A39697:196
Vindiciæ legis & fœderis
Vindiciæ legis & fœderis: or, A reply to Mr. Philip Cary's Solemn call Wherein he pretends to answer all the arguments of Mr. Allen, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Sydenham, Mr. Sedgwick, Mr. Roberts, and Dr. Burthogge, for the right of believers infants to baptism, by proving the law at Sinai, and the covenant of circumcision with Abraham, were the very same with Adam's covenant of works, and that because the gospel-covenant is absolute. By John Flavel minister of the gospel in Dartmouth
London: printed for M. Wolton, 1690
A REPLY TO Mr. Philip Cary's Solemn Call. › Section 3 › Argument 5: Argument V.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
And thus Sir, you are fairly beaten off (if I mistake not) from the new Ground you had chosen and marked out to raise your Battery upon, to demolish that strong Fort which secures the Right of Believers Infants to Baptism, and you must return again to the old answers of Mr. Tombs and others, to our solid and substantial Arguments from Abraham's Covenant, Gen. 17. which have been baffled over and over by Baxter, Blake, Sydenham, and many other stout Champions for Infants Baptism.
And thus Sir, you are fairly beaten off (if I mistake not) from the new Ground you had chosen and marked out to raise your Battery upon, to demolish that strong Fort which secures the Right of Believers Infants to Baptism, and you must return again to the old answers of Mr. Tombes and others, to our solid and substantial Arguments from Abraham's Covenant, Gen. 17. which have been bassled over and over by Baxter, Blake, Sydenham, and many other stout Champions for Infants Baptism.
All that I am further concerned about, is to examine so many of those Scriptures as you have spoken to, which are by us produced in defence of those four Grounds or Principles mentioned in the beginning of this Discourse, whereon we establish the Right of Infants Baptism; and to vindicate those Scriptures from your strained and injurious Interpretations of them. Which being done, they will each of them stand in those eminent places of Service, where they have been so long useful to the Cause we defend.
As for your pretended Solutions of the incomparable Mr. Baxter's, and the learned and acute Dr. Burthogg's Arguments; I admire at your Confidence therein; and let me tell you, without breach of Charity, 'tis an high piece of Confidence in you, to throw the Gantlet and bid Defiance to two such Worthies yet alive, and easily able to detect your Folly in the Weakness and Impertinency of your Answers. Alas! my Friend, you little know what it is to have such weak and inartificial Discourses as yours, brought under the strict Examen of such acute and judicious Eyes. But