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

Hence those high elogies of baptism in most of the Fathers, wherein they are now mis-interpreted by many, as if they ascribed it to the external ordinance, whereas they presuppose, as the blood and Covenant of Christ, so the right qualifications of the party baptized; upon which supposition (which we are bound to entertain of all that make a probable profession) they did so predicate the glorious effects of Baptism, as well they might.

Hence those high elogies of baptism in most of the Fathers, wherein they are now mis-interpreted by many, as if they ascribed it to the external ordinance, whereas they presuppose, as the blood and Covenant of Christ, so the right qualifications of the partie baptized; upon which supposition (which we are bound to entertain of all that make a probable profession) they did so predicate the glorious effects of Baptism, as well they might.

Argu. 24. Mr. Blake's Doctrine of Baptismal Faith, leaves us in utter obscurity, so that no man according to it, can tell whom to Baptize. He hath not ⟨p. 106⟩(that I can find) given us any description of that Faith which entitles to baptism; and I verily think is not able to tell us what he would have himself to be taken for it. If it were a mere Dogmatical Faith, then those should be baptized that were utterly unwilling, or at least unwilling to take God for their God, or Christ for their Lord and Saviour, and the Holy-Ghost for their Sanctifier; and should openly profess, I will not have this man reign over me, for I cannot yet spare the pleasure of my sin. If Mr. Bl. mean that there is requisite somewhat of the will and consent, though not so much as to justify; why did he not tell us what acts of the Will they be that are necessary? Is it only a consent to have God called thei• God, and themselves named his people? I will not be so uncharitable as to think that is his meaning; Is •t only a consent to be baptized, and to hear the Word, and receive the Sacraments? then might it stand with the foresaid disclaiming of the Government of God and the Redeemer, and so of obedience. I think by that time Mr. Bl. hath but adventured to give us an exact definition or description of that Faith which he makes prerequisite and sufficient to baptism (which I hereby entreat him to do) he will have set us up so fair a mark to shoot at, that with a very little skill it may be smitten to the dust.