, (turning himself to the Doctors, and Heads of the University there present) Well, you Doctors, you shall never understand this Book, unless you lead Godly lives.  
We see that our Saviour saith, John 7.17. If any man do my Will, he shall know of the Doctrine, whether it be from Heaven, or no.  
Hence, without the obedient life, our Saviour told the learned Scribes and Pharisees, they could not know the Doctrine, whether from Heaven, or no; for though learned men may and do judge of things within the compass of Reason, yet not of Heavenly things above it, 1 Cor. 2.10. because God reveals them by his Spirit, and tells us, (ver. 4.) the natural man recieves not the things of the Spirit, neither can he know them, because they are Spiritually discerned.  
It's a true rule, Quicquid recipitur, recipitur per modum recipientis, that is, whatsoever is received, is received according to the disposition and temper of the receiver; as it appears by the reception of a distempered palate, in reference to Meat and Drink; and therefore men cannot understand though never so learned, the Mysteries contained in Scripture under the letter, unless they be Spiritually tasted and relished by them.  
Hence St. John saith, for the assurance of those he wrote to, that he declared the very truth unto them, wherein they should walk, Saying, that which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, (of the wore of life) declared we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship, is with his Father, and with the Son Jesus Christ, 1 John 1. ver. 1, 3.  
Our Saviour tells us, John 14.23. that the way to have that fellowship, is, to keep his Words; and then he saith, He and his Father will come to them, and make their abode with him, vid. ver. 21.  
We say no more in reference to what we have said concerning the adjusting of Infant-Baptism by our New Discovery aforesaid, than what we have sufficiently declared, and set forth.  
Unless you be pleased to give us leave to offer our thoughts concerning the mode or manner of Baptising those which are to be Baptised in Baptismal water.  
We think, and are persuaded in ourselves, (but we do not determine it, sed disquiri relinquimus) that the Feet only of the Baptised are only to be covered with the Baptismal water.  
Our reasons are, first from Baptisms operation and use, appointed by the Lord in a Mystery, relating, and essentially depending on Circumcision, which was ordained by God (before Baptism in its operation) for the cutting off the gross Sins from the depraved Humanity.  
And for that many defilements of Sin do for some time remain after the gross Sins are cut off; therefore the Lord brought in Baptism, and ordained it for to wash away the remaining defilements of Sin, after the gross Sins are cut off.  
And these defilements are remaining in the affections, chief to be purged and cleansed away, according to that, 2 Cor. 7. Therefore having these promises, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of Flesh and Spirit, Ephes. 5.27.  
Also the members of the body, which figure out the affections, are the Feet, à Simili, because as the Feet carry the Body, so the affections carry the Soul here and there, whither predominancy and interest do lead or force them; hence Solomon saith, Eccles. 5.11. Take heed to thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the Sacrifice of fools, etc.  
Hence the Feet only upon the account aforesaid are to be covered with Baptismal water, from an induction of particulars. First, For that Baptism was ordained to wash and cleanse away the defilements of Sin, and those defilements are in the affections, and the affections are resembled to the Feet.  
Hence we offer it to consideration, whether the Feet (upon the account aforesaid) be not to be covered with Baptismal water?  
Our second reason for it, is from Christ's practice, only in washing his Disciples Feet, John 13.5, 6. Secondly, From his speech to Peter, who denied our Saviour out of ignorant modesty, and humility to wash his face.  
But upon our Saviour's replication to him, that if he did not wash his Face, he had no part with him; Peter then rejoins upon that account, and saith to his Lord, if so, than not my feet only, but also my hands and 〈◊〉 head.  
To this our Saviour answers, to correct Peter's (now ignorant forwardness) upon his (and our) Lords informing Peter concerning the washing of his Feet saying, he that is released upon the account aforesaid, needs not save to wash his Feet, and is clean every whit.  
Our Saviour's said express, ver. 10, is in the Original thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where it is evident, that our Saviour useth these two words of divers significations, yet our Translators render them both in one, (viz.) to wash, saying, he that is washed, needeth not save to wash his Feet.  
Whereas the first word which our Saviour useth is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and differs much from the other word he useth, which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Infinitive Mood.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Participle Passive of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that comes of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to lose, or to be released from something needful to be released from, which releasement (we are persuaded) in our Saviour's meaning and intention, is that which relates to Circumcisions releasement, which performs in the Mystery the foregoing work in the repenting Humanity, by cutting off the gross Sins, as aforesaid; which must be done, before Baptisms work in its Mystery doth take place, for to wash away the remaining defilements, when Circumcision hath cut off the gross Sins aforesaid.  
Then the repenting Humanity is surely released from his great bondage, according to that express, Luke 13.16. And ought not this Woman (being a Daughter of Abraham) whom Satan hath bound, Lo, this Eighteen years to be loosed from this bond?  
The word out Saviour useth here to be loosed, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Infinitive Mood of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Participle of it, as aforesaid.  
Hence our Saviour's meaning in the said Verse, was to inform Peter of so much, by using the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which notes released, as aforesaid.  
He that is released (viz.) by Circumcisions work) needs not save to wash his Feet, which are his affections, figured forth by the Feet, upon the account aforesaid.  
And therefore our Saviour ariseth from his Paschal Supper, and power water, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is, into washing Vessels, alluding to the Jewish vessels, they used (if not the same) for their daily washing, Mark 7.2, 3, 4, 5 to wash his Disciples Feet, and he comes to Simon Peter to wash his Feet, and it's likely first to him, because under the same Figure of his two names, he is the first of Christ's Administrations to be, and was sent forth, Matth. 10.2.  
Now since our Saviour washed the Feet only, upon this account aforesaid; We offer it to consideration, whether the Feet only, in reference to Baptisms work in its Mystery, and the order of it, are not to be covered, and not the whole Body to be plunged in Baptismal water, and that from the words of Christ to Peter, Ver. 10. He that is released, as aforesaid, needeth not save to wash his Feet, not his hands and head also; for that by our Saviour's discourse to Peter, they are not the object of Baptisms, but Circumcisions work in its Mystery, which cuts off the gross Sins, which are of two sorts; First, open Profaneness and wickedness, figured forth by the Hands, which are the instruments of outward practices in some respect or other, whether good or evil.  
Now the second sort, are those which lie in the Head, the seat of carnal reason, which are the chosen Holinesses thereof.  
In both these our Saviour lies buried; Hence it's said, Isai. 53.9. He made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death.  
Now in the letter, Christ was buried alone, Matth. 27.60. And Joseph laid him in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out of the Rock.  
Hence it's apparent, that Christ lies buried also in the wicked, and in the rich as long as they continue so; though he was but once buried, and alone in Joseph's said new Tomb. Now as the wicked are the profane ones, so the rich are such, which are rich in their chosen Holinesses, as the Apostle doth attest it of the Corin. 1 Cor. 4.8. Now ye are full, now ye are rich, that is, in their self knowledge, and chosen holiness, as appears, ver. 1. to ver. 8. So was the Lawyer that politic questionist, Matth. 19.20, 21. All these have I kept from my youth, what lack I yet? etc. John 9.40. The Pharisees said, are We blind also? Hence Christ tells them, ver. 21.38. That Publicans and Harlots go to the Kingdom of God before them, because it's easier to convince these, for that their gross Sins stare them in the face, when yet the other sort do justify themselves, as he did, Matth. 19.20. Therefore when Christ's Disciples were released from the gross Sins of Hand and Head, (as they were) otherwise they could not have been his coming on Disciples; then our Saviour might say to them, He that is released, as abovesaid, need not save to wash his Feet.  
Hence we ask again, ex vi predict. whether it be not more consentaneous to Baptisms work in a Mystery, which is the washing of the affections, to cover the Feet only in Baptismal water.  
And it's observable, that when the Eunuch was Baptised by Philip, Acts 8.38. It's only said, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, They both descended into the water; and then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when Philip had Baptised him.  
Both which distinct acts of their descending into the water, and their ascending out of the water again, do hold out no more in reference to the said Acts themselves, but to the covering of the Feet only in water, not covering the whole Body in water, as if that were the proper and peculiar significant, relating to a burying with Christ in Baptism.  
Which burying comes when the Circumcised in a Mystery, and also the Baptised in a Mystery, (that is, Spiritually washed from all the remaining defilements of Sin, which are a true burial, and the last degree of the three specified in reference to Christ, (viz.) crucified, Dead, and Buried; and then follows the Resurrection again to a new life, Rom. 6.5.  
Hence nothing can be extorted out of the said express of burying with Christ by Baptism, to pretend to a covering of the Baptised all over in Baptismal water, but the covering of the Feet only with water, is most agreeable to Christ's practice in washing his Disciples Feet.  
This we have offered to consideration, and do not determine it: neither will we be contentious in the case, sed relinquimus disquiri.  
Observing the Apostles rule, 1 Cor. 11.16. If any man lust to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God; for that is of more evil consequence, than the doing or forbearing of a Ceremony, which is but a concomitant for a preservative of a significancy of some particular thing, that hath its use in ushering in (in due order and place) the two great Commandments, upon the which our Saviour told the Lawyer, did hang all the Law and the Prophets.  
Hence to break the operative love to God, and our Neighbour; for the not doing, or doing any relative Ceremony, is, to set up the Ceremony above the performing of the two said great Commands in their end and scope.  
And whether he that doth so, doth not hinder all the performances in reference thereunto; for that St. James declares, 2.10. He that fails in one point, is guilty of all, for all makes up but one rule of love, which is broken by opposition; because doing, or not doing a Ceremony, upon which contention do proceed many horrid mischiefs and miseries, as are seen by woeful experience.  
Hence the Apostle saith, We have no such custom, neither the Churches of God.  
It's not unworthy of our consideration, of the Ceremony mentitioned by the Apostle, 1 Corin. 11.3. where he sets forth, with the grounds on which it is founded in its acts respectively, to be done by Men and Women Believers, with all the concomitants relating to the said Ceremony, and the reasons expressed and laid out, from ver. 4, 5. to ver. 16.  
Yet when the Apostle had so fully argued for it in all the respects, as aforesaid; He would not contend for it, to the breach of love and peace among the Corinthians, but saith ver. 16. If any lust to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God.  
What Ceremony is there in all the Apostles writings, so largely expressed and urged for practice, upon so many reasons and inducements, as that aforesaid? yet is it not so much as taken notice of at this day for any practice, though it stand Recorded in Holy Writ so fully, as aforesaid; when as yet some Ceremonies are contended for with great Zeal, pro & con, as if they were the marrow and life of our Religious Services, needfully to be observed, (as they thought of Circumcision, Acts 15.1.) or we cannot be saved; yet is there no particular express for the Ceremony, which sometimes we practice, but is taken up merely upon an allusion to a word or two in Holy Writ, upon which account we only practise the said Ceremony, as we do for covering all over the persons to be Baptised in Baptismal water, because it is said, Rom. 6.4. Being buried with him in Baptism; therefore by reason of the said express, it's greatly contended for, to cover all over the person that is to be Baptised in Baptismal water.  
And what contentions have there been, and still are, against Infant-Baptism? because there is no express Command for it, when it's no no where forbidden, which surely God would have done, if he had disowned it upon the account aforesaid.  
And it is also as good a document and instruction by way of office administered, as ever Circumcision could be upon the like account aforesaid.  
Hence St. Paul's reflection upon the Galathians, contending only for the Ceremony of Circumcision, Gal. 3.1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; O unconsidering Galathians, who hath bewitched you? may be said of Us, 
— teneros quis mihi fascinat agnos?  
Who doth seduce our  Sheep?  
And them from straying doth not keep?   
By contending about doing, and not doing of some Ceremonies, merely upon an uncertain directive of us in the cases aforesaid.  
Thus verifying what the Poet says, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
The substance we as Nifles take,  
And Nifles for our work we make.   
This is most true (it's feared) in our contests aforesaid; but let us for the time to come desist, and contend for the Faith (by a quiet and peaceable life in all love) which was once delivered to the Saints, Judas ver. 3. and not for the doing or forbearing a Ceremony, the substance whereof is the operative love to God and our Neighbour, Matth. 22.40. Let us not for the time to come contend any more against Infant-Baptism, than against Infant-Circumcision, since Infant Circumcision was done, though commanded (as it was then needful) by way of office only, and Infant-Baptism may be done also by way of office, and to as good use and document, (therefore not forbidden) as ever Infant-Circumcision was or could be.  
Neither let us be dissuaded from the allegorized sense of the Scripture on the pretence that some make it (as 'tis said) a Nose of wax, for we have already hinted how all divided persuasions do, that more frequently and strangely than they which allegorise the Scriptures, which is done to raise up our thoughts above the letter.  
Only let us be sure to take the Apostles advice, and keep the pattern of wholesome words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the exemplar of healing words what is amiss in us.  
And be careful to offer nothing as a higher concern (than the letter holds forth) but what is of a Spiritual document and instruction.  
And what will then be the detriment or wrong to the said portion of Scripture, or to ourselves, by offering something of higher Mysteries contained under the letter, than the letter holds forth.  
Surely this will incite us to read the Scriptures more and more, and prefer the reading of them (both for frequency and diligence) before Plutarch's Lives, the Turkish History, or any other Humane History extant, what ever.  
Not that we should reject the readng of these in their due time and place; For God hath given the Humanity a twoofold life and state, to be conversant in. The Natural, and the Spiritual, yet not pari modò & gradis, but subordinate, to be conversant in them, and not collateral, as if both were of like concern to us, though most make the Natural estate of more concern to us, than the Spiritual; Notwithstanding our Saviour bids us, Matth. 6.33. to seek first the Kingdom of God, and his righteousness, etc.  
We should do in our converse and reading of Divine and Humane Histories, as our Saviour told the Pharisees, they should do in their petty tithings, and the greater things of the Law; as Judgement, and the Love of God, these ought ye to have done, and not leave the other undone, Luke 11.42.  
We should read the Humane stories, to understand and observe how some ingenies and wits have improved themselves in the state and affairs of the habitable World, that we may imitate them, and do the like.  
Ut nobis honori amicis utilitati & Reipublicae emolumento esse possimus.  
Profitable to our Generation in reference thereunto.  
And let us read intermixed Histories betwixt Civil and Inhuman writings, (not prophance writings, for it's said, Ephes. 5.3, 4, 5. Let it not be once named amongst you as becometh Saints.)  
Let us (we say) read the foresaid, that we may understand and observe the various and manifold Serpentine subtileties, and what not Inhumanities', that vicious men have abounded in, wherein they have exercised themselves like Lions, Beats, and Tigers, and that against the Lords innocent ones, Hebr. 11, 34, 35, 36. as if they came for no other end into this habitable world, but to by't and devour, and to be devoured one of another, Gal. 5.15.  
These we may read to lament such woeful effects and practices as are seen daily to arise and issue forth from the degenerate and apostate humanity, fallen by disobedience from its God.  
But we should read the Divine writings with diligence and frequency, and with humble Prayer to Almighty God, that in them we may come to know how and by what means the Lord will, and doth bring back the repenting humanity to the Heavenly life and state again, in such a way, and by such means as the Scriptures do contain in them, under such coverts and figures as the disobedient persevering humanity in disobedience, shall never comprehend in the letter of of the Scriptures (though all Scripture is written for our learning) until we are taught of God, John 6.45. And therefore it is said, that Christ spoke to the Multitude in Parables, and without a Parable he spoke not unto them, Matth. 13.34. but he explained them apart to his Disciples, which Parables are no other but Allegories, which is the expressing of one thing to intent thereby another meaning, Gal. 4.24.  
There is a Noble Person in France, who hath (as it is reported) written of late a Book in defence of Allegories, and showing the necessity of our owning of them to be most frequently in Scripture, if we expect to understand the Scriptures in their Latitude, and understand the strange and high Mysteries which are wrapped up under the letter; yea, of more strange, and high, and advantageous Mysteries, than all the humane Stories can produce, or parallel.  
As for instance, that of Abraham's Conquest over 4 Kings, which had overcome 5 before, and only with 318 Servants born in his House, and by these brought back the goods of the King of Sodom, and also his Brother Lot and his goods, and the Women also, and the People taken Captives by the said Kings, vide Gen. 14.13, 14, etc.  
What Master of a Family can, (in any Humane Story) be produced? who with them born in his House to the number of 318, did overcome 4 Kings, as Abraham did, and bring back the spoil again to them, from whom it was taken?  
Where do you read in Humane Story, of throwing down City walls by sounding of a Trumpet, that the Conquerors might enter in? Yet we read Joshua 6.4, 5, 6. of the walls of Jericho, thrown down with the blowing of Rams horns, whereby the Conquerors entered in.  
How ridiculous is that Story (absit blasphemia dicto) if no Mystery were hidden under the letter for our learning; What do any in this habitable World expect to do the like, and so to gain an easy entrance into their Enemy's Cities? or do any one Family of 318. ever expect to overcome their Potent Enemies, consisting of 4 Kings in battle against them, as Abraham did? sure no.  
It is said, Rom. 15.4. Whatever is written, is written for our learning; Therefore every thing written, is for the learning and benefit of all Mankind respectively; yet this is not true (with reverence be it spoken) that all the Saints of God have actual benefit of all what is written at all times, and in every place; which surely in a Scripture sense and Mystery, they may have at all times, and in every place, which yet in the letter express only, they have not, nor have need of at all times, and in all places.  
As for Instance, St. Paul saith, 2 Tim. 2.12. All (not some) that will live Godly in Christ Jesus, shall suffer persecution; Now that's not universally true in the bare letter, but in a sense under the letter, it's always true of all the Saints of God, poor or rich, high and low, but not in the letter; for it's possible a man may live in a Wilderness alone, yea with his friends also, and in the midst of his Potent friends, to defend him from all violence and persecution whatever, how shall these then suffer persecution under them upon the account aforesaid?  
But in a sense hid under the letter it's always true, and cannot be otherwise, as the Apostle intimates, Galat. 4.29. Where he saith, he that was born after the Flesh, persecuted him that was born of the Spirit.  
This persecuter, which is the Bondwomans' Seed, is within us in all places, and at all times, and in all conditions, until cast out by the Spirit of the Lord, 2 Cor. 3.17. Therefore in this sense and no other, it's true of all, that live Godly in Jesus Christ, they shall suffer persecution.  
What shall we tell you of David's Worthies? 2 Sam. 23.9, to 17. and what they did, and yet how useless that Story is to us, unless to gaze upon, if we take the Story but in the letter only?  
Also of what concern to us is David's Conquest over Goliath? wherein the disparity of strength betwixt them is to be considered, the disparity of David's age and his, and the strange means that David overcame him with, and all expressed in the letter, 1 Sam. 17.  
How strange and incredible is this to carnal reason? and to what purpose is it recorded in the Holy Bible, if nothing under the letter were contained, and of universal concern to all?  
And who would think that true of Moses, Hebr. 11.23, 24, 25. in refusing a Kingdom, and that a large one, offered to him for an Inheritance? or would not Moses be taken by the ambitious Men of this world to be manifestly guilty of great folly in refusing it, if something better and higher Mystery, were not meant there under the letter, for Moses and others to enjoy above that Kingdom's inheritance.  
What Magnanimity was there in those mentioned for doing and suffering, Hebr. 11.33. to 38. cui bono? and to what purpose in reference to us? if it did not relate to, and concern all the Saints of God to do and suffer the like respectively, as they did aforesaid.  
And our Saviour saith of his Worthies, Joh. 14.12. He that believes in me, the works that I do, shall he do also, and greater than these; Hence, there must be other things contained under the letter, than are held forth only in the letter.  
Otherwise the Scriptures must be in some things untrue (absit blasphemia dicto) in some things of no concern to our Heavenly estate) in some things ridiculous, and not worthy of taking notice of the respective Stories and Narratives in them, unless some higher Mysteries be hid under the letter, for us to inquire into; Therefore it must be granted, in reference to the letter, that some further thing must be intended under it, to remove all those insufferable inconveniencies aforesaid from the Scriptures, which otherwise must remain, and likewise to introduce all things in the right sense (opened) in the Scriptures from under the letter, for to make the man of God perfect to every good work, 2 Tim. 3.17.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2 Tim. 2.7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 1 Thes. 5.21. 
Consider what we say, and the Lord give you Understanding to try all things, and to keep the best.  
FINIS.   

POSTSCRIPT.  
COurteous Reader, We beg thy pardon that so many Crypses of defects, redundancies, and inversion of parts, appear dispersed here and there in this our Breviat of Infant-Baptism, adjusted by our New Discovery.  
For this offence we beg thy pardon, because it came not through remissness and carelessness, but through many other causes, quas nunc praescribere longum est.  
And it being so, (as 'tis well known it is,) We hope thy Charity, according to Scripture requiring, 1 Pet. 4.8. in thy candid breast, will cover our errors aforesaid committed.  Qui non est sponte nocens, is poene innocens sit. 
And to make thee amends what we can, We have (by the labour of a very ready and good friend) inscribed all and every one of them in the respective Margins, where they are our blemish.  
To remove thy trouble in poring upon an Errata, to find our meaning, what it ought to be there respectively.  Sic habetis confitentam reum & avidum Lectori Candidato (quoad vires) satisfacere. Parca's igitur (ut possis) Parkero tuo, retineasque illum, in favore tuo, dum manet lachesi quod torqueat in Parkero parcendo, propter Confess. praedict. 
Vale.