88 APPENDIX loTtlnib.IV ` And t. to yourfirft Argument, I anfiver, sit is againit you and overthrows your Caufe: for as ordinarily Women were admitted to the 'Pafiover, without Circumcifion, but not without the Covenant : and as in extraordinary Cafes of- ' fered ( as of all I eael 4.0 years in theWildernefs ) the Males alfo were admitted ' uncircumcifed, fo much more may it be now in cafe of Baptifm. ` 2. Either the Ordinances and Examples of the Jews about Circumcifion , af- ' ford us Argumentsfor regulating our Baptifm and Communion, or not: If not, ' then you urge them in vain : If they do, then they prove the Duty , if not the ' Neceffity of Infant Baptifm. ;. Ceremonies have not fo much laid on them under the Gofpel, as under the ' Law. Mercy before Sacrifice is the Gofpel Canon. Ad z" , 2. That Command Mattb. z8. commandeth the baptizingof Difciples : s I doubt not but it commandeth therebythe baptizing of Ínfants, who areDifci- pies, and made Difciples, while profelyted Parents enter them into the Covenant ` of God, according to his exprefs unrepealed Law and Promife. ` 2. But fuppofe it did not command Infant-Baptifm ; nay, fuppofe it had con- ' fequentially , forbidden it, it proves no more than that it is a fin , not a nullity. ;. But fuppofe it had made it a Nullity, how are you guilty of other mens o- ' miffron of Baptifm by holding Communion with them, when you may at your ` Enterance declareyour diffent from them in that point. Your Argument would ` lead you toavoid Communion with all Churches in theWorld, even the re-baps ` tized, that held not all that you take to be the Intitutions of Chrift : becaufe you ' are bound to hold them. But when you have leaveto do your own Duty, if you f will fhuri all that you think donot theirs, you will abhorCatholicifm. `44 r, r. As to yobn 3. S. doubtlefs that Textfpeaks of more than the vifrble Church, even the Myftical and theTriumphant. And therefore if youwill from ' thence exclude Infants from Baptifm, and the vifible Church, you mutt needs themall out of Heaven, but Cbriio diffenriente, you Ihall have none ofChrifi's content. z. It is both Wateras the fig», and the holy Covenant and Cleanfing of the ' Soul, as the thing fignified, that are convincingly meant in the Text. But ` how ? one only as a fign, and the other as the thing fignified : and therefore not ' as equally neceffary in point of means, though equallycommanded. Alas, how ` eafrly underftand we fuch Speeches among Men. If a General fay to the Rebels `(I will (pare noneof you that will not come and lift himfelfunder me) every Bo- ' dy willunderftand, that becoming a Soldier (and theMilitary Engagement orSa- ' crament, as the Oath was anciently called) is the thing here fignified to be ab- ' foiutely neceffary : and theLifting or Colours, but as a fign for Order, and in Cafes of Neceffity difpenfable, and regarded but in order unto the thing fignified. Your Arguments from perfonal Inconvenienciesare none. Ad a", e. Do not you ftartle to hear the Catholick Church called the World? ' and a retirement into its Communion, called a Returning to the World ? I have read (Come out from among thorn) that is, the World; but not ( Come out of the ` Catholick Church). z. And do you not ftartle to hear themcall their way Strithsej?, and the other Loofnefl? If they mean a finful ftri&nefs,fo every Vice, or many,, mayhave a tri&- ` nets. Malice bath a ftri&nefs, and Covetoufnefsand Oppreflìon hatha ftridnefs, ` andSupertition bath afiridnef,. But ifthey mean it of a holy ftri&refs, aro ' not they the ftri&eft that are likeft to Chrift, and molt conformable to his Will, and molt accuratein their Obedience? And is not Love the mw and great Corn- ' mandment? Are not your People look that are fo far from holy Love and Catho- lick Communion. God se Love, and he that dweletb in love dwelletb in God. They are ftri& then in oppofingGod, and the Unity or tweet Communion of the Members of the Lord. Is it an honour to be (tri& Sinners and Deftroyers of the ` Church and Holy Love ? Let fome rake heed, leaft they be too ftri& to come in- ' to Heaven among fo many Millionsof Souls that never owned any but Infant ` Baptifm ( which is, I think, lince Chrift many hundred' to one , that is there, ' that never were again( Infant Baptifm) whether do you think Chriftor the Pha- ` rifees were the ftri&er, when they condemned him for eating with Publicans and ` Sinners, and his Difciples for breaking the ears ofCorn, and him for Sabbath-breaking, ' &c. Sure he more accurately obferved his Father's will, even the bleffed Rule of ' Love and Mercy, though they weremore fuperftitiousand ftriek, was it the weak, ' or the ftrong Chniftians, Rom. t4. á rq. that were the ftri&er about meats, and ` drinks, and days? The weak fuperftitioufly, but the thong did more ítri&lyhad-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=