An apologetical reply to a book called an answer to the unjust complaint of…An apologeticall reply to a booke called an ansvver to the unjust complaint of…

The Answer to the eleventh Section examined. Of the private conference had with me after my coming over.

The Answer to the eleventh Section examined. Of the private conference had with me after my comming over.

IN this Section three things are to be considered. 1. his gird at Mr. Hook: 2. His partial and defective report of a conference between us. 3. his pretended answer to some passages in my third writing. These we will examine severally and briefly.

IN this Section three things are to be considered. 1. his gird at Mr. Hook: 2. His partiall and defective report of a conference betweene us. 3. his pretended answer to some passages in my third wrighting. These we will examine severally and breifely.

For the first. 1. the great disturbance, which here he seemeth to impute to Mr. Hook: is to be charged upon himself, and his own violent and unjust opposition against Mr. Hook: and the Church, and not at all to Mr. Hook: unless by accident, as Paul might be said to be an occasion of the disturbance at Ephesus,¹ the cause whereof was Demetrius & his companions. 2. It would be known how I seemed to accord with him, and to dislike Mr. Hook: opinions, in general? If he mean, by my my silence, I confess, I heard him speak some things, at which I was silent, being not called to speak. For himself said, that, in some of their differences, he would not inquire after my opinion, being persuaded that I was therein clear, And, in conclusion, pitched upon two questions. 1. Concerning the power and authority of C••sses, whereunto what I answered he knoweth. 2. Concerning promiscuous administration of Baptism, according to the custom of the Dutch Church in Amsterdam, wherein what I held and do hold shall appear.

For the first. 1. the great disturbance, which here he seemeth to impute to Mr. Hook: is to be charged upon himselfe, and his owne violent and unjust opposition against Mr. Hook: and the Church, and not at all to Mr. Hook: unles by accident, as Paul might be said to be an occasion of the disturbance at Ephesus,¹ the cause whereof was Demetrius & his companions. 2. It would be knowne how I seemed to accord with him, and to dislike Mr. Hook: opinions, in generall? If he meane, by my my silence, I confesse, I heard him speake some things, at which I was silent, being not called to speake. For himselfe said, that, in some of their differences, he would not inquire after my opinion, being perswaded that I was therein cleare, And, in conclusion, pitched upon two questions. 1. Concerning the power and authority of C••sses, whereunto what I answered he knoweth. 2. Concerning promiscuous administration of Baptisme, according to the custom of the Dutch Church in Amsterstam, wherein what I held and doe hold shall appeare.

1. 1Ast. 19.22.

First, partial, in declaring the state of the question, which was not as he intimateth, but thus. After an historical narration made by him of a difference between the Classis and Mr. Hook; about a custom, which the Ministers of the Dutch Church in Amsterdam have, of baptizing all that are brought by whomsoever, he asked me what I thought of it. I desired (for my satisfaction) to know wh•t their custom was, being then, in part, ignorant thereof. He told me, that they baptized all, refusing none. I replied, that I would baptize all their infants, who were members of his Church, refusing none. He said, that is not sufficient. I, desiring to carry matters with all possible peaceableness, told him that I would not refuse to baptize others also, which were no members of his Church, if I were satisfied concerning the Parents, and instanced in such as might occasionally be there from England, & were sufficiently known to me. But yet the case might be such, in some others, as I should not adventure to do it. He answered. But here they except none, but baptize all that are brought, though the parents be not known, or the infant be presented, in the f•thers absence, by persons unknown. I told him, that, I hoped, such cases were seldom, especially in the English Church. He said, it must be expected to fall out often. I told him, I should desire to be satisfied concerning the parents, before the child were presented. He said. They would often bring them, in sermon time, without giving any notice before, and, in such a case, to refuse any, would give offence, if the child should be unbaptized. I replied, that offence may be prevented, seeing those, whom I dare not admit, may repair to the Dutch Church, where none are refused. He added, that it would give offence to the Classis, if our Church •hould not do as they did, in this. I answered, the difference between the small English Church, & the vast Dutch Church in the same town being considered, that might easily be answered.

First, partiall, in declaring the state of the question, which was not as he intimateth, but thus. After an hystoricall narration made by him of a difference betweene the Classis and Mr. Hook; about a custom, which the Ministers of the Dutch Church in Amsterdam have, of baptizing all that are brought by whomsoever, he asked me what I thought of it. I desired (for my satisfaction) to know wh•t their custom was, being then, in part, ignorant thereof. He told me, that they baptized all, refusing none. I replyed, that I would baptize all their infants, who were members of his Church, refusing none. He sayd, that is not sufficient. I, desiring to carry matters with all possible peaceablenes, told him that I would not refuse to baptize others also, which were no members of his Church, if I were satisfyed cōcerning the Parents, and instanced in such as might occasionally be there from England, & were sufficiently knowne to me. But yet the case might be such, in some others, as I should not adventure to doe it. He answered. But here they except none, but baptize all that are brought, though the parents be not knowne, or the infant be presented, in the fthers absence, by persons unknowne. I told him, that, I hoped, such cases were seldom, especially in the English Church. He said, it must be expected to fall out often. I told him, I should desire to be satisfyed concerning the parents, before the child were presented. He sayd. They would often bring them, in sermon time, without giving any notice before, and, in such a case, to refuse any, would give offence, if the child should be unbaptized. I replyed, that offence may be prevented, seing those, whom I dare not admit, may repayre to the Dutch Church, where none are refused. He added, that it would give offence to the Classis, if our Church hould not doe as they did, in this. I answered, the difference betweene the small English Church, & the vast Dutch Church in the same towne being considered, that might easily be answered.

By all which it appeareth that the thing which I refused (and whereupon our difference arose) was the promiscuous administration of baptism to all that are presented, by whomsoever; ⟨p. 118⟩and not that J made the parents submission to my private examination a necessary condition of baptism, but only I propounded it as a prudent mean for avoiding that promiscuous baptizing which he required. Thus the Reader may see the report to be partial.

By all which it appeareth that the thing which I refused (and whereupon our difference arose) was the promiscuous administration of baptisme to all that are presented, by whomsoever; ⟨p. 118⟩and not that J made the parents submission to my private examination a necessary condition of baptisme, but only I propounded it as a prudent meane for avoyding that promiscuous baptizing which he required. Thus the Reader may see the report to be partiall.

Secondly, it is defective, not mentioning diverse passages of discourse between us, which I will but point at. As about an order in the Classis, which he said was for this, concerning which, what I demanded and, what he answered, I will, for this time, conceal, as also what he spake about this custom being always observed in that Church, as also about passages that, he said, had been between the Classis, and Mr. Forbes about Mr. Hooker, in reference to this question. He omitteth also our discourse about the case of an unbaptized Turk presenting his child to baptism, with no other profession then that which is required in their Church. And how he thought it to be more for a mans satisfaction, to baptize all, upon the injunction of the Classis, then to refuse any, upon his own judgement. Other passages also I could name, but these may suffice, to show that his memory hath not retained particulars so well as my notes, at least, that this report is defective. But let us consider his Arguments.

Secondly, it is defective, not mentioning diverse passages of discourse betweene us, which I will but point at. As about an order in the Classis, which he sayd was for this, concerning which, what I demanded and, what he answered, I will, for this time, conceale, as also what he spake about this custom being alwaies observed in that Church, as also about passages that, he sayd, had bene betweene the Classis, and Mr. Forbes about Mr. Hooker, in reference to this question. He omitteth also our discourse about the case of an unbaptized Turke presenting his child to baptisme, with no other profession then that which is required in theyre Church. And how he thought it to be more for a mans satisfaction, to baptize all, upon the injunction of the Classis, then to refuse any, upon his owne judgement. Other passages also I could name, but these may suffice, to shew that his memory hath not retayned particulars so well as my noates, at least, that this report is defective. But let us consider his Arguments.

¹He mentioneth 2 sorts of arguments, which he used in that conference to convince me. The first consisted of reasons, the second of Scriptures alleged against my opinion.

¹He mentioneth 2 sorts of arguments, which he used in that conference to convince me. The first consisted of reasons, the second of Scriptures alleadged against my opinion.

1. 1The arguments for promiscuous baptizing. 1 From Reasons.

First, the reasons were two. 1. the scandal of the Brownists. 2. the offence of the Church. In both which he should have set down my answers also, which seeing he neglected, I will now set down truly, according the to substance of my answer, and yet briefly.

First, the reasons were two. 1. the scandall of the Brownists. 2. the offence of the Church. In both which he should have set downe my answers also, which seing he neglected, I will now set downe truely, according the to substance of my answer, and yet breifely.

¹To the first. I answer. 4 things. Ans. 1 1. What the Brownists hold, so far as it accordeth with the rule, is to be received for the rules sake, which is truth, and not to be rejected because they hold it. Ans. 2 2. Their unjust and unwarrantable excommunicating of Mr. S. for such an opinion is not justified by my supposed agreement with them in this tenet. For a man that holdeth this, may condemn that. Ans. 3 3. the difference between them and me ⟨p. 119⟩in this point is such (as the Answerer knoweth) that there is no fear of their insulting, or being hardened thereby. 4. the French Churches and some other Dutch Churches, viz, in Zealand. and England &c. are not so large in this practise as they in Amsterdam.

¹To the first. I answer. 4 things. Ans. 1 1. What the Brownists hold, so farr as it accordeth with the rule, is to be received for the rules sake, which is truth, and not to be rejected because they hold it. Ans. 2 2. Theyr unjust and unwarrantable excommunicating of Mr. S. for such an opinion is not justifyed by my supposed agreement with them in this tenet. For a man that holdeth this, may condemne that. Ans. 3 3. the difference betweene them and me ⟨p. 119⟩in this point is such (as the Answerer knoweth) that there is no feare of theyr insulting, or being hardened thereby. 4. the French Churches and some other Dutch Churches, viz, in Zealand. and England &c. are not so large in this practise as they in Amsterdam.

1. 11. The scandal of the Brownists1. The scandall of the Brownists

To the second. I answer. 1. That the ways propounded by me for accommodation,¹ were sufficient (as I conceive) to prevent any offence of the Church. These ways I will now relate in the words wherein I wrote them to a friend to enable him to acquaint the Dutch preachers with the truth in this matter. This writing was dated & delivered by me, for the use aforesaid, the 10 of Jan: new style, 1634. Wherein I spake of my self in the third person, for good reason, at that time.

To the second. I answer. 1. That the wayes propounded by me for accommodation,¹ were sufficient (as I conceive) to prevent any offence of the Church. These wayes I will now relate in the words wherein I wrote them to a freind to inable him to acquaint the Dutch preachers with the truth in this matter. This wrighting was dated & delivered by me, for the use aforesaid, the 10 of Ian: newstile, 1634. Wherein I spake of my selfe in the third person, for good reason, at that time.

1. 12. The offence of the Church Ans. Means: propounded for accommodation. A Copy of a writing showing.2. The offence of the Church Ans. Meanes: propounded for accommodation. A Copy of a wrighting shewing.

Sir, because you are willing to take pains for the accommodation of this difference, you shall, in few words, understand. 1. the true state of the question. 2. the reasons of his answer. 3. the way of accommodation, which will best satisfy him, which I leave with you in writing, for the help of your memory.

Sir, because you are willing to take paines for the accommodation of this difference, you shall, in few wordes, understand. 1. the true state of the question. 2. the reasons of his answer. 3. the way of accommodation, which will best satisfye him, which I leave with you in wrighting, for the helpe of your memory.

First, the question is,¹ whether he will baptize all children who are presented to the Church, though the parents be no members? His answer was, and is, that this cannot be answered otherwise then according to cases. He may not say, that he will baptize none: and he dare not say, that he will baptize all, but this he saith. There are cases where in he will baptize such as are not members of this Church, and yet the cases may be such, as, in them, he shall refuse to administer it to others.

First, the question is,¹ whether he will baptize all children who are presented to the Church, though the parents be no members? His answer was, and is, that this cannot be answered otherwise then according to cases. He may not say, that he will baptize none: and he dare not say, that he will baptize all, but this he sayth. There are cases where in he will baptize such as are not members of this Church, and yet the cases may be such, as, in them, he shall refuse to administer it to others.

1. 11. The state of the question.

Secondly the reasons of his answer,¹ besides others (which to him seem weighty) in reference to this particular place, are two. 1. the promiscuous mixture of all languages, and sects, amongst which also are many Libertines, which are of no Church, and, for aught is known, many parents, who themselves never were baptized, will, in policy, present their children thereunto, 2. the custom of this place, which hath been to refuse none, though presented in the sermon time (without notice given before) by a nurse, or any one, neither ⟨p. 120⟩of the parents appearing in it, or being known, or enquired after, nor any sufficient assurance given for the education of the children, in that faith, which is there professed, and that confession of faith being expressed & demanded by the minister, in a language, which they that present the child, some times understand not, & in this act both the ministers must join,

Secondly the reasons of his answer,¹ besides others (which to him seeme weighty) in reference to this particular place, are two. 1. the promiscuous mixture of all languages, and sects, amongst which also are many Libertines, which are of no Church, and, for aught is knowne, many parents, who themselues never were baptized, will, in policy, present their children thereunto, 2. the custom of this place, which hath bene to refuse none, though presented in the sermon time (without notice given before) by a nurse, or any one, neither ⟨p. 120⟩of the parents appearing in it, or being knowne, or enquired after, nor any sufficient assurance given for the education of the children, in that fayth, which is there professed, and that confession of fayth being expressed & demanded by the minister, in a language, which they that presēt the child, some times vnderstand not, & in this act boath the ministers must joyne,

1. 12. Reasons of my answer.

¹Thirdly, for accommodation; He desireth that, at least, these three things may be agreed upon.

1. 13. Three means of accommodation.3. Three meanes of accommod•tion.

First, That this Sacrament be administered by the ministers severally not jointly (as the Lords supper is) either only by him that preacheth, or only by him that preacheth not, at that time, in their several courses, respectively: whereby, the discovery of any difference, in particular cases, between them may be prevented, & mutual concord between themselves may be preserved, both being left free to walk according to their light, in such particulars, wherein their opinions may differ.

First, That this Sacrament be administred by the ministers severally not joyntly (as the Lords supper is) either only by him that preacheth, or only by him that preacheth not, at that time, in theyr severall courses, respectively: whereby, the discovery of any differēce, in particular cases, betweene them may be prevented, & mutuall concord betweene themselves may be preserved, boath being left free to walke according to their light, in such particulars, wherein their opinions may differ.