A trial of the new-church way in New-England and in old ... by that…A tryall of the nevv-church vvay in New-England and in old ... by that…

Thirdly, It is very improbable that the persons baptized, were in Church-state or order. If they were members of the Jewish Church not yet dissolved, this is not to the purpose; for men have not right to Baptism, because they were members of the Jewish Church, but because Disciples and (as you say) joined together in Covenant, and have fellowship and calling of their Minister, who is to dispense the Seals unto them. And Baptism is the Sacrament of initiation, not into the Jewish but the Christian Churches. Secondly, when you say, the Seals in ordinary dispensation are the privileges of the Churches. There are no Ministers but of particular Churches. Baptism and the Lords Supper are to be administered only to the members of the Church. No society may lawfully desire the Seals, unless they have joined in the choice and calling of their Minister. Believers not yet joined in Church-order are without. Do ye not in all these understand a Christian society,¹ united in a Church-way, &c. which cannot agree to the members of the Jewish Church, not yet dissolved. Thirdly, The constitution of the Church (saith Mr. Robin.) is the orderly collection and conjunction of the Saints into and in the Covenant of the New Testament; but the members of Jewish Churches not yet dissolved, were not in such constitution. If the Eunuch and Centurion were proselytes and members of the Church of the Jews; The Samaritans whom Philip baptized were not so. And that any Gentiles, or the Gailor whom Paul baptized in the Apostles times, were set members of a Christian Assembly before baptized, is very strange. If there was a Church at Philippi, yet the Gailor who was baptized and converted the same night, could not be a set member by solemn admission before Baptism. It is said the Apostles baptized these persons in an extraordinary way. But in this practise of ⟨p. 64⟩the Apostles two things are to be considered. 1. The circumstance of the action. 2. The quality or substance of the act. In some circumstances the baptizing of some of these persons might be extraordinary, but the substance and quality of the action was grounded upon rules perpetual and common to us with them.

Thirdly, It is very improbable that the persons baptized, were in Church-state or order. If they were members of the Jewish Church not yet dissolved, this is not to the purpose; for men have not right to Baptisme, because they were members of the Jewish Church, but because Disciples and (as you say) joyned together in Covenant, and have fellowship and calling of their Minister, who is to dispence the Seales unto them. And Baptisme is the Sacrament of initiation, not into the Jewish but the Christian Churches. Secondly, when you say, the Seales in ordinary dispensation are the priviledges of the Churches. There are no Ministers but of particular Churches. Baptisme and the Lords Supper are to be administred onely to the members of the Church. No societie may lawfully desire the Seales, unlesse they have joyned in the choice and calling of their Minister. Beleevers not yet joyned in Church-order are without. Doe yee not in all these understand a Christian societie,