Certain disputations of right to sacraments, and the true nature of visible Christianity defending…

The next place where I am cited against my self, is pag. 150. because I speak of Saints that shall not be saved. Answ. And so I do still. But yet I still say that Analogum per se positum stat pro famosiore significato. And therefore the words [Saints, Believers, &c.] must ordinarily be understood of such as are justified, where there is no limitation, or special reason to the contrary.

The next place where I observe my self cited against my self, is, p. 158. Because I maintain that it is an Error in Mr. Tombs to say [That the Covenant whereof baptism is the Seal, is only the the absolute covenant, made only to the Elect: Therefore Mr. Blake infers [And if men in the state of nature be in that covenant that baptism sealeth, viz. the conditional Covenant; then men in the state of nature and short of justifying faith, have right to baptism.] To which I reply; 1. I have showed you at large how far men unsanctified are or are not in covenant with God; and in what sense they have or have not right to baptism: And yet must we still use the undistinguished terms, as if I simply denied without distinction? Yea, before you confess that you tell it abroad in your discourse, that I say none have right to baptism but they that have saving faith, and that you can hardly gain credit to your words. The way to gain credit were to speak truer, and specially in your discourse of other men behind their backs. A Right by any promise or mortal grant from God to them, I denied: but I affirmed Hypocrites to be the rightful objects of the Ministers Act, or that we may lawfully give it them, and that thus far they have such an (improper) right. And yet still you would make me believe that I simply deny them right. 2. Your Consequence here is wholly groundless. It is one thing to say as I do [That the conditional covenant is made to the non-Elect] And another thing to say as you term it [that they are in the covenant] For that word is very ambiguous. If your consequence be good from my Assertion, then you may as well prove that Turks, Jews, and Heathen may have the Sacraments given ⟨p. 239⟩them. For I affirm that the conditional Covenant is made to them. 3. The thing that I maintain against Mr. Tombs is,