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…

2. Admit that, in some cases, there may be a lawful use of special witnesses, or sureties: yet, can these give the infant a right to baptism, which had none in the parents? That the ⟨p. 165⟩Covenant is made with parents for themselves and their children,¹ and that thereby the children are holy in the parents we read, but where do we read so much of sureties?

2. Admit that, in some cases, there may be a lawfull use of speciall witnesses, or suretyes: yet, can these give the infant a right to baptisme, which had none in the parents? That the ⟨p. 165⟩Covenant is made with parents for themselves and their children,¹ and that thereby the children are holy in the parents we read, but where doe we read so much of suretyes?

1. 1Gen: 17. 1 Cor: 7.

3. Admit, that, in some sureties the children have a right unto baptism (viz, such as were of Abraham's family,¹ borne in his house, or bought with his money, and so such as are members of Christian families, in a like state) yet, will it thence follow, that such sureties as many times present children to baptism, in that place, partake of the same privilege, of whose families the infants are not members, nor are their families ordered like Abraham's, themselves also are, some of them, notoriously wicked, others of them unknown to the Church, and many of them, such as have no power to see the child educated, and, it may be, shall never see it after that day. Such an one was that unknown woman, who seeing a harlot delivered of a bastard, instantly took the infant, and brought it to the English Church, in Amsterdam, where (as it fell out) she found the Congregation dismissed before she came, who being asked by some of the members, why she came no sooner, answered, how could I come before the child was borne? or to that purpose, and so she hastened to the Dutch Church, where she found them baptising many, & without delay presented the child, which was received, without any difficulty or question. Judicious Calvin calleth the promise made by those who have no power to educate the child an open mocking of God.²

3. Admit, that, in some suretyes the children have a right unto baptisme (viz, such as were of Abrahams family,¹ borne in his house, or bought with his money, and so such as are members of Christian familyes, in a like state) yet, will it thence follow, that such suretyes as many times present children to baptisme, in that place, partake of the same priviledge, of whose familyes the infants are not members, nor are their familyes ordered like Abrahams, themselves also are, some of them, notoriously wicked, others of them unknowne to the Church, and many of them, such as have no power to see the child educated, and, it may be, shall never see it after that day. Such an one was that unknowne woaman, who seing a harlot delivered of a bastard, instantly tooke the infant, and brought it to the English Church, in Amsterdam, where (as it fell out) she found the Congregation dismissed before she came, who being asked by some of the members, why she came no sooner, answered, how could I come before the child was borne? or to that purpose, and so she hastned to the Dutch Church, where she found them baptising many, & without delay presented the child, which was received, without any difficulty or question. Iudicious Calvin calleth the promise made by those who have no power to educate the child an open mocking of God.²

1. 1Gen. 17.3.
2. 2Calv. Epist: 149.

Pretence. 3 Third pretence] They are manifest Christians which profess Christian Religion, at the reading of the Liturgy of Baptism?

Pretence. 3 Third pretence] They are manifest Christians which professe Christian Religion, at the reading of the Liturgy of Baptisme?

1. 1Orat: 30. in laud: Basil.

2. If persons, otherwise unknown, are sufficiently manifested to be Christians by such a profession of faith as is usually ⟨p. 166⟩made there at the reading of the Liturgy of Baptism (which is done by saying yea, or some gesture of the body only) to what use was such a declaration of their faith required in the Apostles times, and many ages after?

2. If persons, otherwise unknowne, are sufficiently manifested to be Christians by such a profession of fayth as is usually ⟨p. 166⟩made there at the reading of the Leiturgy of Baptisme (which is done by saying yae, or some gesture of the body only) to what use was such a declaration of their fayth required in the Apostles times, and many ages after?

3. Beza puts a case of a man convicted lawfully, in the presbytery, of obstinacy in maintaining some dangerous errors against the immortality of the soul and the resurrection of the body, and then asketh Erastus, shall we account this man a Christian?¹ And answereth minimè opinor. I suppose not. In like manner, I will put a case or two. Terentius of Harlem is infamous to this day for like errors, and for the dangerous fruits thereof in diverse, who yet live in several places, and some in Amsterdam, who, to this day, have not revoked their wicked errors. Also the story of Robert Roberts is notoriously known, who said he would have one child baptised in the true Church, and having collected a catalogue of several Churches, which he called the seven sisters, to the Arminians he presented one of his children to be baptised, but, because he was a Libertine, & a scoffer they refused to baptise it, except some other presented it: another being about 14 years old he presented to the Anabaptists, but they refused it, accounting him too young to make confession of his faith, one of them was baptised (as I am told) by the Papists, another by the Lutherans, the other in the ordinary Congregation, where he liveth, as it is said. This is published in a pamphlet printed to the view of all men. Again, the Dutch preachers refuse to baptise the infants of Gypsies, whom they call Heydenen, because of their disorderly course, yet many of these will offer to make the same profession, which is required at the reading of the Liturgy, and some of them will tell you, that they have been baptised. Are these to be accounted as heathen notwithstanding that? why not others also, that are as bad they?

3. Beza puts a case of a man convicted lawfully, in the presbytery, of obstinacy in maintayning some dangerous errours against the immortality of the soule and the resurrection of the body, and then asketh Erastus, shall we account this man a Christian?¹ And answereth minimè opinor. I suppose not. In like manner, I will put a case or two. Terentius of Harlem is infamous to this day for like errours, and for the dangerous fruits thereof in diverse, who yet live in severall places, and some in Amsterdam, who, to this day, have not revoked their wicked errours. Also the story of Robbert Roberts is notoriously knowne, who sayd he would have one child baptised in the true Church, and having collected a catalogue of severall Churches, which he called the seven sisters, to the Arminians he presented one of his children to be baptised, but, because he was a Libertine, & a scoffer they refused to baptise it, except some other presēted it: another being about 14 yeares old he presented to the Anabaptists, but they refused it, accounting him too yong to make confession of his faith, one of them was baptised (as I am told) by the Papists, another by the Lutherans, the other in the ordinary Congregation, where he liveth, as it is sayd. This is published in a pamphlet printed to the view of all men. Againe, the Dutch preachers refuse to baptise the infants of Gypses, whom they call Heydenen, because of their disorderly course, yet many of these will offer to make the same profession, which is required at the reading of the Leiturgy, and some of them will tell you, that they have bene baptised. Are these to be accounted as heathen notwithstanding that? why not others also, that are as bad they?

Lastly the Answerer himself refused to baptise the child of G. P. being excommunicated, and of a profane life, as its said, and I. S. who held with the Anabaptists and Arians, besides some others, yet, I suppose, neither of those refused to make such a profession as is required at the reading of the Liturgy. Now, if their denying to baptise infants in those cases be warrantable; ⟨p. 167⟩how can it be justified that they would compel me to baptise all that are brought, by whomsoever, in that place?

Lastly the Answerer himselfe refused to baptise the child of G. P. being excommunicated, and of a profane life, as its sayd, and I. S. who held with the Anabaptists and Arrians, besides some others, yet, I suppose, neither of those refused to make such a profession as is required at the reading of the Leiturgy. Now, if theyre denying to baptise infants in those cases be warrantable; ⟨p. 167⟩how can it be justifyed that they would compell me to baptise all that are brought, by whomsoever, in that place?

Pretence. 4 Fourth pretence] The infants should not bear the punishment of their fathers sin?

Pretence. 4 Fourth pretence] The infants should not beare the punishment of their fathers sinne?

Ans: 1. If they ground this Assertion upon Ezek: 18.14;¹ it is impertinent, it being there spoken of a son forsaking his fathers sins, and doing the contrary, with whom the Lord dealeth not in the course of his justice, but of mercy. Such were Abijah & Josiah: otherwise, it will not hold in all cases. For, were not infants drowned in the old world, burnt in Sodom, swallowed up of the earth with Corah, plagued in Egypt (especially in the death of the first borne) stoned with Achan, destroyed with the Canaanites and Amalekites, rooted out by judgements upon the families of Eli, Jeroboam, Baashan &c. with their parents?

Ans: 1. If they ground this Assertion upon Ezek: 18.14;¹ it is impertinent, it being there spoken of a sonne forsaking his fathers sinnes, and doing the contrary, with whom the Lord dealeth not in the course of his justice, but of mercy. Such were Abijah & Iosiah: otherwise, it will not hold in all cases. For, were not infants drowned in the old world, burnt in Sodom, swallowed up of the earth with Corah, plagued in Aegipt (especially in the death of the first borne) stoned with Achan, destroyed with the Cananites and Amalekites, rooted out by judgements upon the familyes of Eli, Ieroboam, Baashan &c. with their parents?

1. 1Ezek. 18.14.17.

2. To come punctually to the question. With Cain,¹ his posterity were driven from the face of God, except so many of them as joined with the family of Seth, the Church of God, and thence arose the different names of the sons of God and the daughters of men. So were the Ishmaelites and Edomites, with Ismael, and Esau, their Fathers. At this day, the children of the Jews are broken off, with their fathers, for unbelief, and are become strangers from the Covenant of promise, and so have no right to the Sacraments, the outward seals of the covenant.

2. To come punctually to the question. With Cain,¹ his posterity were driven from the face of God, except so many of them as joyned with the family of Seth, the Church of God, and thence arose the different names of the sonnes of God and the daughters of men. So were the Ismaelites and Edomites, with Ismael, and Esau, their Fathers. At this day, the children of the Iewes are broken off, with their fathers, for unbeleife, and are become strangers from the Covenant of promise, and so have no right to the Sacraments, the outward seales of the covenant.

1. 1Gen. 4.16 Cap. 6.2. Vide Bez. de excom. p. 35.

3. What difference soever we make between infants,¹ in this respect, yet 1. It doeth not enter into Gods decree concerning Election. For secret things we leave to God. 2. Nor doeth it concern the eternal salvation of the infant, which is not at all prejudiced by the want of baptism, it being not by its own contempt, or neglect of it, (else we must conclude all those infants to be damned, which died in the wilderness, being uncircumcised, which God forbid!) but it only concerneth their admission, or not admission into a visible Church. And so a difference may, and must be made. For, though all infants are by nature alike children of wrath. Yet, in respect of the Adoption outwardly manifested, they are not alike, especially to us, and in reference to Church privileges. For, I demand, was Jsaack, and the ⟨p. 168⟩children of the heathen alike, in this respect. And, if no child should be denied the Sacrament for the parents sin, why are not the infants of Jews, Turks, Indians, Moors, Gypsies admitted, without any difference, to baptism?

3. What difference soever we make betweene infants,¹ in this respect, yet 1. It doeth not enter into Gods decree cōcerning Election. For secret things we leave to God. 2. Nor doeth it concerne the aeternall salvation of the infant, which is not at all praejudiced by the want of baptisme, it being not by its owne contempt, or neglect of it, (else we must conclude all those infants to be damned, which died in the wildernes, being uncircū cised, which God forbid!) but it only concerneth their admission, or not admission into a visible Church. And so a difference may, and must be made. For, though all infants are by nature alike children of wrath. Yet, in respect of the Adoption outwardly manifested, they are not alike, especially to us, and in reference to Church priviledges. For, I demand, was Jsaack, and the ⟨p. 168⟩children of the heathen alike, in this respect. And, if no child should be denyed the Sacrament for the parents sinne, why are not the infants of Iewes, Turkes, Indians, Moores, Gypses admitted, without any difference, to baptisme?

Pretence. 5 Fifth pretence.] The five Ministers yielded, that, if any other case fell out, whereby it may seem that the infant presented should not be baptised, that then the judgment of the whole English presbytery, or also, if need be, and if conveniently it may be done, that the judgment of the Classis of Amsterdam be obtained, heard, and rested in.

Pretence. 5 Fifth pretence.] The five Ministers yeelded, that, if any other case fell out, whereby it may seeme that the infant presented should not be baptised, that then the judgment of the wholl English presbytery, or also, if need be, and if conveniently it may be done, that the judgment of the Classis of Amsterdam be obtayned, heard, and rested in.

Ans:] This concession of the five Ministers, which is used for a pretence against me, is really and indeed much against themselves. For.

1. Their judgment is, that I should be left free, in any other case, to order my practise in admitting infants to baptism, by the advice of the English presbytery, without requiring the counsel of the Classis, or observing, the custom of that place therein. If so, why not in this case also? The case whereat I stuck, was to be free not to baptise those infants, whose parents, being no members of that Church, are altogether unknown. For which purpose I insisted upon this demand (which I still think to be equal, and, in that place, necessary) that none such should present their children in public to be baptised by me, till I had before received satisfaction concerning them, by private conference with them, or otherwise. Yet, to prevent all offence, I freely offered, in any difficult case that might fall out, to acquaint the English presbytery with it, and to seek their advise.

1. Their judgment is, that I should be left free, in any other case, to order my practise in admitting infants to baptisme, by the advice of the English presbytery, without requiring the counsail of the Classis, or observing, the custom of that place therein. If so, why not in this case also? The case whereat I stuck, was to be free not to baptise those infants, whose parents, being no members of that Church, are altogether unknowne. For which purpose I insisted upon this demand (which I still thinck to be aequall, and, in that place, necessary) that none such should present their children in publick to be baptised by me, till I had before received satisfaction concerning them, by private conference with them, or otherwise. Yet, to prevent all offence, I freely offered, in any difficult case that might fall out, to acquaint the English presbytery with it, and to seeke their advise.

Now, if my demand, about being satisfied concerning the parents and presenters, be judged by those five learned and prudent men fit to be granted, in any other case, why not in this case? Let the difference be shown between other cases and this, in reference to my demand. Will they say, this case is already determined? Let them show where. If they say in the Scripture; Let them allege one text from the first of Genesis to the last of the Revelations for it. If they say, in some National Synod of these Countries; Let them name the Synod, and produce the Canon, in any one Synod that hath been from the ⟨p. 169⟩beginning of Reformation to this day. If they cannot, as it is certain they cannot, where then? If they say in the Classis; It will concern the Classis to show, 1, by what right they take upon them to limit the Churches in such cases, wherein the Scriptures and the Synods have left them at liberty, 2. How this cometh to be so particularly and severely pressed upon the Ministers of the English Church, seeing no more is required of the Ministers of any other Church, by the Classical orders, then to subscribe to the Catechism, and to the Belgic Confession, and to the last Synod of Dort, but no such practise is taught or defended in any one of these.

Now, if my demand, about being satisfyed concerning the parents and presenters, be judged by those five learned and prudent men fit to be granted, in any other case, why not in this case? Let the difference be shewen betweene other cases and this, in reference to my demand. Will they say, this case is already determined? Let them shew where. If they say in the Scripture; Let them alleadge one text from the first of Genesis to the last of the Revelations for it. If they say, in some Nationall Synod of these Countryes; Let them name the Synod, and produce the Canon, in any one Synod that hath bene from the ⟨p. 169⟩beginning of Reformation to this day. Jf they cannot, as it is certaine they cannot, where then? If they say in the Classis; It will concerne the Classis to shew, 1, by what right they take upon them to limit the Churches in such cases, wherein the Scriptures and the Synods have left them at liberty, 2. How this commeth to be so particularly and severely pressed upon the Ministers of the English Church, seing no more is required of the Ministers of any other Church, by the Classicall orders, then to subscribe to the Catechisme, and to the Belgick Confession, and to the last Synod of Dort, but no such practise is taught or defended in any one of these.

2. This further may be collected out of the concession of these five Ministers, that the judgment of the English presbytery is sufficient, in some cases which may fall out and cause doubts in the Minister about baptizing some that are brought, and that in those cases it is to be heard and rested in, if it can be obtained, without the judgment of the Classis, which the Minister is not bound to seek, but when it is needful, through his not obtaining the other. Herein they contradict the Answerer, who concludeth the Elders to be insufficient for this, and that,¹ not by a common insufficiency that is in all men for holy administrations 1. Cor. 2.16. but by a special insufficiency in cases of this nature. Which is the rather to be observed, because there he saith that the Classis hath already judged and determined it, and therefore they are insufficient: but here he saith, the five Ministers have referred me to the judgment of the English presbytery, & elsewhere he saith,² that this writing of the five Ministers was by all the ministers of the Classis, with one consent, approved and confirmed. If this be so; then the Classis have not judged the Elders to be insufficient in cases of this nature. Thus he may be found not only contradicted by the Classis, but also contradictory to himself.

2. This further may be collected out of the concession of these five Ministers, that the judgment of the English presbytery is sufficient, in some cases which may fall out and cause doubts in the Minister about baptizing some that are brought, and that in those cases it is to be heard and rested in, if it can be obtayned, without the judgment of the Classis, which the Minister is not bound to seeke, but when it is needfull, through his not obtayning the other. Herein they contradict the Answerer, who concludeth the Elders to be insufficient for this, and that,¹ not by a common insufficiency that is in all men for holy administrations 1. Cor. 2.16. but by a speciall insufficiency in cases of this nature. Which is the rather to be observed, because there he sayth that the Classis hath already judged and determined it, and therefore they are insufficient: but here he sayth, the five Ministers have referred me to the judgment of the English presbytery, & elsewhere he sayth,