The SEPARATISTS ANSWER To the ANABAPTISTS ARGUMENTS Concerning BAPTISM.

OR, The Answer of SAMUEL CHIDLEY to JOHN SPILSBURY, concerning the Point in difference.

Psal. 116.16.

O JEHOVAH, surely I am thy servant, I am thy servant, and the son of thine handmaid.

LONDON, Printed by J. C. 1651.

The EPISTLE To the READER.

Reader,

THis Answer to M. Spilsbury hath been of about ten yeers standing; but he having made no Reply, I publish it. And although M Spilsbury is not of my judgement in all the Fundamental points of Religion, and I op­pose him in those things wherein I judge he swerveth from the rule of righteousness, and particularly in this; yet doubt not but that we are both of one minde for the good of the [Page] Commonwealth, and shall be readie still to joyn heart and hand against the Common Ad­versarie. And when the time cometh that God causeth the Nations to beat their swords into plow-shares, and their spears into pruning hooks, that nation shall not lift sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more; God will put an end to the Controversies amongst men in matters of Religion, and God shall be one, and his Name one. In the mean time, what light the Lord hath made known unto me, I hold it my dutie to discover, as I finde a seasonable opportunitie.

S. C.

The SEPARATISTS ANSWER To the ANABAPTISTS ARGUMENTS.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

THe Church-state being false and An­tichristian, it thus follows: To be­lieve a true external Church-ordinance in the Administration, where there is neither tru Church, Member Power, Minister, nor Subject; this we can­not do, without some Rule in the Word of [Page] God for to build our faith upon.

The Separatists Answer.

LEt Gods Word be mans Rule for every action: for it mea­sureth all things, and yet is not measured; it bindeth all things, yet is not bound.

In Israels deep Apostacie, though there was neither true Church, member, power, Minister, nor subject amongst them when Cir­cumcision was by them adm [...]nistred; yet those that received Circumcision in [...]hat Apostacie, and returned & kept the Passeover in Judah, were not commanded to be circumcise again: Therefore, the Circumcision so received A­postacie, did stand in force as an Ordinanc [...]. [Page] God. And though the evil of the manner of it was not commended but condemned, and to be repented of; yet the thing it self was not commanded to be repeated again. So it ap­peareth, that the holy Ordinance of Circumci­sion was not worn out by those Apostates, but was effectual either to the salvation or damna­tion of every one that received it.

And surely Gods Ordinances are as durable now under the Gospel, as they were before and under the Law: for Christ was not inferiour to any. He that was greater then Moses, or any one of the Patriarchs or Prophets, said he was not worthy to stoop down to unloose the latchet of Christs shooes, Mark 1.7.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

And we dare not believe that Anti­christ could either steal or usurp an Or­dinance of God: we dare not impute such folly to Christ, as to judge him so un­faithful as to suffer such an Ordinance of Baptism to be stollen out of Gods Trea­sury.

The Separatists Answer.

And we may and dare believe that the Phi­listims stole away Gods Ark 1 Sam. 5.1, 2.; and that the holy Vessels (belonging to Gods house) were taken away with Gods people into Babylon Jer. 42, though they (that laid such sacrilegious hands upon them) had no right unto them; yet did use them or rather abuse them, to their own destruction.

And if Baptism cannot be usurped, or stollen out of Gods treasury, th [...]n Simon Magus, after he was baptized, Act. 8.13. left it behind him when he departed out of the treasure-city.

But I suppose that Apostates who apostate now do not leave their Baptism behinde them, neither have they right unto it: yet it shall be so effectual, that it shall rise up in judgement against them.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

But o [...] [...] [...]a­ry, [...] Antichrist hath counterfeited a S [...]ate or Church of Christ, and the Pow­er and Laws of [Page] Christ; a Gospel and Ministery: even so hath he counterfeit­ed the Baptism of Christ, to deceive the people.

Or else why should he have all the rest from himself, and this one Ordinance from the Lord, who hath disclaimed all Communion with him.

The Separatists Answer.

And although Jeroboam and his people counterfeited a State or Church of God, and though his Priests counterfeited, alleadging that their Power and Law was the Power and Law of God: and though his Prophets coun­terfeited also, affirming that their Gospel and [Page] Ministery was the Gospel and Ministery of God: Yet still Circumcision was Gods Or­dinance, wherewith they deceived the people, even as the whorish woman doth her friends and lovers with the sweet stollen waters, and pleasant hidden bread which he hath.

But as the Apostate; of Israel (whose communion God disclaimed) did mix their own Traditions with Gods Precepts and their Ordinances with Gods Ordinances; and so set up their pillars by Gods pillars, and their posts by Gods posts: so have these locusts done which are now; whose communion God doth also disclaim: which though they have and hold a general profession of Christ, and draw neer unto God with their mouthes, yet they are counterfeits, (like the apostate Isra­elites) their hearts are far from him.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

And that he is a fore-runner of Christ, as Joh. 10.8. it is evident thus, In his taking such sub­jects to administer his Ordinance upon, that are not capable of it, nor able to resist him; being young infants, which there is neither pre­cept nor example for.

The Separatists Answer.

And though Jeroboam and his Crew were in a manner Antichristians, and forsakers of God; yet it was not because they circumcised young infants but because they were reple­nished from the east, and were soothsayers, like the Philistims, and pleased themselves in the children of strangers, Isa. 2.6. So these Antichristians are not Antichristians for baptizing Infants, but because they are apo­statized and degenerated from the Faith and Order of Christ, and baptize such Infants that are the children of whoremongers and adul­terers, thieves and murderers, and all sorts of wicked persons.

And the Prophet Isaiah did not desire the Lord not to forgive the apostate Israelites because they circumcised young children; for that was the Ordinance of God, Gen. 17.10. which if they had done in the right way and manner, it would have been pleasing to God, [Page] vers. 11. but the Prophet saith, Because their land is full of idols, and they worship the work of their own hands, that which their own fingers made; and the mean man bow­eth down, and the great man humbleth himself: therefore forgive them not, Isa. 2.8, 9. The like may be said concerning these Antichristians. And though there be neither precept nor example in the Scripture, that these Antichristians should baptize, no more then the Idolaters in Jeroboams time had to circumcise; yet the Church of God hath as much warrant to administer the Signe and Seal of the righ­teousness of faith upon the infants of believers, even as well as the Church had to administer the Seal upon their infants in former time. But as they had no ground to circumcise all Nati­ons or seeds, or any apostate, though the off­spring of Abraham, but those that were the seed in Covenant with God Gen. 17.14. so we have no warrant to baptize all nations but be­lievers and their holy seed, Mat. 28.18. Mar. 16.16. That the infants of believing parents are so, is plain, because they are not out of the New Jerusalem; they are not ranked with dogs, &c. as in Rev. 22.11, 15. but are to be esteemed holy; and written among the li­ving in Jerusalem, vers. 14. Isa. 65.23. and 4.3. Such holy infants, that most heavenly Prophet, which was like unto Moses, defended by his gracious hand, Exod. 14. and by his power admidistred Baptism upon them and their parents, 1 Cor. 10.1, 2. before the Law was given in Mount Sinai: and such are san­ctified in their life, blessed in their death, and shall be also glorified in their resurrection: for Christ is the same to day as he was yesterday, and so he will be for ever. Hebr. 13.8. He hath died for [Page] them, and hath given them eternal life, and hath declared that they are part of the furni­ture of his Fathers Kingdom Luke 18.16.: he hath en­tered into Covenant with them Deut. 29.10, 11, 12., and will faithfully perform the same Rev. 21.3, 4, 5, 6, 7..

The Anabaptists Arguments.

And whereas he bears the people in hand that the pro­mise is made to be­lievers and their seed, and taking his example from Circumcision; both which, rightly consi­dered, will strike him to the heart.

First, if he mean the promise in the second of the Acts, vers. 39. as common­ly he doth; it is not said, The promise is made to believers and their seed; but, The promise is to you and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call: implying, that the promise be­longs to none, but one­ly such as the Lord shall call: and for such children, see Acts 13.32, 33. Acts 3.25.

The Separatists Answer.

And it is evident that the promise is made to believers and their seed, as it hath been in the days of old Acts 2.39.: and therefore seeing that Cir­cumcision and Baptism are all one in effect Col. 2.11, 12, 13. though they differ in the elements; as the In­fants of believing parents were to receive Cir­cumcision in the days of Abraham, so the In­fants of believing parents are to receive Bap­tism in the days of Christ: But as God did not require the Infants of both unbelieving parents to be circumcised, no more hath he required such to be baptized now. And if the right con­sideration of this will strike Antichrist to the heart, even so let it be: I wish it may hit home.

And the same promise which is declared to be made to the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, Act. 13.32, 33. & 3.25. is declared in Act. 2.39. to appertain unto their childrens children, according to the words in Isa. 69.21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord: My Spirit that is upon thee and my words which I have put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy [seed,] nor out of the mouth of thy [seeds seed] saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever. And this promise appertaineth unto none but those whom the Lord our God doth call. That the Lord our God doth call the Infants of belie­vers with themselves, is apparent, Deut. 4.37. & 7.6. The work which he calleth them to, is to keep his covenant, Gen. 17.14.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

Again the promise is the Covenant or Promise of Grace concerning eternal life: and to all such as God doth enter in­to Covenant with he must upon his faith­fulness perform the same. Now if the promise belong to believers and their seed, without exce­ption; then all such seed must be saved, or else God doth not perform his promise: which to affirm, is Blasphemy.

The Separatists Answer.

Christ Jesus (that spotless Lamb) is said to take away the sins of the world Joh. 1.29.; I hope you will not say, any other world then the Church. Christ taketh away the sins of his Church; yea, of his visible Church Rev. 1.5.. If any apostate from thence, Christ hath not bound himself to save them, unless they return Amos 4.11. Jer. 3.7, 8.. Yet he perform­eth his promise to his own Church Isa. 4.2, 6.; and those that do abide therein, are to be esteemed holy Vers. 3, and that their names are written in the book of life of the Lamb which was slain from the foundation of the world. And Christ taketh away the sins of the world no otherwise, but as they are of the number of his Church: for time hath been, when all the world was the Church, and the Church was the world; & then was the whole world redeemed, being the Church of Christ; so he reconciled the same to himself. And as the Infants of believers have been visi­ble believers, as the body of Christ, so they are still: for Christ is no changeling; his Covenant which he hath made with them and their seed, is an everlasting Covenant, that he will be a God unto them for ever: and blessed are the people whose God is the Lord. But if any draw back, the Lord hath testified that his soul shall have no delight in them.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

But now the spiri­tual seed possesseth the place. So Abra­ham and Sarah typed out Christ and his Church, Gal. 4.22, 31. Isa. 51.1, 2.

The Separatists Answer.

And though the Infants of believers are ge­nerated and have bodies as well as spirits, yet they are the Lords spiritual seed, regenerated by his Spirit, as well as those which profess faith verbally, and yeeld actual obedience vi­sibly. Yea, the Infants of believing parents are in as good an estate as the greatest and holiest visible professor of Christ, and are the true seed and children of light, as well as Levi, which paid Tythes in the loyns of Abraham, Heb. 7.9.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

And all the seed of this husband and wife are to be bapti­zed as soon as they are born.

The Separatists Answer.

Now seeing that the Infants of believing parents were members of the Church of God, and circumcised by Gods appointment, as well as their parents; the Infants of believers have as great a priviledge now: for Gods hand is not shortened. But let none presume to say that all the seed of Christ are to be baptized so soon as they are born, unless they could or would prove it: for persons may have right to an Ordinance, and yet through some occasions and reasons may be hindered from it. But there is a time for all things.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

And such are one­ly the seed of Abra­ham in the Gospel-sence; as Rom. 9.7, 8. Gal. 4.22, 23, 28. Gal. 3.16, 17, 18.

The Separatists Answer.

The Gospel sheweth that believers are the children of Abraham, even as Isaac was: therefore they have the same priviledges, which Isaac had; and their Infants also (upon the same ground) have as large and precious pro­mises and priviledges as Isaac's Infants had. But Isaac's Infants had right to the signe and seal of the righteousness of faith: Therefore the Infants of all believing parents have right to the signe and seal of the righteousness of faith also.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

And we must have the Gospel to expound to us the Law: and such as the Gospel sets forth to be the chil­dren of Abraham the seed of the promise to whom the Covenant belongs; such onely must have the Seals, and none else. We are not to put the King of heaven's Great Seal to a blank.

The Separatists Answer.

And seeing that the testimony is bound up, and the Law sealed among the disciples Isa. 8.16., we ought to walk by the light of the same Vers. 20.; which declareth, that believers and their off­spring are in the Covenant of Abraham; and to such onely the Seals of the Covenant do appertain, and to none else: for we are not to put the King of heaven's Great Seal unto a blank.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

As we are all born [Page] children of wrath we must have some bet­ter evidence then the Popish conceit of the faith of others, to in­right us into Gods holy things; which nothing can inright us to, but onely our own faith in Christ.

The Separatists Answer.

But as the Infants of believers are all the [Page] children of wrath by nature; so, on the con­trary, they are justified by Gods free grace in Jesus Christ: which could not be, if they were as heathens still in the world, which Christ would not pray for, much less die for. But Christ prayed for the Infants of believers: Therefore he died for them and therefore they are not to be esteemed blanks, but may lawfully be sealed: for where the invisible seal of the holy Spirit of promise may lawfully be judged to be, there may the visible seal be applied; for the subjects thereof have right thereunto, by vertue of Gods everlasting Covenant made with Abraham and his seed, and all believers and their seed for ever.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

And if we will follow Circumcision, we must have the like command as was for that: and so we have for the bapti­zing of believers, but never for Infants.

The Separatists Answer.

And forasmuch as the Infants of believing parents cannot be taxed with actual sin, or any sin at all, any more then their parents; let us not doubt then but that they are spiritually holy as well as their parents, and have right unto Baptism, as well as such holy & obedient Infants had right to Circumcision of old, which was the same in effect with our Baptism, and grounded upon the same everlasting Promise or Covenant. So likewise Christ gave a gene­ral Commission to his Apostles, that they should make all nations disciples, and baptize them into the Name, &c. and declared, that he that believeth and is baptized, shall be sa­ved; and he that believeth not, shall be damned. See, here is the Condition and the Promise: The Condition is Faith and Baptism; the Promise is Salvation; And he that belie­veth not shall be damned. So that it is plain, if no Faith, no Salvation: and there is in a spi­ritual sence but two ways for all mankinde; which two ways are different, and in which are two sorts of persons of sundry conditions. [Page] All those that are within Gods Covenant, Matth. 13.14. Rev. 20 14, 15. and 22.14, 15. are within the new Jerusalem, and have right un­to Christ that tree of life, and all things therein with him. That the Infants of believing parents are in this holy and happie estate, hath been proved already by the Scripture; and therefore it is evident & apparent, that they are the right subjects of Baptism; included in the Commissi­on for Baptism as really, as the Infants of the faithful in the days of old were in the Com­mission for Circumcision. Therefore it is better for us to magnifie the mighty power of God by which the Infants of believers were bapti­zed in the days of Moses, 1 Cor. 10.1, 2. then to deny them Baptism now in the days of the Messiah who never came to take away any priviledge which of right belonged to such Infants, but to plant as great in stead thereof.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

God made a Cove­nant with Abraham and his seed; of which Circumcision was a seal. This Covenant was typical, and so was Abraham and his seed. The Covenant had two parts, inclu­ding two inheritan­ces, unto which were two heirs, Isaac and Ishmael, otherwise the spiritual & car­nal seed of Abraham. The one part of the Covenant typed out a temporal inheritance as the land of Cana­an; and Circumcisi­on [Page] sealed this to all the carnal seed, as well as the spiritual. The other part typed out a heavenly Ca­naan, or spiritual in­heritance; and Cir­cumcision sealed this to all the spiritual seed.

The Separatists Answer.

Gen: 17.7.God made a Covenant with Abraham and his seed, that he would be a God unto them for ever. This Covenant was substantial, and never to have an end: Circumcision was a Seal of this most glorious Covenant; and Baptism is the Seal of it now. This Covenant was not two, but one, though Godliness had then the promise of this life, and of that which is to come. Apostates had nothing to do with this Covenant in their Apostacie though they were the seed of Abraham according to the flesh; Circumcision sealed unto them neither spiritual blessings nor earthly favours, but rather confu­sion, destruction, and damnation. Yet this Or­dinance of God, as it was in it self, was not without effect, no more then the Baptism which Judas and Simon Magus received. Therefore, that Circumcision sealed up the land of Canaan to the carnal seed is denied: for many of them had no inheritance in the land of Canaan: [Page] Yea, the Proselytes themselves had no inheri­tance, any more then the Patriarchs of old, who were pilgrims and strangers in that land, looking for a citie whose builder and maker is God. Moreover, if God made a Covenant with Carnalists to give them the land of Ca­naan, and gave them a Signe to confirm it to them in their carnality, then God was bound by it to perform the same unto them, though they never embraced his ways, but held on in their own wickedness. But God threatned to root them out from the land of the living, and did as he said: Therefore Circumcision did not seal unto them the earthly land of Ca­naan.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

The Covenant with respect to this part, was confirmed upon Isaac the true seed of promise, proceeding from Abraham and Sarah, lawful hus­band and wife; from which Ishmael, and with him all the car­nal seed were exclu­ded, Gen. 17. Gal. 4. If any say, The Cove­nant being establish­ed with Isaac, it was also the same to all his seed: Answ. Not so: the Covenant was established with Isaac onely, as he was he was the promised seed, and so typed out Christ, Gal. 3.

The Separatists Answer.

If because the Covenant was confirmed and established with Isaac, therefore Ishmael was exempted before his apostacie; then, by the same ground, the rest of Abrahams chil­dren were exempted from this Covenant. But it is to be considered, that the Lord, establish­ing the Covenant with Isaac, did therein de­clare, that all who cleaved unto Isaac in that true way of Worship, God would be their God, and the God of their seed for ever. So that the Covenant was not established with Isaac onely and alone, but also with all those that were members of the visible Church, which consisted both of young and old. God was a God, and Christ was a Saviour unto them all in an especial manner, so long as they did not apostatize: But if any did go from Isaac's banner, they deprived themselves of Isaac's blessing.

Even so it is said concerning Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, They shall hang upon him all the glory of his fathers house, both the off-spring and the issue, all vessels of [Page] small quantity, Isa. 22.24. If any despise the Infants of believers, because they are ves­sels of [small] quantity, and therefore think them to be no vessels of God at all; let them consider, that they are either vessels of honour, or dishonour. Vessels of dishonour they are not; for they belong to the Kingdom of God: Suffer them (saith Christ) to come unto me, Mark 10.14. and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

In whom all the promises are yea and amen, and belong to none but onely such as first come to him by faith: and so ne­ver any by the Gospel were baptized, but onely believers.

The Separatists Answer.

And all the promises of God are yea and amen in Christ: so the application of them appertains unto none but the members of Christ: and those that are not his members, have neither right to him, nor any divine Or­dinance of his; therefore they must not par­take of the same: for God never appointed holy things for dogs, and such as are without the new Jerusalem; but those that keep Gods Commandments, and enter in thorow the gates into the holy City, they are blessed, and have right to all the holy things of God, Rev. 22.14.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

For all types in the Law ceased, when the substance came;

The Separatists Answer.

And those who had right to any typical things, had right to the substance of that thing whensoever the type of it was taken away: for Christ never came to bereave any of the type, and leave them neither substance nor type. Therefore, seeing the Infants of belie­vers in former times had right to the types, the Infants of believers now have right to what­soever substance is left in the stead thereof.

And those who have right to one substantial Ordinance, have right unto all: Therefore the Infants of believers have as great priviledges as their believing parents: for Christ came not to give believing parents the substance, and to bereave their off-spring both of type and [Page] substance; but he came to fulfil the promises made to the fathers, and to confirm them to their children, and their childrens chil­dren, thorowout their generations.

The Anabaptists Arguments.

and so the carnal in­heritance, the carnal seed, and the seal, as it respects the same, all ceased together.

The Separatists Answer.

To presume to say, that Circumcision, the signe and seal of Gods everlasting covenant, was a seal of a carnal inheritance, is a carnal affirmation: for as the seal was Gods holy Ordinance, so it sealed up an heavenly inheri­tance, spiritual blessings, and everlasting pro­mises in Christ; and Baptism doth the same now. The uncircumcisedness and carnality of the heart, doth not argue that Gods Ordi­nance is not spiritual: for certainly Gods di­vine Ordinance is effectual to the receivers, whether they apostate or not. If they apo­state, then it is effectual to their confusion and damnation; but to those that do not apostate, it is effectual to their sanctification and salva­tion.

FINIS.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.