A MIRROR FOR Anabaptists, In three Rational DISCOURSES That may put the Blush upon them, viz.  

1. Paedobaptism Defended and Justified.  
2. Anabaptism plainly Confuted.  
3. Some valid and suasory Reasons to draw them from the Error of their way, to re-embrace the Truth which they have deserted, and to return to the Church of God from which they have departed.   
By THOMAS GERY B.D. and Rector of Barwell in Leicestershire.  Prov. 23.23. Buy the truth and sell it not. 
London, Printed for Nath. Webb at the Kings-head, and W. Grantham at the Bear in St Paul's Churchyard, near the little North-door. 1660.   

A PREFACE.  
HAving perused some of the late Elaborate and Learned Writings and Disputes of our Modern Orthodox Divines, about Infant-Baptism, in Justification thereof, as also the voluminous, tedious and sophistical Cavils, and exceptions against the Writings and Assertions of the aforesaid Authors, by one M. Tombs, an Antipaedobaptist, and a very able Scholar, yet no Anabaptist; as being no Separatist from the Church of England: I find them all set forth, dressed and adorned with so much Art and Eloquence, as transcends the capacity of the Vulgar people; so that some of them are like Painted Glasse-Windows, that are beautified with Pictures of divers colours, which while they please the sight, do hinder the Light.  
Now because the vulgar illiterate people do stand in need to have the truth of this Point of Faith about Infant-Baptism, to be held forth and cleared up unto their apprehensions, as who are mainly concerned therein; I did apprehend that it would be both a charitable and an acceptable work to tender unto them some plain and short explication of this Point, and justification of 〈◊〉. And therefore have here endeavoured to epitomise and abbreviate the more large discussions hereof before mentioned, and to lay the truth open with such brevity, perspicuity & plainness, as that it may be obvious to the eye of every rational and intelligent person that is not muffled with prejudice, and may neither cost much money to buy, nor much labour to read.  
If any shall deem this a frivolous and needless work, after so many learned dissertions and discussions thereof; my Apology and excuse is this, That in my communication and conference with some of the Disciples and Followers of Anabaptists, these ensuing Arguments have prevailed to give them a sight of their errors, and to renounce them. And therefore in hope that they may work upon some more of them also, to this purpose (through his help, who worketh many times by weak means, that his own power may shine forth with greater lustre) I have been induced to make them thus public; If they prevail not to reduce any more Anabaptists from the error of their way, yet they may happily prevent their seducing of others. I presume not herein to add any thing to the Learned disceptations and discourses before mentioned, but only to abbreviate, modify and accommodate them to vulgar capacity and apprehensions.  
If hereby I shall convince but one misbelieving person of their error about this Point, or confirm but one in the right belief of it, I shall not repent me of my labour, though hereby I expect to incur the displeasure and censure of many.   

To the AUTHOR.  
My Reverend and Worthy Brother in the Ministry of the Gospel.  
I Have to my best ability perused this learned and laborious Piece of yours, wherein you have set before the face of all gainsayers, in a short and plain, but pithy manner, all that is (or needs) to be collected from other accurate Assertors of the contrary to what the Anabaptists of this age allege for their opinions without reason, and destitute of all proof, down from the Apostles times and Primitive Churches: Your eludication of that 19 Chap. of the Acts, v. 1.2, 3, 4, 5. is most convincing, and your Arguments concerning precedence of Faith not necessary in Infants; and the other both before and after that Section, are irrefragable.  
But Alas Sir! we find when all is done to these men, and other opposers of those manifest Truths held out and maintained by ancient and the most Learned of our Modern Fathers, and defenders of that clear truth which you show the world in this your Glass, and wherein many holy Martyrs have lived and died; yet, etiamsi nihil habeant contra nobiscum tamen non sentiunt; not because they do not sufficiently understand, but by reason of a resolved on perversity in the will.  
And God knows, this is a common misery incident to men, and this hath been and is a knot full of perplexities, which is made up in that Conclusion, Ultimus actus intellectûs est Voluntas: which if it were absolutely true, than we might to good purpose still labour in rectifying that Faculty of understanding, and so the will must follow: But we find and feel it otherwise, for we all do many sins, which even the Soul of our understanding, our Conscience checks us for, and which we know ought not to be done: No wonder then, if these men so abundantly convinced, will yet persist in error, and the evident reason of their wilful stubbornness herein, is the same which is discovered in all Schismatics, namely pride, accompanied with Faction and Singularity.  
Your great and lasting Comfort is, to have so strenuously conflicted with these unreasonable and absurd Disputers, and done enough, and more than satisfies all impartial Readers of your Book. In the only way remaining, and which you resolve to take, I shall cordially join with you in commending these arrogant, and for the most part, ignorant men to God's Mercy, and the Word and Power of his Grace: Remaining, Sir, as you have obliged me,  
Leicester, May 20. 1659. Your Faithful Friend and Fellow Servant in Christ Jesus, THO. PESTLE.   

A Mirror for Anabaptists.  

The first Point that I am to begin with is, the Arguments justifying Paedobaptism.  
THE first Ground and Argument for Paedo-baptism, Arg. 1 that I shall lay down, is the general Commandment that our Saviour Christ gave to his Apostles, Mat. 28.19. Go, teach all Nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: All the exception against this is, that Teaching being first enjoined, makes Infants uncapable of Baptism, because they are uncapable of Teaching.  
To this it is answered, that the teaching there enjoined, was the publication and preaching of the Gospel to all Nations in the first place, before the Sacrament of Baptism was to be administered unto them; which is most apparent from St. Mark his expression of the same Commission and Precept, Mark 16.15. Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every Creature. That which St. Matthew phraseth [teach] or [Disciple] St. Mark expounds to be the preaching of the Gospel. And this was necessary to be done in the first place, and accordingly was done before ever any Nation received Baptism. So that when the Gospel is preached to any Nation, and that Nation doth receive and entertain it, then is that Nation discipled or taught, and so put into a capacity and susceptibility of the Sacrament of Baptism, and all in that Nation have a title unto it, whereof Infants are a considerable Party; whose Incapacity of teaching doth not make them uncapable of Baptism, because while they remain Infants, they are not included among those that are to be taught: For our Saviour did not send his Disciples to teach Infants, but men of years: And therefore the teaching pre-required, as antecedent to Baptism, is necessarily required only of men of years, that be docible, and not of Infants that are indocible. So that we acknowledge a necessity of a praevious & precedaneous teaching, before Baptism of docible persons, but not of Infants; because they are capable of Baptism, though not of teaching. I know that protervious and peevish Spirits are able and apt enough to cavil at any truth, be it never so clear, and so its probable, will cavil at the interpretation of this place of Scripture: But the indifferent Reader may discern it to be both can did and consonant to other Texts; for no no where in Scripture is there any exception against this general Command of battizing all. Nations that embrace the Gospel, amongst which Infants are a considerable party (as was said before) And therefore where the Gospel is preached and embraced, there Infants of that Nation are to be baptised by virtue of that command. For a general Command in Scripture to perform any duty appertains to all persons of what condition soever, unless in the same Scripture some exception be added; whereas in this case there is no any.  
A Second Argument may be th● testimony of the ancient Father's o● the Church, who affirm it to be a● Apostolic Tradition, and so of the same authority and credibility with other Apostolic Traditions; such as these, The Apostles Creed, Th● change of the Sabbath from the la●● day of the week to the first; an● what Books of Scripture are Canonical, and what Apocryphal. Whic● Assertions being received by th● Church, as Apostolic Traditions are, and ever have been, acknowledged and embraced as undoubt●● Truths, though they be not (in t●minis) word for word expressed i● Scripture: And so in like manner hath Infant-Baptism, as leaning upon the same ground with them; so that the Anabaptists may as well question the truth of the Apostles Creed, an● the sanctification of the first day of the week for the Sabbath, and the Canon of Scripture, as the lawfulness of Infant-Baptism, in that they 〈◊〉 lean upon one and the same foundation, i. e. Apostolic Tradition; which was ever held by the Churches of God to be of authentical authority, next unto Scripture itself: For though the Reformed Churches disclaim Popish, Humane Traditions, as men's Inventions; yet these Apostolic Traditions, they receive and reverence, as unquestionable Truths. Now that the ancientest Fathers, as Dionysius Areopagita, Justin Martyr, Origen, St. Augustine, with many others have witnessed Paedo-Baptism to have been accounted and received as a Tradition Apostolical, neither can, nor is denied by the Learnedest Anabaptists. But yet they will not give credence to their testimony hereof, which how void of Charity it is to censure such renowned Doctors, as reporters of an untruth, especially in matters of Religion, I leave it to be considered of, by all persons of understanding. Arg. 3  
A Third Argument may be the constant practice of Infant-Baptism by all Christian Churches from the very next age after the Apostles, to this present age. This was witnessed by Dionysius, who lived in the Apostles time, and Ignatius, and Justin Martyr, and Iraeneus and Origen. This is proved at large by many learned men, who of late have written of this Subject, and therefore I will supersede the labour of rehearsing the particular proofs thereof; especially considering that the most learned of the Adversaries of this truth, do not deny this; but yet condemn it as an error and a very pernicious abuse, needful to be taken away out of the Church of God, as is to be seen in Mr. Tombs his Antipedo-Baptism, in the 3d Part, and Section the 98 about the middle of the Section; which is a presumptuous censure, unfit for any particular man to pass against the Church.  
Now this practice of Paedo-Baptism by the Universal Church of Christ in all ages and places is an Argument irrefragable and unanswerable, to prove the lawfulness of it: For the Church is the ground and pillar of truth, so saith the Apostle, 1 Tim. 3.16. Particular Churches may err both in judgement and practice, but the Universal Church cannot err in any important point of Faith, such as this is; because of Christ's promise to it, both of protection and direction in several Texts, as Mat. 28.20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you, and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world; which could not be meant only of the Apostles, (as who could not live to the end of the world) but of necessity of the whole Catholic Church. And John 14.16. I will pray the Father, and he shall send you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth. And again, John 16.13. He promiseth his Disciples again, to send them the Spirit of truth, which should guide them into all truth. Seeing therefore the Universal Church for many ages, and those next succeeding the Apostles, have allowed and practised Infant-Baptism, no intelligent godly Christian may oppose it, without manifest contempt of the sentence and judgement of the Catholic Church; which whose will not hear, is to be accounted as a heathen man, and a publican, Mat. 18.17. If some particular Churches only had practised it, the Legality of it might have been questioned; but seeing all Churches for many ages did practile it, the legality of it is thereby made unquestionable.  
A Fourth Argument may be the Circumcision of Infants in the time of the Jewish Church. Arg. 4 For if Baptism be the Sacrament, now under the Gospel, that succeeds the Jewish Circumcision, which is abolished; then, by the rule of analogy and proportion, and parity that is betwixt them, to whom Circumcision belonged under the Law, to those Baptism belongs under the Gospel. But Baptism is the Sacrament now under the Gospel, that succeeds and comes in place of the Jewish Circumcision: Which is most apparent from Col. 2.11, 12. Where the Apostle proves that the Collossians were circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, being buried with him in Baptism; that is, because they were baptised in or into his name; for else the Apostles argumentation were inconsequent, if Baptism did not come in place of Circumcision; for in affirming they were circumcised, because they were baptised, he declares Baptism to come in room of Circumcision: Hence therefore it follows that as Infants were to be circumcised in the time of the Law, so Infants are to be baptised under the Gospel.  
I cannot conceive what exceptions can be brought against this argument, but one of these two.  
1. Either the unfitness to require a Covenant of a Child, that cannot speak to declare it. Or,  
2. Because there is not a particular Commanding Scripture for it.  
If the first be objected, I Answer, That to lay an imputation of unfitness upon Infant-Baptism in that respect; is to charge God, himself with commanding that which was unfit (which were audacious presumption, if not blasphemy) for he commanded Infants to be circumcised, whereby they entered into a Covenant with God, though they could neither express it nor know of it, Gen. 17.  
To the second exception (which I find in Mr. Tombs, in the 3d. Part of his Antipaedobaptism, section, 11. near the end) I return a threefold Answer.  
1. I answer, That what is colligible and deducible from Scripture by good and undeniable consequence, (as Infant-Baptism is) is of force and creditable, as well as what hath precept or example. For its an erroneous Principle (as the learned & judicious Doctor Saunderson hath observed and taxed in his Preface lately prefixed to a new Addition of some Sermons of his that had been formerly published) to hold that a man may do nothing (meaning about the religious Service of God) for which there cannot be produced either command or example from Scripture; for so he should be barred from deducting any doctrinal conclusions from Scripture, but what are specified in it either by precept or example; which would much infringe and straighten the Ordinance of preaching.  
2. I answer, that though it were granted, that it's fit to have either precept or example for performance of religious duties; yet for circumstances about the performance of them it's not necessary; and this is but a circumstance, Ergo.  
3. I answer, that there is an implicit Command as well as an explicit, and the former is a sufficient warrant, and that Infant-Baptism hath; namely in Mat. 28.19. as formerly hath been declared.  
A Fifth Argument, Arg. 5 Infants have remission of sins and salvation by Christ, as well as those of riper years: This is proved by Mat. 18.3. Where our Saviour saith, Except ye be converted and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. And from (Mark 10.14. Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbidden them not, for of such is the Kingdom of God. This being granted that Infants are saved (some at least, which is sufficient for the present purpose) it follows, that then they are made members of the Church of Christ; for, extra ecclesiam non est salus, out of the Church there is no salvation: It was the sentence of Cyprian, Lib. de unitate Eccles. and it hath ever been owned as a truth by all Orthodox Divines; as which hath its ground from Acts 2.47. Where it's said, that God added daily unto the Church such as should be saved; which implies thus much, that all such as are saved, are first added unto the Church. And Mr. Tombs acknowledgeth this to be true, understanding by the Church, the invisible Church of the Elect, in his Antipaedobaptism, Part 3. Sect. 9 pauso post medium, which is as much as we require to be granted.  
Whence I argue thus, If Infants he members of the Church of Christ, than they are cleansed from their sins by such ways and means as the Church is cleansed (this is undeniable) But the Church is cleansed by the washing of water through the Word, Eph. 5.26. i e. by the Sacrament of Baptism, through the word; and therefore Infants also, as which are members of it. And if so, than the Sacrament of Baptism belongs to them, and may not be withheld from them, neither in Charity nor Equity. For if they be members of the Church, which is cleansed by the washing of water through the word, than this washing of water through the word (which can be no other but Baptism) belongs unto them, as being the means whereby they are made members of the Church.  
If it be objected against this Argument (which is all that can be objected) that some Infants are saved, and so are made members of the Church, and yet die before they be baptised,  
I answer, that such are saved after an unknown and extraordinary way, which puts no bar to the ordinary way and means of salvation by God appointed, which is Baptism; as the forecited Text of Scripture proves, with many other. For God's extraordinary works wrought either without means or against means, are no Patterns and Precedents for us to follow, nor do at all warrant us to neglect the use of ordinary means. God's mitaculous preservation of the lives of Moses and Elias forty days without food, is no warrant for others to fast so long: Nor his miraculous work in providing a Whale to save Ionas from drowning, when he was cast into the sea, any warrant for others to throw themselves into the sea, and yet expect to be saved from drowning. And therefore God's mercy to Infants unbaptised, in saving them after an unknown and extraordinary way, is no warrant for us to neglect to baptise Infants, which is the ordinary way and means appointed by God for their sanctification and salvation, as in the next Argument is largely proved.  
If any Anabaptist can answer this Argument fully and fairly without shifting and shuffling, I shall never trust my own Judgement again; but shall be ever jealous of the shallowness of it.  
A Sixth Argument; Arg. 6 All means of Grace and Salvation which God hath appointed as instrumetal to that end, are to be afforded to Infants, which they are susceptive or receptive and capable of (this no rational person will deny) For when God hath appointed the means to any end, we are tied to the use thereof; if we expect to attain to that end; as I might instance in divers particulars: But Baptism is a means of Grace and salvation, which Infants are receptive and capable of, and therefore it is to be afforded and ministered unto them.  
That it is a means of Grace, i. e. of remission of sin, and so consequently of salvation (which is all that I stand in need to prove) is oft affirmed in Scripture, Acts. 2.38. Repent and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, Acts 22.16. Arise and be baptised (saith Ananias to Saul) and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. Rom. 6.4. We are buried with him by Baptism into his death, i. e. made partakers by baptism of the merits of his death and burial. Eph. 5.26. (the Text before alleged) It is said, that Christ sanctifieth and cleanseth his Church by the washing of water through the Word, Tit. 3.5. It is called the Laver of regeneration, 1. Pet. 3.21. It's called the Figure that saveth us. Out of all which Texts, 〈◊〉 apparent, that baptism is appointed of God as one means (together with other) of remission of sin, grace and salvation; which though it doth not alway; confer the same ex opere operato (as the Papists erroneously affirm) yet always it doth so, when God is pleased to vouchsafe the concurrence and cooperation of his holy Spirit with it, which also of necessity is required to all other means of Grace, to make them effectual, as well as to Baptism; as namely, both to the Word preached, and to Prayer, or they avail not. This then being proved, that baptism is a means of Grace by God's appointment, it necessarily follows, that it appertains to Infants, as who are receptible of Grace as well as those that are of ripe years; and therefore baptism which is a means of grace, ought not to be withheld from them.  
All that is or can be answered to invalidate the force of this argument, is this, That though Infants are in themselves capable of baptism, as being a means of Grace, yet the Scripture puts a bar to them, because they want Faith, which is required before baptism.  
To this it is answered, that the precedence of Faith is required only of such as are capable of Faith, and not of Infants which are not in a capacity of it; which I thus demonstrate:  
If Faith, and so consequently Remission of sin and Regeneration, were always and of all, necessarily required before baptism, than baptism could never be a means and instrumental cause to bring forth faith and regeneration: For if Faith and regeneration must go before it, than it cannot be the instrumental cause of Faith and regeneration; for the effect cannot go before the cause.  
But that it is sometimes and to some a means of regeneration, remission of sin, Faith and other Grace, is sufficiently proved by the Texts before quoted.  
Therefore the precedence of faith is not necessarily required of all to be baptised. I apprehend the force of this Argument, and the last before this, to be such as will stall any Anabaptist whatsoever, to enevate or invalidate.  
To these, Arg. 7 I might add a Seventh Argument, very valid and convincing, which is the Title and Interest which the Infants of Christians have to the Covenant of Grace: For if the Covenant of Grace itself belong to Infants (which hath been formerly proved from Mat. 18.3. & Mark 10.14. and is justifiable by many other Texts of Scripture) than the seal thereof also belongs to them.  
But because this Argument is so largely and fully pressed already by divers learned men, I will omit all further prosecution of it: and conclude this first point thus: It's an old adage and a consessed truth, that force united becomes more forcible. Lay now all these Arguments and considerations together (the least whereof will sway with any, but such as are forestalled with prejudice) and paedobaptism will stand as a truth infringible, and a Fort impregnable and insuperable.   

The Second Point.  
Having now sufficiently proved the lawfulness and necessary use of Paedo-baptism, I come in the next place to confute what is repugnant to it, which is Anabaptism, or dipping such as have been baptised in their Infancy. And my first Argument I frame thus:  
THat opinion or Doctrine in Religion, which is new, Arg. 1 is not true (this is denied of none)  
But such is Anabaptism, or the rebaptisation of such as have been baptised in their infancy:  
Therefore it's not true.  
I prove the Assumption thus; because it's not to be found in Scripture, neither by precept not example, nor by good consequence to be deducted from it, but was broached about 300 or 400 years after the Aostles, by one Donatus a Presbyter about Carthage in Africa, as is testified by several Authors, amongst whom St. Augustine is a principal; who writ a Book in confutation of him. I have heard that some Anabaptists in answer hereunto, have alleged, Acts 19.2, 3, 4, & 5 verses, as a precedent and example for rebaptisation. But I shall clear that Text from warranting it, which I do demonstrate these two ways.  
1. Because the Evangelist doth not say of those there mentioned that they were rebaptised, but baptised; he saith not, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he saith not, which when they heard, they were rebaptised (which had been the more proper speech, if they had been truly baptised before) but he saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. which when they heard, they were baptised; which intimates, they were not rightly baptised till then, and therefore that was no reiteration of their baptism, but their first baptism.  
2. It's apparent from the Context, that they were not rightly baptised before, that is, baptised in a right form; and therefore this was no rebaptisation, but a first baptism: For the right form is, to be baptised in the name, or into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, or in the name of the Lord Jesus, which is the same in substance with the former, though in fewer words.  
Now that they were not baptised in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost, is most apparent, in that they said in the second verse, that they had not so much as heard, whether there were a Holy Ghost; which they must needs have heard, if they had been baptised in his name. Neither were they baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus before, for in that it's said, they were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus then, it undeniably implies, that they were not baptised in his name till then; and so consequently not truly and rightly baptised till then: And so I hope I have cleared this Text from warranting the Anabaptists rebaptisation, or dipping those that have been formerly baptised in their Infancy.  
The Professors of Anabaptism at their first appearing in the Christian Church, Arg. 2 and boasting themselves to be the only true Church (which was done by Donatus and his Disciples, as was declared in the former argument) were condemned by the Church then as Heretics, and cut off as unsound members, and were so suppressed by it, that for the space of 1000 years or thereabouts, there never appeared any face of them again in any Christian Nation. This is a truth so clear out of all Histories, that make mention of them, that I presume there is none of them that have the face to go about to outface it.  
But this, namely a cessation to be, can never befall the true Church of Christ, witness many Texts of Scripture, as Psal. 125.1. They that trust in the Lord, shall be as Mount Zion, that cannot be removed, but remaineth for ever. Mat. 16.18. Upon this Rock will I build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. And Esay 27.3. Lest any assail it, I keep it, saith the Lord. with many such like, which justify that the true Church of God cannot fail and cease to be.  
Whereas therefore there appeared no face of Anabaptistical Professors for so long a time, it proclaims them to be no true Church of Christ, and so their anabaptistical Profession not to be truth. This argument I once used in a dispute with one Mr. Oats (a Coryplaeus and teacher of note amongst them) and all the answer he returned, was this, that he had heard that there had been some of their profession formerly in Hungary; which was both an insufficient answer, and a  and clandestine confession, that they must either prove the continuance of such profession and professors from the Apostles times, (which they never can, nor (that I ever heard) attempted to do) or else must yield themselves in a manifest and obstinate Error.  
The Anabaptists interpretation of several Texts of holy Scripture, Arg. 3 as if they did impugn and disallow Infant-Baptism, is dissonant and dissentaneous from the interpretation of all visible Churches, both before and since their appearance; and therefore is a private interpretation, and so is repugnant to St. Peter's Doctrine, who tells us, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private Interpretation, 2 Pet. 1.20.  
Divers of the Fathers affirm, that the Primitive Church received of the Apostles not only the Scripture, but the genuine and true Interpretation thereof, and this indeed in all probability was so. And therefore if the Primitive Church held Paedo-Baptism to be agreeable to Scripture, and so accordingly practised it (as before hath been declared) it's out of doubt a doctrine of truth, and the Anabaptists reclamation and opposition of it (as if it were not warrantable by Scripture) a private and novel misinterpretation of Scripture, and therefore to be disavowed, detested and exploded.  
Rebaptisation of those that have been baptised before, Arg. 4 is repugnant to Scripture, which allows but one Baptism, Eph. 4.4. There is one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism.  
But our Infants whom they re-baptize, have been truly baptised before. Ergo, They act therein against Scripture. Now that our Infants are truly baptised, I thus demonstrate; Those (whether men, women, or children) that are baptised in the right and true form of baptism, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost, expressly set down, Mat. 28.19. are truly baptised. But our Infants are thus baptised, and therefore are truly and rightly baptised: For it's a known Canon in Logic, and received of all Learned men as a truth, that [forma dat esse] the form of a, thing gives its being unto it. And therefore Infants being baptised in this true and right form, are truly and rightly baptised and so ought not to be baptised again.  
That Profession of Christian Faith, Arg. 5 which was never publicly and openly acknowledged and owned by any Christian Nation; but ever since its first hatching, hide itself in corners and private Conventicles, & was professed only of some private persons, cannot be the truth: for Veritas non quaerit angulos, Truth seeks not to sculk and hid itself in corners; but such is Anabaptism: Ergo. The major Proposition I make good, from those many Texts of Scripture, where it's affirmed, that Nations, yea many nations should flow unto the Church of the Gospel (which is the ground and Pillar of truth, where truth is to be found) as Esay 2.2. It shall come to pass in the last days, that the Mountain of the Lords House shall be established in the top of the Mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills, and all Nations shall flow unto it. And the like sentence is in Micah 4.1. which was fore-spoken of the state and condition of the Church under the New Testament. And for the minor Proposition, let them make it appear, that ever any Nation did openly and publicly, without restraint, make profession of Anabaptism, and they shall be quit from the Conclusion. But this was never yet done, nor indeed can be done, Esay 49.23. It's foretold of the Church of the New Testament, that Kings should be nursing Fathers and Queens should be nursing Mothers unto it: That is, that there should be some supreme Civil Magistrates that should be propitious to it, and Protectors of it: But this honour was never done to Anabaptists; there was never King nor Queen nor Supreme Magistrate, that hath protected their Profession, nor the Professors thereof, under that notion; but have always declared their dislike and distaste of them; which undeniably secludes them from being that true Church of Christ there spoken of, (which yet is their Pharisaical boast) and proclaims them to be a Set and Sect of Schismatics, that have groundlessly made a scandalous and dangerous separation of themselves from that true Church of Christ, whereof divers Civil Magistrates have been for many ages, and still are the constant and resolute Protectors and Defenders.   

The Third Point.  
Swasory and Considerable reasons to bend and sway with all Anabaptists to repudiate and renounce the error of their way.  
THE first reason that I shall tender to their due consideration, Reas. 1 is this, Because Persons of that Profession, are generally void of Charity; which Charity being the cognizance of a disciple of Christ, as is taught by Christ himself, John 13.35. By this shall all men know that ye are my Disciples, if ye have love one to another: And being also a Badge of truth, as St. John affirms, 1 John 3.19. Thereby (saith he, speaking of Love or Charity) we know that we are of the truth. The contrary thereto, which is uncharitableness, must needs be the Livery of such as are adversaries to Christ and his truth, and therefore to be abhorred and abandoned.  
Now that they are uncharitable, appears these two ways.  
1. From their separation of themselves from all other Christian Congregations, and refusing Churh-fellowship and society with them.  
2. From their ostentation and boasting of themselves to be the only Church and people of God upon earth, and censuring all others as unregenerate Persons, and so out of God's true Church; and thereupon term them the world, (as one that was of their Profession and Association, but is now reclaimed, hath certified and assured me) Whereas Charity thinketh not evil, but believeth all things and hopeth all things, 1 Cor. 13.5, & 7r Now by this uncharitable censure of theirs, they condemn not only all the Reformed Churches of Christendom (amongst which there be Millions of Saints) but all the Martyrs in Queen Mary's days here in England, and all the Martyrs in the Primitive Church, that never were dipped after their Infant-Baptism, Baptism, and yet lived godlily, and suffered gloriously, and died comfortably.  
That the Martyrs in the Primitive Church lived and died with signal and apparent evidences of extraordinary divine Graces, and supernatural comforts imparted and infused into them, is witnessed (as by other Ecclesiastical Historians) so, by that creditable Author, Eusebius, in his Ecclesiastical History, Lib. 8. Cap. 12. toward the end: where he testifieth of them, That they so shined throughout the world in their afflictions, that the beholders wondered at their patience and noble courage, and that (saith he there) was not without cause; for they expressed and showed forth unto the world special and manifest signs of the divine and unspeakable power of our Saviour Christ working by them.  
And for the Martyrs in Queen Mary's days, Mr. Fox in his History of them, recordeth many speeches uttered by them, which were manifest evidences of Gods divine Graces and Comforts in an extraordinary measure and manner conferred and breathed upon them. And therefore to censure both these and all other Christian Professors in the world besides themselves, to be without God in the world, sets a shameful brand of Pharisaical pride and uncharitableness upon them: And is enough to make both the ears of all that hear it to tingle, and their hearts to boil with indignation against them, and divers wise and godly persons wonder, that they are not more strictly dealt withal and restrained; this and some others of their gross hallucinations and errors, and presumptuous and irregular extravagancies and Practices considered.  
A second Reason that I shall offer to their consideration, is this, Reas. 2 Their presumptuous confidence in their own Opinions and Judiciousness; preferring the same before the wisdom and judgement of millions of eminently Learned and Godly Christians (and many of them Martyrs) who lived before them, and that in all ages, even next to the Apostles, as hath been formerly declared. This is contrary to the prescript Rules, Directions, and Sanctions of the holy Scripture, as in Prov. 3.7. Be not wise in thine own eyes. And Prov. 26.12. Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him. Esay. 5.21. woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight. Luke 9.23. If any man will come after me, let him deny himself: Which self-denial in one point of it, consists in the denial of a man's own reason and wisdom, Rom. 12.6. Be not wise in your own conceit. It's not to be questioned, but that the Christians of the Primitive Church, and the Learned holy Fathers that succeeded them (who were main and strenuous Props and Pillars of the true Christian Faith, in defence thereof against the Heresies of those times) as also the modern, learned and illustrious Divines, the late Reformers of Religion, Luther, Zuinglius, Melancthon, Peter Martyr, Calvin, Junius, Beza, Zanchy, Chemnitius, with many such of other Nations; and those Renowned, Pious and Learned Divines of our own Nation, that lived but a few years since; as Cranmer, a Bishop and a Martyr, Jewel, Whittaker, Reighnolds, Andrews, Perkins, Bishop Usher, Bishop Hall, Hooker, with thousands more, who were Divines of singular and transcendent piety and Learning: It's not to be questioned (I say) but that these men did seriously and searchingly and throughly sift and examine this Point of Infant-Baptism, yet concluded for it, and owned it to the last period of their lives without any scruple at all. And is it likely that a few Illiterate Persons (I speak it comparatively, namely, in respect of those so profoundly Learned beforenamed) should espy out such an error to be crept into God's Church, as they were never able to discover.  
Oh be humbled now in yourselves, all ye selfconceited and perverse Anabaptists, and lay your hands upon your mouths, and deny yourselves, if ye will be Christ's Disciples, as ye would be accounted. And take unto you these or the like words, and say (as the truth is) Alas! we are weak men, and far inferior to those renowned Worthies and glorious Martyrs now mentioned, both in Learning, Perspicacity, Judgement, True Zeal and Piety; and therefore we do acquiesce and submit to the Judgement and Sentence of those Learned, Judicious and illustrious holy Ones of God, so far excelling us in all divine Graces and Virtues. And the rather to bend you hereunto, remember how St. Peter hath set this Presumption and self-conceitedness as a black Brand upon the Heretics of these last times, in 2 Pet. 2.10. Where he speaks thus of them, That they are presumptuous, and stand in their own conceit, and fear not to speak evil of them that are in Authority: And therefore it stands you in hand to beware that you wear not this Reproachful Livery.  
A Third Reason may be this, Reas. 3 Because they give great offence to many Godly Christians, by separating themselves from the Congregations of the Reformed Churches; which is repugnant to the Doctrine of the holy Scritpures, as is evident by these Texts, 1 Cor. 10.32. Give no offence neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God. And Rom. 16.17. Now I beseech you Brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences, contrary to the Doctrine which we have learned, and avoid them. Herein they proclaim themselves to be such vain ostentators, as God complains of, Esay 65.5. Who said, stand by thyself, come not near to me, for I am holier than thou; and yet they were a smoke in God's Nose, and a fire that burned all the day, as in the next words God himself pronounceth against them. Hereby also they declare themselves to be such Mockers, as St. Judas foretold should appear in these last times, in the 18 and 19 v. of his Epistle; in that they thus separate themselves from other godly Christians; for these be they (saith he) that separate themselves. If they shall say, that it is an offence taken, and not given: It's answered, that its the unanimous sentence and judgement of all Learned and Orthodox Divines, both ancient and modern, and amply justifiable by Scripture, that neither corruption in manners in a particular Church, nor errors in matters of Ceremony, Circumstance, or in the manner of Church-Government are a sufficient ground or warrant for any particular persons to desert it and make separation from it; but it must be some error in the Fundamentals of Religion, that will justify a separation from any particular Church. Now the Church of England is not culpable or chargeable in the least measure, of error in any one particular Tenet, that strikes at the Foundation of Christian Belief, as I doubt not but they will ingeniously confess. And therefore their separation from the Church of England, is an offence given by them, and not an offence taken by us, who profess ourselves Members of the said Church.  
I wonder that the example of our blessed Saviour is no more minded and regarded by them; who never refused to join himself to the Congregations of the People of the Jews, though they were guilty of more foul errors, and gross abuses by many degrees, than the Church of England is. And it's very apparent from St. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians and Galatians, that neither errors which are not fundamental, nor corruption in Manners, will warrant a separation from any Church; seeing he acknowledgeth and owneth both these, as the Churches of God; albeit he taxeth them both, both for palpable errors and foul misdemeanours (as is evident in the said Epistles) and such as were more gross and dangerous errors that any the Church of England holds. Reas. 4  
A Fourth Reason shall be this; Because their Sect hath hatched several Brood's of Fanatic, Vertiginous, and Brainsick persons, that are looked upon by prudent persons, as Monsters among Christian Professors, as Quakers, Ranters, Seekers and Adamites, the very scum and shame of Christians: For these were never heard of, till they sprang up from among their Disciples, which their resorting still together doth evince and evidence. Whereas therefore such prodigious and abominable Brats, or rather Monsters are hatched in their Nest, it's a shrewd sign that the Brood is naught.  
A Fifth and last Reason that I shall propound to them to be weighed in the balance of their discretion, Reas. 5 is this; Because Persons of their Profession have never been accounted as sound Members in the Body either of Church or Commonwealth; but as Incendiaries and seditious Persons, and Perturbers of the Peace both of Church and Commonwealth in all Nations and Countries where they have appeared; and have been proceeded against accordingly, as by divers examples in Histories is very evident. One of the first of this Sect, that shown himself openly, was one Thomas Muntzer, who in the year [1523] published his doting errors of this sort, at the City of Alsted in Saxony; who stirring up the People to sedition also and insurrection, whereby great tumults were raised, grievous outrages committed, and many Thousands slain, and himself being a principal Agitator and actor amongst them, was at last apprehended by the Land-grave and the Duke of Saxony, at Frankenhusium; where he was sentenced to death by the said Princes, and had his Head cut off and fastened to a Stake. This story of him and divers others of their Sect, is at large recorded by one Mr. Alexander Ross, a late Reverend Divine, in the latter end of his Book entitled, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Or A View of all Religious in the world. Some question is made, whether these Stories of the Anabaptists, were penned by himself or not; but it matters not, seeing the truth of them is avouched by divers other Authors.  
After this, or about the same time, one Balthasar Pacimontanus, (a Clergy man of Ingolstade in Germany) declared himself to be of this Sect (he was confuted and convinced both by Luther and Zuinglius) who persisting obstinately in his errors, was at last burnt at Vienna, a famous City of Austria in the said Germany; as Bellarmine reports in his first Book, the Sacrament. Baptism. Cap. 8. from the Testimony of Johannes Cochlaeus.  
Afterwards appeared John Becold of Leiden, with his Associates, at the City of Munster in Holland; who for their prodigious Errors, Blasphemies and wicked Practices, were openly condemned and put to death, about the year [1537] as the History of them is written both by Sleidan and divers others, and notoriously known to be true.  
Lastly, (to omit very many other Instances) ariseth up one Michael Servetus, a Spaniard by birth; one that Mr. Calvin laboured much with to reduce from his error of Anabaptism, and some other Opinions that were blasphemous, but not prevailing with him, to reclaim him, he was at length sentenced to death by the Senate of Geneva, and there burnt, in the year [1553] as Chemnitius witnesseth, in locis communibus, Part 1. Cap. 2. de tribus Personis divinitatis.  
Consider now therefore with yourselves what comfort or encouragement ye can have to be the Disciples and Followers of such Leaders; who never yet were approved of in any Christian Nation; but were ever exploded, proceeded against and spewed out as scandalous and criminous Offenders? Yea and even here amongst yourselves, divers of your eminent Leaders and Teachers have been notoriously and deservedly famed to be of lose and scandalous Conversation (whereof ye cannot be ignorant) which greatly blemisheth your Profession; because ye pretend to more Holiness (yea and make your boast thereof) than ye will acknowledge to be in others, who are not of your Faith and Persuasion. If these Reasons will not prevail with you, do desert the error, yea, the dangerous error of your way, I have no more to say to you, but shall tender my Prayers for you (as St. Paul did for the Ephesians) To the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of Glory, that he may give unto you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him, the eyes of your understandings being opened, that ye may know, what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the Glory of his inheritance in the Saints.   
FINIS.   

Books sold by Nathanael Webb at the King's Head, and William Grantham, at the black Bear in St. Paul's Churchyard.  
MAster Isaac Ambrose, prima, media, & ultima, [First, Middle and Last things] in three Treatises, in 4.  
— Looking to Jesus; a View of the everlasting Gospel, in 4.  
— Redeeming the time: a Sermon in 4.  
Mr. Richard Tines on the Sacrament in 4.  
Mr. Nathanael Hardy, several Sermons, preached upon solemn occasions, collected into one Volume, in 4.  
— [The first Epist. General of St. John] unfolded and applied, in 22 Sermons, in 4.  
[History surveyed in a brief Epitome: or a Nursery for Gentry] comprised in an intermixed discourse upon Historical and Poetical Relations in 4.  
Mr. William Nicolson's Exposition of the Church Catechism, in 4.  
Dr. Stoughton's 13 Sermons, being an introduction to the Body of Divinity, in 4.  
Dr. John Preston [A Position delivered in Cambridge concerning the irresistableness of converting Grace, in 4.  
Mr. Thomas Cradock [Gospel Liberty] in the Extension and Limitation of it, in 4.  
Mr. John Browning [concerning public Prayer, and the Fasts of the Church, in 4.  
Mr. Rich. Lewthwat [Vindiciae Christi & obex errori Arminiano] A plea for Christ, in 4.  
Mr. John Lawsons' [Glean and Expositions of some of the more difficult places of holy Scripture] in 4.  
Mr. John Cotton [The way of the Churches of Christ in N. England] in 4.  
Mr. Edward Thorp [the New Birth, or Birth from above] in 4.  
Mr. John Ley's Discourse of Disputation● in matters of Religion  
[The Beacon flaming, with a non obsta 〈…〉 agninst those that plead for liberty of Printing and publishing Popish Books] in 4.  
Mr. Nathanael Stephen's [A precept for the Baptism of Infants, out of the N.T.] in 4.  
Dr. Sam Annesly [the first Dish at the Wiltshire Feast] a Sermon preached before many worthy Citizens of London born in that County, in 4.  
[Communion with God] in two Semons preached at Paul's, in 4.  
Mr. Edmund Calamy [The Monster of sinful selfseeking anatomised] preached at Paul's.  
Mr. John Warren [The Potent Potter] Sermon preached before the Parl. in 4.  
— [The unprofitable Servant [A Semon preached at an Assize, in 4.  
— Man's Fury subservient to Gods glory preached to the Parliament.  
Dr. Robert Gell, Of God's Government o● the world by Angels, preached before the Astrologers, in 4.  
— Noah's Flood returning, A Sermon.  
Dr. John Wincop [Gods Call to weeping and mourning] preached before the P. in 4.  
Mr. George Walker, A Sermon preached before the parliament, in 4.  
Rich. Meggot [The Rib restored] or the honour of Marriage, a Wedding Sermon.  
Mr. Will. Good [Jacob raised] a Sermon preached before the Parliament, in 4.  
Mr. Thomas Goodwin [The great Interest of States and Kingdoms] a Sermon preached before the Parl. in 4.  
Mr. Sam. Kem, A Sermon preached upon the choice of Burgesses for the City of Bristol, in 4.  
Mr. Ambr. Stavely [Index Expurgatorius, A short Examination of the Doctrine of Purgatory] a Sermon in 4.  
Mr. Peter Sterry [the Clouds in which Christ comes] a Sermon preached before the Parl. in 4.  
— [The teachings of Christ in the Soul] a Sermon preached before the Parl. in 4.  
Mr. Robert wild, the arraignment of a Sinner at the Bar of Divine Justice; An Assize Sermon.  
Mr. Giles Firmin, Stablishing against Shaking, or a discovery of the Prince of darkness (Scarcely) transformed into an Angel of light, powerfully now working in the deluded people called Quakers, in 4.  
— Mr. Stephen Marshal, The power of the civil Magistrate in matters of Religion.  
Mr. George Swinock, The Gods are men, An assize Sermon.  
Mr. Ben. Needler [expository notes, with Practical Observations upon Genesis] in 8.  
Mr. Giles Firmin, Of Schism, against Dr. Owen.  
Mr. Votier, Of Effectual Calling.  
Mr. George Hopkins [Salvation from sin by Jesus Christ] or the Doctrine of Sanctification, in 8.  
Mr. John Trap, Theologia Theologiae A Treasury of holy truths, touching Go●● Word, and God the Word, in 8.  
BP. Davenant [An exhortation to Brotherly communion betwixt the Protestant Churches] in 8.  
Mr. John Simson, [The Perfection 〈◊〉 Justification, etc.] in 8.  
Mr. Hall, [The Loathsomeness of long Hair] also against Painting, Spots, and Naked Breasts, in 8.  
— [Vindiciae Literarum, the Schools guarded] or the excellency and usefulness of Humane Learning in subordination to Divinity, in 8.  
Mr. John Warren [Principles of Christian practice] illustrated, with Questions and Scripture Answers, in 8.  
Mr. Daniel Evans [a Catechism about Infant's Baptism, in 8.  
[The Practice of Christianity] or the Epitome of Mr. Roger's seven treatises, in 12  
Mr Thomas Jackson [the true evangelical temper, etc.] in 12.  
Mr. Tho. Gery, the Fort Royal of Christianity defended, to prove the Scriptures to be the Word of God.  
Mr. Mullard [celestial Soliloquies] several Divine Meditations and Prayers drawn from the holy Scriptures, in 12.