More proofs of infants church-membership and consequently their right to baptism, or, A second…

2. To the Minor, If his bare affirmation would prove that Infants were not to be baptized, what need he write his books?

Mr. T. 2. They were not visible members of the Church-Christian who were not of the body of Christ: But no Infant was of the visible body of Christ, proved from 1 Cor. 12.13. All that were of the body of Christ were made to drink into one spirit in the Cup of the Lords Supper: But no Infant was made to drink into one spirit; for none of them did drink that Cup, &c.

Answ. Denying the Minor, I answer to the proof: 1. To the Major: 1. Mr. T. elsewhere pleadeth that 1 Cor. 12. speaketh of the Church-invisible only, and yet now he maketh it to be the visible. 2 [All] is oft put for the Generality and not a proper universality: And it seemeth hard to prove that every visible member hath the spirit, which is expressly there said of all the members, though whether Baptism and the Lords Supper be included, Mr. T. elsewhere maketh disputable. But I grant that it is spoken of the Church as visible, and that all the members ordinarily having Spiritus Sacramentum, are in judgement of charity said to have the Spirit. 3. But if Sacraments be indeed here included as he asserteth, then Baptism is first included: and so if we prove Infants Church-members, this Text will prove them to be baptizable, according to Mr. T. Remember that. 4. But that Mr. T.'s exposition is not true, that every member drinketh of the Cup in the Lords Supper, he may be turned about to confess himself: For, 1. Doubtless he thinks that this Chapter speaketh of the Church not only as visible (if at all) but as invisible also; and he oft saith that many real members of Christs body ⟨p. 163⟩