LETTERS BETWEEN Mr. ROBERT ROGERS, OF WAKEFIELD, AND Mr. THOMAS WALKER, The present VICAR there, TOUCHING BAPTISM.   decorative flourish 
LONDON, Printed by J. G. for Richard Lowndes at the White Lion in St. Paul's Churchyard, 1656.   

The occasion of these following Letters was this:  
AN urgent necessity (an Infant unbaptised, and in imminent danger of death) put me upon it to go to Mr. Walker our present Vicar at Wakefield upon the week day, to desire from him (what I conceive was his duty, the Charge of Souls being at present upon him) that he would administer the Ordinance to my weak Child, partly that I might discharge the office of a Father, and that my Child might not want the benefit of the Ordinance. After much impertinent discourse, as of Christ's going 50. miles to John to be Baptised, and the like, the main ground of his refusal seemed to be the want of a Congregation on the week day; and though I offered to bring ten or twenty persons for a Congregation, and my Child (notwithstanding its weakness) to the Church, yet he still refused, saying, It was contrary to his Judgement: although he had done it formerly to others) so the result was, That he neither would Baptise my child in that necessity, nor give way to any other to do that Christian and charitable office for me within his parish.  
Upon the Lord's day following, after forenoon Sermon, I desired him to satisfy me from the Word of God, how he could in conscience dispense with that neglect, and what the Scripture made out against Private Baptism in A case of necessity; He promised, and I expected satisfaction in the afternoon, where in stand of Scripture he produced the Rubric of the Common-Prayer before Public Baptism, and read it publicly to his People, so fare as he thought it might conduce to his purpose: but when he came to that expression. Nevertheless, (if Necessity so require) Children may at all times be Baptised at home, he left it out, and read it not, nor gave the Congregation any satisfaction in it; not much unlike the Devil's quotation of Scripture, when he would have persuaded Christ to have thrown himself from the battlements of the Temple, so that wanting that satisfaction which he promised, and I expected from him, I sent him this following Letter;  
Sir,  
It is the Word of God, not the Rubric of the Common-Prayer must satisfy me in my desire, whin you shall give me such satisfaction, I hope you will do it ingenuously, without adding or diminishing. I rather desire an Argument ad rem, then ad hominem, I am unwilling to make any farther noise in the business, if I may receiver satisfaction from you in writing under your hand, which when I have received, I shall submit and remain  
Your friend, ROBERT ROGERS.  
Wakefield, March 6. 1655.  
SIR,  
Can hearty wish, that you were not rather inclined to cavil, then desirous of satisfaction, which I have good ground to suspect not only from your carrige towards me, but also from your slighting and undervaluing the constant 〈…〉 God▪ There is no sober-minded, intelligent Christian, but will both suspect and suspend his Judgement, if differing from the generality of those, that are Pious, and Learned; You cannot but know, if you understand any thing, that it is more proper for me than you in this particular to require satisfaction, because you desire me to do that (which as I told you, when you were with me) is against my judgement: according to which I am bound to act, otherwise I should condemn myself in the things which I allow, contrary to that of the Apostle, Rom. 14.22. But however I shall propound (according to your desire) one or two particulars to your serious consideration, and shall pray that God may set them home upon your spirit.  
1. Duly weigh that Christ's Baptism was not private, but public, yea though Christ were put to much inconvenience thereby, as will appear from Math. 3.13: Now it is an unquestioned maxim amongst Divines, both Episcopal and others, grounded upon Math. 11.29. that Christ's moral acts (as this of submission to Baptism was, as appears from Math. 3.15.) are to be imitated by his people.  
2. Consider the nature of the Sacrament of Baptism, it's a public ordinance, not private; now public Ordinances are to be dispensed in a public manner: That it is a public Ordinance, I prove from Scripture, Math. 28.19. and also from the nature of the Ordinance itself, It being a Sign and Seal of Initiation into the Visible Church. Whereas you desired from me an express text of Scripture, that Baptism ought to be public. I answer, that it is sufficient if it be proved by direct consequence from Scripture, though it be not expressed in terminis: There is no express example or precept in Scripture, either for Infant-Baptisme, or for admission of Women to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, yet none of the Orthodox do question either, because they may be gathered from Scriptures by direct consequence: the Application is easy. Whereas you were offended that I should leave out some part of the Rubric in my quotation of it, be pleased to take notice, that I omitted the last clause therein, because it would (had I read it) have occasioned the reading of the Rubric before private Baptism, for which there was then no time, however I desire you read it at your leisure, because I think it will be of concernment to you, in reference to your child; although I do not own it as Scripture, yet I look upon it as agreeable unto Scripture. I shall rejoice if God be pleased by these few lines to convince you of your error, so as to reclaim you; but if you persist to cavil as heretofore, I shall endeavour to heed you no more therein, then Christ did the Pharisees in the like case: Whereas you say you are not willing to make any farther noise in this business, I do not see how with convenience or modesty you can; but if you think the noise thereat will prejudice me, I shal● not desire you to spare me: One thing more I shall hint to you (which 〈◊〉 you will close with) that no Infants have right to the privilege of Baptism, but those that are born of Christian Parents; whether you do own the Principles of the Christian Faith I know not, (you never professed so much to me, which in such a case was requisite) This I am sure of, and others have been witnesses thereof, that your carriage in this business hath been no whit Christi●● towards  
Yours so fare as you are in God's way, T. WALKER.  
SIR,  
I should not have either troubled myself or you with 〈◊〉 reply, if I could possible have picked the least satisfaction from your letter, the doubt is thus stated; Whether (in case of necessity a Minister) be not bound to private Baptism, (though not upon the Lord's day) the whole drift of your writing it to prove the practice and conveniency of public Baptism, a thing never by me denied or questioned, nor I think by any sober Christian, so that your letter in effect is in my thoughts no more than a begging of the question or shooting at Rovers without ever coming near the mark.  
Sir, I shall no further take notice of your uncharitableness in censuring, and the recrimination wherewith you have stuffed your paper, then to tell you how sorry I am to see in a Preacher of the Kingdom of Christ so little of the Spirit of love and meekness; when you shall satisfy me in the generality of the opinions of pious and learned men in the true point in question, it is probable I may be convinced, in the mean time you cannot blame me if I dare not rely upon your own judgement, and by I know not what kind of implicit faith pin my conscience upon your or any other man's sleeve.  
I have but two things to speak to in your letter, and I shall do it, without any bitterness; the one relates to yourself, the other to me; first, in one place you say you are not bound to act against your Judgement; in another that you look upon the Common prayer though not as scripture, yet to be agreeable to Scripture; in my thoughts here is either a flat contradiction or some thing worse; if in your judgement, the Common-prayer be agreeable to Scripture, you act against your judgement and conscience, in denying my child private Baptism, which is a part of it, if it be not agreeable to Scripture you act against your judgement, and conscience in quoting it, and affirming it to be so: if this be not either to contradict or condemn yourself in that which you allow, having done that to others you denied to me, I refer it to every judicious and sober-minded Christian.  
The other relating to myself, it the doubt you make of my Christianity, in the close of your letter, and you seem to keep this as your great engine to batter the fabric, what cause you have in a settled Church for many hundred years to raise such a doubt I know not, the rather where you have no cause to suspect, and where you see a constant frequenting of the Ordinances, my earnest desire to you, for the Baptising of my child, was I think a sufficient Argument of my faith, to any moderate Christian Spirit, where if you had doubted you might have examined me, though even in that of Examination I am dubious whether it be in your power; I believe there are still many good Christians in Wakefield who never were under your examination, and I do think it to be very hard and uncharitable to judge or censure any man for want of it. Other things thets are in your letter of less moment, which I am unwilling to take notice of. Sir, my prayers shall be for yourself, and for all that serve at the Altar, that you may rather study to be ensamples to your flocks, then to Lord it over God's heritage. If you please to give me an account or the Question wherein not only myself but the Parish is concerned, I shall not make use of any other Ministers for my satisfaction in the point, in the means time I rest  
Yours ROBERT ROGERS  SIR, 
I am very glad, that you are satisfied about the practice and convenience of publ●que Baptism, this had been enough, had you duly weighed it, to have engaged you to bring your child to public Baptism, it was the rule which the Apostle observed, not to use his liberty in all things, that were lawful, but only those things which were convenient. And it is an approved rule among Divines, that he that would keep a good conscience in such cases, wherein there appears any doubt, will make choice of the surer part, that is, that part wherein he may be sure not to offend against the Lord; now I think you will not deny but you bade been on the surer part, had you brought it into the public Congregation: Whereas you urge necessity, I answer, that it did not appear to me to be a case of necessity, nor does yet appear that it was so, if I should grant to you that private Baptism were lawful in case of necessity, yet I suppose you will not say that every one must be judge of the necessity, and if the Minister do not so judge, I see not (that being duly considered above-written) how he can in conscience proceed to Administer it privately? you may accuse me as fare as you please of want of love and meekness, and have as low thoughts of me as you please in other respects, I bless God he hath so fare given me a sight of myself, that none that know me think worse of me, than I do of myself: All your tart expressions and harsh censures, together with your charging me with self-contradiction, or (to use your own words, somewhat worse) shall not (I hope) make me out of charity with you, neither you, nor any other shall find me backward to express myself, in any thing (wherein I may lawfully) as becomes a Minister of the Gospel: that private Baptism is against the judgement of the Generality of Protestant Divines is clear to me, and also may be to you, if you will but consult Dr. Usher's body of Divinity, the judgement of the last Assembly of Divines sitting at Westminster, as also the Common-prayer book, for that the compilers thereof were in their judgements against private Baptism appears clear to me, in that there is an express Injunction in case any had been baptised privately to make it afterwards public: This you will find if you read the private Baptism. The contradiction with which you charge me is easily reconciled, if you do but look upon my words, upon which you ground the aspersion, you shall find that they relate not to all the Common prayer in the whole Systeme of it, but only to the Rubric before private Baptism, which I look upon as agreeable to Scripture, let any unprejudicated understanding person read that passage of my letter, and if they do not agree with me herein, I shall willingly be accounted a self-contradicter, though I look upon that Rubric as agreeable to Scripture, yet I am not obliged thereby to Administer baptism privately, especially when I am not satisfied that it is a case of necessity. Whereas you charge me with denial of that to you which I did to others, I answer that the case was very different: And I find the Apostle did the like, as you may see Acts 16.3. compared with Gal. 2.3. he Circumcised Timothy, yet would not Circumcise Titus, nor suffer it; you constant attendance upon Ordinances I commend; but this together with a desire of having your child Baptised does not necessarily speak you to be a Christian though (for my own part) I never denied your Christianity, but only affirmed (which I still think) that your carriage in this business had not been Christian I have known many that have done both these, and yet have been guilty of such gross ignorance as was inconsistent with Christianity, taken in the largest sense Whereas you question my power of Examination, I shall refer you to what you heard lately in public about that subject, from a person more able to satisfy you then I am, I have not ever yet heard one syllable of Reason or Scripture against it, no nor any Protestant Divine: I cannot as yet see any thing that should make against it, except Ignorance, or Pride, or both: if you can show me sufficient grounds against it, I will leave it, and also give you many thanks, for it is a work that a man shall have little thanks for, and incur much prejudice and displeasure by which I have experimentally found, yet dare not leave it; wherein you see me domineer over the flock, or give ill example to it, tell me privately, and I shall endeavour to rectify it: That the Church of England hath been for many hundred years, or one hundred years settled, unless in a Popish way, is wholly denied by  
Sir, Yours as fare at he may for Christ's sake, T. WALKER. Wakefield, March 1655.  SIR, 
You should have received a quicker answer to your Letter, but my 〈◊〉 at York, and some other necessary occasions hindered me, I was upon the opening of your Letter full of expectance, in reference to my satisfaction in the case propounded, but upon perusal of your paper, instead of arguments from Scripture you fly to a poor shift of selfe-satisfaction, and make yourself the Judge of the necessity, I shall refer myself to any impartial person in your Congregation whether the Mother with the Midwife, and others employed in business of tha● nature, be not the fit Judges of the Sickness and danger of an Infant, and consequently of the pressing necessity than yourself, except you will take upo● you the office of a Midwife, as well as of the Minister:  
What you still urge in reference to Public Baptism, I still say is fare from the matter in hand, or a mere begging or declining the Question, I never denied it, nay I proffered you twenty persons for a Congregation (Christ admit of a less number) because you seemed to stand upon that, also to bring my child to the Church, though then in great weakness, did not I herein choose the surer part? but it seems twenty are not a Congregation without a Sermon, o● Exposition, and that is not to be had on the week day without hire. How wel● Demetrius plays his part, while good Souls grieve to see Christ and his Ordinance thus bought and sold!  
That the Compilers of Common Prayer were in their judgements against Private Baptism, where Public might be had without danger of the Infant, 〈◊〉 deny not, but in such a case (which is the question in hand) their judgement are for it, as appears by the Rubric, else they man not Compiled it, nor subscribed a form for it, your own argument returns upon yourself, I could have wished satisfaction rather than sophistry; Dr. Usher I have an honourable and reverend opinion of, when you shall satisfy me out of him, I shall say no more to you, in the mean time I have so much charity as to think you will no belie him.  
That contradiction is not yet solved, though your own interpretation be allowed, if private Baptism in a case of necessity be agreeable to Scripture, why do you not accordingly Administer it? if not, why do you say it is, and quote it publicly as an Authority? this is either to contradict or condemn yourself in what you allow, that poor starting hole of self-satisfaction into which you run again when all helps fail you, will not clear the contradiction in the eye of any knowing man.  
That of the holy Apostles circumcising of Timothy and not of Titus, whereby you would justify the Administering of Baptism to other men's Children and not to mine, is (if you had well understood yourself) little to the purpose, the Apostle did it to avoid offence to Jew and Gentile, he became all things to all men, that he might by all means save some; it was that he might gain both and lose neither: how fare this is from your practice, I refer to the whole Congregation and to your own heart, offences are multiplied, weak Christians troubled with your practices, a party so adhered unto, that the rest are wholly cast off, your partiality noted by all the people, besides Saint Paul's example in the infancy of the Church in matter of practice, cannot always be a rule to us, witness one example for all, his shaving at Concrea, Act. 18.18: I know not whether your Argument be guilty of more irreverence or folly.  
For your great Diana of examination, you refer me I know not whom, and therefore leave it: you tell me that neither Reason nor Scripture speak against it, methinks it is a weak way of arguing, yet if you allow but the same for private Baptism, your argument destroys yourself, what ever the Scriptures say of Examination, I am sure your practice makes it necessary to the Ordinance, so as it cannot be had without it, and the neglect of it dangerous: and if that practice be without positive grounds from Scripture, you know where your thanks must be.  
My Christian wish you apply yourself, but since you desire it, I shall with privacy propound these questions to you, what think you of him who shall in the face of a Congregation examine the Father of a child upon the account, passing by all others who had their Children baptised the same time, what think you of him who shall Baptism a child without prayer before, or Thanksgiving after Baptism? what think you of him who for want of examination and not giving in his name, shall turn a man out by head and shoulders from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper? what think you of him who before morning Sermon shall refuse to Baptise a weak child upon the entreaty of the Parent, and then Baptise it after Sermon when it is either dead or at the point of death? what do you think of him that shall publicly deny the Supremacy of the civil power in causes Ecclesiastical distracting the flock, and withdrawing them from their obedience? if this be not to Lord it over God's heritage, I know not what is, I hope you will letter consider of these things, in the mean time I am  
Yours so far as you are a Son of Peace. ROBERT ROGERS. Wakefield the 12 of April 1656.  
I have not received any answer of this last Letter, therefore I Printed these Letters in hope that they may fall into the hands of some Godly and Learned Divine, that will endeavour to give the Church of God satisfaction in this point.  
FINIS.