Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression…

Yet because we have no access to their hearts, and therefore must judge of the heart by the profession and outward signs, therefore we must judge these probably to Covenant with the heart, who do profess to do so with the tongue; and those to Covenant entirely and without error in the essentials, who profess so to do: and therefore we must judge them probably to be true Christians, and truly godly men (till they retract that profession by word or deed:) and therefore we must judge them probably to be truly in Covenant with God, and such as God is, as it were, obliged to justify: and therefore we must give them the name of Christians, and men in Covenant with God: and therefore we must use them as Christians in works of charity, and in Ordinances, and Church communion: and so must use their children as Christians children. The warrant for this usage and Judgement, I must desire the Reader to take notice of, in what I have written to Mr Tombs Objections on 1 Cor. 7.14. and to Dr. Ward, and against Mr. Tombs Precursor more fully: For to repeat all here again would be tedious and unnecessary. When Christ saith to us, [If a Brother repent, forgive him] here by [Repenting] doth Christ mean plainly Repenting, or the profession of it? No doubt, repenting it self. Why, but how can we that know not the heart, know here when our Brother repenteth? Will Mr. Bl. say therefore that none is obliged to forgive? Rather we know that man must judge him to repent that professeth so to do: and therefore forgive him that professeth it. Not because professing was the assigned requisite condition: but a sign of that condition: and therefore we are to accept of no profession, but what probably signifieth true repentance. For if we knew a man dissembled, or jeered us in professing repentance, we are not bound to do by him as a penitent. So God commandeth us to love and honour them that fear the Lord, that are faithful, that love Christ, &c. But we know not who these be: Are we therefore disobliged from loving and honouring them? Or will Mr. Bl. say that we must not honour them, lest we mistake and give that honour to one that hath no right to it? (as he saith about the Sacrament; herein joining with Mr. Tombs.) Those that profess to fear God and love him, we must love and honour as men that do fear and love him:

Yet because we have no access to their hearts, and therefore must judge of the heart by the profession and outward signes, therefore we must judge these probably to Covenant with the heart, who do profess to do so with the tongue; and those to Covenant entirely and without errour in the essentials, who profess so to do: and therefore we must judge them probably to be true Christians, and truly godly men (till they retract that profession by word or deed:) and therefore we must judge them probably to be truly in Covenant with God, and such as God is, as it were, obliged to justifie: and therefore we must give them the name of Christians, and men in Covenant with God: and therefore we must use them as Christians in works of charity, and in Ordinances, and Church communion: and so must use their children as Christians children. The warrant for this usage and Judgement, I must desire the Reader to take notice of, in what I have written to Mr Tombes Objections on