The History of both out of Antiquity making it appear that Infants Baptism was not practiced for near Three-Hundred years, nor enjoined as necessary till Four-Hundred years after Christ. With the Fabulous Traditions and Erroneous Grounds upon which it was by the Pope’s Canons (with Gossips, Chrism, Exorcism. Baptizing of Churches and Bells and other Popish Rites) founded. And that the Famous Waldensian and Old British Churches, Lollards and Wickliffians and other Christians witnessed against it.

History of Christianity amongst the Ancient Britains and Waldenses.

That persons Baptized in Infancy are to be baptized after they believe which is not to be esteemed Rebaptization, but Right Baptism. Peter Bruis, the great Waldensian Martyr.

The Second Edition with Large Additions

Eph. 4: 5 One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism

Acts 17: 28 As certain also of your own poets have said.

London, Printed for Fran. Smith, at the Elephant and Castle

Near the Royal Exchange in Cornhil, 1674

Reader, as you go throught this book, you will notice in several places where spelling are not uniform. I have tried, when and where possible, to correct this. Do not, however, that there are places where common names are used and I am not sure whether the names are one and the same or some other, i.e. Justinius and Justinian, so I simply let them as I found them. There are a few places in this work, Hebrew and Greek characters that were handwritten into the original text. I have attempted to properly convert the Greek, but have in two places found it difficult to discren the Greek. In these places, the Greek words may be incorrect (Please forgive my lack of Greek knowledge and know that D’Anvers made no such mistake, but I). Additionally, I have no way to convert the Hebrew characters. You’ll notice that in one or two places, I have simply put unusual "wing-dings" in their places and in one or two more instances simply left a blank space in their stead. Also, due to the size of this work, I am not sure whether I have corrected all of my errata. If I haven’t and you find them, please let me or Bro. Pound know what and where and we will make the necessary corrections. May the Lord bless the reading of this monumental work to your souls. J.K.O.

*. TABLE OF CONTENTS TO THE WHOLE:

A Reply to Mr. Wills in Defense of the said Treatise *

A Second Reply to Mr. Baxter in Defense of the Same *

A Rejoinder to Mr. Wills, his Vindicatae, *

With an Answer to his Appeal *

The Baptist’s Answer to Mr. Wills his Appeal. *

With H. D’s Postscript. *

The Preface *

Foundation For Infant’s Baptism *

Infant Baptism Establishes the Rule and Reign of Antichrist *

Establishment of the Jewish Antichristian Estate in the Place of Christ’s Estate *

The Contrast Between the Gospel Administrators and the Antichristian Administrators *

The Reformers and their Different Reasons to Support Antichrist’s Baptism *

The Differing Concepts of Faith Which Protestants Allow for Infant’s Baptism *

Richard Baxter’s Conclusions *

The Ancient Waldenses *

Objection I *

Answer *

Objection 2 *

Answer *

Objection 3 *

Answer *

Objection 4 *

Answer *

Objection 5 *

Answer *

The Usefulness and Beauty of Believer’s Baptist as the Ordinance of God *

Infant’s Baptism is an Invention of Man and an Innovation of Antichrist *

Conclusion to the Preface *

AN APPENDIX TO THE PREFACE *

Objection 1, *

Answer *

Infant’s Baptism is Antichrist’s Baptism *

Objection About Title Page *

Objection 4 *

The History of the Sufferings of the Baptists in all Ages Since Christ’s Time *

Additions to This Edition *

The Contents of the Whole *

CHAPTER I *

Wherein the Baptism of Believers is proved to be the only true Baptism, from Christ’s positive Institution or Commission; Viz. Matthew 28:18,19. *

I. From Christ’s positive Commission *

Richard Baxter *

John Calvin *

Piscator *

John Tombes’ Felo De Se *

Mr. Perkins *

Paraeus *

Chapter Two *

Wherein the Baptizing of Believers is proved to be they only Baptism from the apostles Doctrine teaching the same. *

From the Apostle's Doctrine *

Bede *

Erasmus *

Chapter 3 *

Where in Believer's Baptism is proved to be they only Baptism, from the Examples and practice of the Primitive Saints. *

Luther *

Bullinger *

Baxter *

Jews *

Samaritan *

The Eunuch *

Paul *

The Gentiles *

Lydia *

The Jailer *

Crispus *

Corinth *

Philip *

CHAPTER IV *

Wherein Believers are proved to be the only Subjects of Baptism, *

from the Spiritual Ends of the Ordinance. *

To be a Sign of the Mysteries of the Gospel. *

Paraeus *

Mr. Perkins *

2. To Witness Repentance *

Mr. Baxter *

Bullinger *

Dr. Taylor *

Mr. Baxter *

4. End signally to represent the Covenant of Man’s Part *

Mr. Perkins *

Mr. Baxter *

Voluntarily Obedience *

Baptism is a Washing *

Dr. Taylor *

Baptism is the Answer of a Good Conscience Before God *

Mr. Baxter *

Fifth End to be a Sign of the Covenant on God’s Part *

Mr. Perkins *

Bullinger *

Sixth End to Present the Union Between Christ and the Believer *

Dr. Taylor *

Mr. Baxter *

Seventh End is Entrance into the Visible Church *

I Cor. 12:13. *

Baptized into Christ *

The Power of Solemnity *

The Ancients called Baptism the Gate of the Sacraments *

Ambrose *

Justin Martyr *

Ursinus *

Assembly Catechism *

Mr. Baxter *

Concerning John Bunyan *

Chapter V. *

The Old Testament Church Considered *

The New Testament Church Considered *

The Spiritual House *

John the Baptist *

John Owen *

Then The Carnal Seed Under the Law-Now The Spiritual Seed Under the Gospel *

Dr. Taylor *

CHAPTER VI. *

Wherein Believer’s Baptism is confirmed to be the only true Baptism, from the Constitution of the Primitive Churches, who were formed not of Ignorant Babes, but of professing Men and Women, that upon Baptism were joined together to observe all the *

ordinances of Christ, which is also further evidenced by the Dedications of the Epistles to the Churches, and by the Epistles themselves. *

First, the Dedications of the Epistles to the Churches *

The Apostolic Pattern and Example *

The Jerusalem Church *

Samaria *

Cesarea *

Philippi *

Colosse *

Corinth *

The Church at Rome *

The Church at Galatia *

The Church at Ephesus *

The Church of England *

Dr. Owen gives a description of a Gospel Church *

Mr. Baxter *

Nor in the Epistles Themselves *

Dr. Owen *

I Corinthians 12:25, 26. *

I Thess. 5:2, 4, 5. *

Hebrews 6:11, 12. *

From the Characters Christ Gives His Disciples *

CHAPTER VII *

Wherein there is an account of Believers Baptism, in a brief history thereof; not only from the Scriptures in the first Century, but from human Authors also, confirming the necessity of Instruction and Profession of Faith before Baptism, in all the Centuries. And that the Children of Christians, as well as Pagans, were not otherwise baptized; whereof you have some famous Instances, especially in the Fourth Century of several eminent Christians that deferred the Baptizing of their Children till they could give an Account of their Faith. Collected out of several Authors, especially the famous Magdeburgensian History. *

Century I. *

The Time When Baptism First Began. *

Its Divine Original *

Where, How, Upon Whom, and Why Baptism was Administered *

Who Are the Meet Subjects for Baptism *

When, Where, and by Whom Christ Jesus was Baptized *

The Many Disciples made during Christ’s Ministry *

Christ’s Enlarged Commission *

The Apostles Baptized the Believing Jews and Gentiles *

At Jerusalem *

At Samaria *

Upon the Way to Gaza *

At Damacus *

At Caesarea *

At Philippi *

At Corinth *

At Colossee *

At Rome *

At Ephesus *

An Historical Account of Baptism, as we find it was upon the Profession of Faith owned *

to be practiced by the testimony of Antiquity, both in the First, as well as in the Remaining Centuries. *

Human Antiquity for Believer’s Baptism *

The Magdeburgenses *

The Subjects of Baptism *

The Administrators *

The Place *

The Time *

The Manner *

The Ceremonies *

Clemens *

Ignatius *

H. Montanus and Jacob Du Bois *

Auxibins *

Waldenses and Albigenses by D. Balthazar Lidins *

The Ancient Britains *

CENTURY II *

Justin Martyr *

Dionysius Alexandrinus *

Clemens Alexandrinus *

Walafrid Strabo *

Century III *

Tertullian *

Origen *

Mr. Baxter *

Eusebius *

Cyril *

Justinus *

CENT. IV *

Athanasius *

Hilary *

Basil *

Gregory Nazianzen *

Ambrose *

Arnobius *

Jerome *

Athanasius *

Victorinus *

Ephrim Syrus *

Epiphanius *

Decrees of Councils *

Council of Carthage *

Council of Laodicea *

Council of Neocesaria *

Basil Baptized Aged *

Gregory Nazianzen Baptized after 20 years old *

Constantine Baptized Aged *

Ambrose Baptized after Bishop of Milan *

Chrysostom Baptized at 21 *

Jerom Baptized in his 30^th Year *

Austin Baptized about the 30^th Year of his Age *

Theodosius Baptized Aged *

Monsieur Daille *

Dr. Field *

Beatus Rhenanus *

Mr. Den *

Dr. Jer. Taylor *

Dr. Barlow’s Letter *

CENTURY V. *

Chrysostom *

Austin *

Synesius *

Faustus Regiensis, Etc. *

CENTURY VI *

Gregory *

Cassiodorus *

The Council of Agathen *

CENTURY VII *

Various Councils’ Decrees *

Egyptian Churches Follow Apostles Doctrine *

CENTURY VIII *

Bede *

Haimo *

Various Councils Decrees *

CENTURY IX *

Rabanus *

Albinus, Damascenus and Raphanus *

Remigius and Strabo *

CENTURY X *

Auslebertus, Smaragdo and Theophilact *

CENTURY XI *

Anselm *

Algerus *

Buchardus *

Ivo *

Waldenses *

Bernigarius *

Peter Bruis *

CENTURY XII. *

Rupertus *

Bohemius *

Rupertus *

Peter Lumbard *

Albertus Magnus *

Thomas Aquinas *

The Petro-Brusians and Henericans *

Waldenses Greatly Increase *

CENTURY XIII *

The Waldenses *

Dulcinus *

Many Friars *

John Wickliff *

John Huss *

The Turlupins or Waldenses *

Vignier *

The Baltic Sea and Saxony *

The Old Confession of Faith *

CENTURY XIV. *

The Bishop of Meyland *

The Anabaptists in Bohemia *

The Confession of the Thaborites in Bohemia *

Century XV. *

Old Waldenses or Baptists in Germany *

Waldenses in Hungary *

The Waldensian Confession of 1521 *

The Thessalonican Churches and the old German Waldenses *

Thessalonians in Switzerland *

CENTURY XVI *

Jacob de Roor *

Ludovicus Vives *

Bellarmine *

Grotius *

Zwinglius *

Luther *

Bullinger *

Erasmus *

Ludovicus Vives *

Melancton *

Beza *

Bucer *

Chamier *

Dr. Hamond *

Dr. Field *

The Church of England’s Catechism *

Chap. I *

Wherein the Scriptures’ total silence about Infants Baptism is observed with the necessity of Scripture warranty to authorize every Ordinance and that by the Confession of Parties themselves. *

No Scripture for Baptizing Infants *

The Parties Themselves Owning It *

The Magdeburgenses *

Luther *

Erasmus *

Calvin *

Bucer *

Staphilus *

Choclens *

Melancthon *

Zwinglius *

Daniel Rogers *

Baxter *

Dr. Taylor *

Luther *

Calvin *

Basil *

Austin *

Theophilact *

Tertullian *

Mr. Ball *

The Sixth Article of the Church of England *

Objection *

Answer *

CHAPTER II *

Century I *

Apostolical Tradition’s First Pretended Proof *

Century II *

Century III *

Century IV *

Infants Baptism Practiced in the Latter Part of 4^th Century *

Lying Forgeries About Constantine’s Baptism by the Papists *

Distinction Between Laymen and Clergy *

Century V *

The Milevitan Council’s Canon Respecting Infants Baptism *

Pope Innocent I Ratifies It *

The 5^th Council of Carthage’s Canon *

Also Confirmed by Pope Innocent I *

The Doctors of this Age Approving Infants Baptism *

The Various Impious Acts of Pope Innocentius I *

Century VI *

The Canons of Various Councils *

Pope Gregory the Great *

Emperor Justinian’s Decree *

Maxentius *

Some Decrees Made in these Times against Anabaptists *

Anabaptists to be Punished with Death *

The Uncleanness and Murders found at Monasteries *

Century VII *

Various Canons *

Century VIII *

Additional Decrees and Rites *

Century IX *

Century X *

Vossius *

Century XI *

Anselm *

Meginhardus *

Century XII *

Peter Lombard *

Century XIII *

Thomas Aquinas *

Alexander *

Bonavenure *

Century XIV *

Canons of the Council of Trent *

A Blasphemous Decree *

Princes of Germany Complain to the Pope *

Pope Pius’ Ridiculous Act *

The German Protestants about Infants Baptism *

The Smalkald Articles *

The Mumpelgarten Conference *

The Book of Concord *

The English Protestants about Infants Baptism *

Article 27 of the Church of England *

The Scottish Service Book *

The Directory *

Chapter III *

Tradition the Principle Ground of Infants Baptism *

Austin *

Chrysostom *

Bellarmine *

The Council of Trent *

The Council of Basil *

Eckius *

The Traditions for Infants Baptism are Fabulous *

Dionysis the Areopagite *

Justin Martyr’s Responses the Second Supposed Proof *

The Third Supposed Proof are the Various Papal Decrees *

Origen the Fourth Supposed Proof *

The History of Ruffinus and His Forgeries *

Objection *

Answer *

Scripture Grounds for Infants Baptism examined *

Scripture Canon for Infants Baptism *

Matt 19:14 *

John 3:5 *

Mark 16:16 *

The Argument from Federal Holiness Examined *

1 Corintians 7:14 *

Objection *

Answer *

Objection *

Answer *

Objection *

Answer *

The Arguments from Circumcision Examined *

From whence it is thus argued: *

Answer *

Galatians 3: 16 *

Calvin Confirms the Position *

Ainsworth Confirms the Position *

Dr. Owen Confirms the Position *

Amesius Confirms the Position *

The Evil Consequences of the Contrary *

Acts 2: 38 Answered *

Circumcision the Seal of the New Covenant? *

Circumcision Administered Only to Believers and their Seed? *

Baptism Came Not in the Room, Place and Use of Circumcision *

Not Baptizing Infants Doesn’t Make Gospel Privileges Lesser than Legal *

Chapter IV *

Wherein is made manifest that the Ordained Ceremony of Baptism is, in this of Infants altered and changed, and another Rite introduced, quite contrary both to the Signification of the Word, Nature of the ordinance, and manifest Practice thereof, not only in the Apostles’ times, but many Ages after, as confessed by Parties themselves *

The Manner of Baptism is by Dipping *

From the Signification of the Word *

Scapula and Stevens *

Grotius *

Pasor *

Vossius *

Minicaus *

Liegh *

Salmatius *

Causabon *

Pindarus *

Beza *

Selden *

Daniel Rogers *

Dr. Taylor *

Joseph Mede *

Chamier *

From the Scripture Practice *

Matthew 3 *

Cajetan *

John 3: 23 *

Piscator *

Calvin *

Acts 8: 36 *

Calvin *

Romans 6: 4 *

Cajetan *

Keckerman *

Diodatius *

Leigh *

Assemblies Annotations *

Dr. Cave *

Bishop Jewel *

Mr. Baxter *

Daille *

Walfridus Strabo *

Mr. Fox *

Hieremias, Patriarch of Constantinople *

Zepperus *

Dr. Taylor *

What Clinical Baptism? *

Objection *

Answer *

Objection *

Answer *

Chapter V *

Wherein you have an account of several Mischiefs, Absurdities and Contradictions that are justly to be charged upon the Practice. *

Chapter VI *

Wherein the Nullity and utter Insignificance of Infants Baptism is made to appear. *

Neither Right Matter Nor Form *

Objection *

Answer *

Chapter VII *

Wherein there is an account of some eminent witness that hath been born against Infants Baptism from first to last. *

Tertullian’s Witness *

The Witness Born by the Novations and Donatists *

Argument *

Answer *

The Witness born by the Ancient Britains *

Some Witness born by several Eminent Persons in several ages against Infants Baptism. *

The Witness born by the Waldenses *

The First is the Witness we find hereof in their public Confessions of Faith. *

The Second is the Witness we find borne hereto by several of their most eminent leading men. *

Berinagarius *

Peter Bruis *

Arnoldus *

Henricus *

Thirdly, In the Witness borne not only by some particular men, but by the Body of the People, as appeareth by Decrees of Councils, Decretal Epistles and Edicts given forth against them, as well as the Testimony of many Learned Writers. *

Dr. Usher *

Erbrardus *

Lastly, From the Foot steps we find of This Truth, and the Sufferers from the Same in Several Countries and Places, We here the Waldenses had Heretofore Imprinted it, as Appears by the Following Instances. *

By their Disciples in several Countries, Witnessing to these truths. *

Germany *

Aizates *

Tryers *

Stire *

Mentz *

Peremania *

Donau *

Eychester *

Vienna *

Schwas *

Ansburg, Salsburg and Waltsen *

Palatinate *

Altze *

Harlem *

Rome *

An Abstract of the Cruel Placates and Bloody Persecutions of the Protestant Cantons in Switzerland, Viz. Zurich, Berne, Schashuifen, against the Anabaptists. *

The Baptists persecuted by the Protestants in Helvetia *

The First Edict of Zurich, 1525 *

The Second Edict of Zurich, 1530 *

Upon Which Edicts Followed These Persecutions *

Faelix Mentz *

Two Baptists Burnt *

Six Baptists Burnt *

The Placaet of 1639 *

The Baptists Reply to the Third Manifesto of Zurich *

Their Doctrine was no Heresy *

Zwinglius and Dr. Hubmeier Controversy *

Oeculampadius and Dr. Hubmeier *

The Minister of Schaushuison *

Christopher Hogendort, against Infant Baptism *

Cellarius against Infant’s Baptism *

The Nine Ministers of Strasburg witness against Infant’s Baptism *

Pomeran and Bentius wrote against Infant’s Baptism *

The Second Charge that they disturb the Civil Peace *

At Zurich, Two Christians Starved to Death, other Killed *

Others starved and beheaded *

The Magistrates of Amsterdam Intercede *

The Placaet of Schafhuisen *

The Placaet of Berne *

The States General of the Low Countries *

The Duke of Newburg Banishes the Anabaptists *

Thirdly in Holland *

Friezland abounding with Anabaptists *

Cassander about the Anabaptists *

Beza’s Honorable Testimony about the Anabaptists *

AN ABSTRACT OF THE BLOODY EDICT OF THE EMPEROR CHARLES THE FIFTH, made June 10, 1535, against the ANABAPTISTS OR WALDENSIAN CHRISTAINS (and the execution thereof) in the Seventeen Provinces *

At Sardam and Horne *

At Leeworden, Gofdam and in North Holland *

At the Buss, at Rotterdam and also in North Holland *

At Enchusen, Waterland and Wormes *

At Amsterdam *

Philip the Second and his Cruel Edict *

Sufferings in Flanders *

Sufferings in Holland *

The Placaet of Groningen, in 1601 *

Placaet of Danventer in 1620 *

Van Braght’s The Bloody Theater *

The Old Waldenses in Bohemia, Moravia and Austria *

The Eminent Dr. Hubmeier and his wife martyred at Vienna *

Comenius’ History of the Anabaptists of Moravia in his History of Bohemia *

They Lived in Colleges *

Bishop Usher on the Collegians *

The Collegiants in Several Countries in 1675 *

Hungarian Scholar Reports to Gov. D’Anvers about the Collegiants in 1675 *

Collegiants in Transylvania *

The Collegiants were not Socinians *

Collegians or Fraterinian Waldenses in Poland *

The Waldenses and their Recourses, Residences and Succession *

in England for Many Ages *

Waldenses in the time of William the Conqueror *

Henry 1, and King Stephen’s Times *

Henry 2’s Time *

Roger Hoveden and his Annals *

Roger de Bedres, Governor of Gascoyn *

Richard I and King John *

Pope Innocentius the Third established the Dominican and Franciscan Orders to Suppress the Waldenses *

Waldenses called Lollards in 1315 *

Lollards in the Time of Edward Third *

A Treatise of Lollardism *

An Account of that Eminent Servant and Confessor of Jesus Christ, Mr. John Wickliff *

Wycliffe and the old Waldenses *

For Two Sacraments *

For Believer’s Baptism *

For Believer’s Baptism only *

For Churches of Saints *

That Baptism Signs, not gives Grace *

That Baptism saves not in itself *

That nothing is to be received without Scripture authority *

Against Traditions, Canons & Pope’s Decretals *

As a Lollard he denies Infant’s Baptism *

Denies Confirmation *

No Head of the Church but Christ *

Pope is Antichrist *

Pope’s Infallibility is blasphemous *

Prelates diabolical *

Against Church Ornaments *

Against Patronage *

Against Nuns *

For Lay Preaching *

Against Degrees of Divinity *

Only Two Orders in the Church *

The Church of Rome is the Synagogue of Satan *

Against Monks and Friars *

Against Lordly Priests *

Against Tithes *

Against Ignorant Worship *

Against Canonical Hours *

Against Set Forms of Prayer *

Not to Fear Men in God’s Service *

For Abounding in Charity *

Against Unlawful and For Lawful Oaths *

For Gracious Rulers *

How Designed against and Preserved in Edward’s Time *

Wickliff Persecuted and Cursed *

An Earthquake *

Londoners Friends to the Lollards *

Government of the City Changed *

Wickliff’s Death *

Bones Burned Forty Years After *

The Great Testimony Given To Wickliff by the University of Oxford. *

Great Learning *

Exemplary Piety *

John Wickliff’s Life by Mr. James *

Favored by Princes *

Great Deliverance *

Great Success in His Ministry *

Friars’ Malice After His Death *

Persecution of Lollards *

Lucifer’s Letter to the Prelates *

Pope’s Bull against Lollards *

Queen Anne, a Friend to the Lollards *

The Statute for Burning of Heretics *

Articles for Discovery of Lollards *

Lollards Burned *

Cobham and 38 Hanged and Burned for Lollards *

Diverse Lollards Martyred *

Lollards Unanimous Herein *

Objections Answered About Contrary Confessions *

The Confession Not By the Waldenses *

The Succession of Believers Baptism *

THE History of Christianity *

Ancient Britains *

Their Conversation according to their Enemies *

Their Doctrinal Progress and Success *

Waldensian Youth Taught the Scriptures *

Waldensian Misisters are called Barbes *

Waldensians Oppose Romish Errors *

Rome Persecutes the Waldenses *

Bunion’s Answer *

Bunion Asserts Ignorance absolves from Sins of Omission and Commission *

Amongst all those ordinances and institutions of Christ, that the Man of Sin has so miserably mangled, metamorphosed and changed, none has been more horrible abused than that of Baptism; which as to Matter and Form, Subject and Circumstances has suffered such apparent Alterations and Subversions, that nothing but the very name of the thing remains, and yet that also very improperly too, if duly considered.

Which the better to Demonstrate, you have here not a Platform of the Primitive Institutions, in Christ’s Commission, the Apostle’s Precepts and Practice, and the Spiritual Ends thereof, plainly laid down from the Scriptures, and confirmed by the Learned; but the change itself of Believers into Infant-Baptism, traced out and detected, with all the Popish, Ridiculous Superstitions, and Fooleries, made essential to it, and concomitants with it, and that according to Apostolic Tradition, as their impious Forgeries would impose upon us.

Infant Baptism Establishes the Rule and Reign of Antichrist

Than which, as nothing did ever more tend to defile and ruin the true Church, and reproach the Wisdom and Authority of Christ their Head; So nothing could rationally more establish and confirm the false, or more apparently promote the Sovereignty and Dignity of Antichrist their Head; which is so plain, that he who runs may read. For if the very Act of Sprinkling, or pouring a little Water on the Child’s Head, or face (with the Charms attending it) must give Grace, Regeneration, take away Sin, save the Soul, add to the Church, and give right to all the Ordinances; as Mr. Pope has been pleased, sitting in the Temple of God, as God, to Ordain and Decree, and that with Anathema’s too, against every one who shall not so receive it.

Establishment of the Jewish Antichristian Estate in the Place of Christ’s Estate

How naturally must it needs follow;

First, That Christ’s Conversion, and the powerful preaching of the Gospel, His means to effect it, must be slighted and despised; Ignorance and Profaneness, the true Interest of this State, necessarily brought in; Christ’s Baptism, with all its Spiritual Ends and Uses, ousted and contemned; the Jewish Antichristian Rites of a Natural Church and High-Priesthood, with all the Appurtenances, introduced.

But, Secondly, That as the Nations should accept this New Project of being made Christians and Church-Members by the Pope’s Christening, they necessarily oblige themselves by receiving his Law, to embrace also his Government, and to be Ruled in chief by himself (as the greatest part, called Christendom, have done accordingly) who can deny it? To the erecting a Throne for the Beast, and to give that vile Person (who blasphemously they call his Holiness) cause to say (looking over his greedy Fabric, with his Father of old, Dan. 4:30.) Is not this great Babylon that I have built by the might of my Power, &c for the honor of my Majesty? Therefore, has it become the Corner and Foundation stone of the Antichristian Church and State.

The Contrast Between the Gospel Administrators and the Antichristian Administrators

For as they who take (as far as they can judge) living Stones (called the Spiritual Seed, Saints by Calling or Believers) to build Christ a House or Church, Orderly joining them together by Dipping, do yield Obedience to Christ’s Command, conform to the Primitive Pattern of the New-Testament Churches, ascribe honor and glory to the Lord Christ the Institutor:

So they, who take the Carnal Seed, VIZ. Ignorant and Unconverted ones, to make up the National, or any particular Church, joining them together by Sprinkling, do thereby yield Obedience to the Pope’s Canons, conform to the Jewish and Antichristian Pattern, and reflect Honor and Dignity to their Sovereign Lord, the Pope, the Contriver and Imposer thereof. And is not this very observable, that Pope Innocentius the First, (that Abaddon and Apollyon) that had so many marks of Antichrist, as you find in the account here given of him, was the first Confirmer and Imposer hereof.

The Reformers and their Different Reasons to Support Antichrist’s Baptism

But that which is most to be lamented is, that the Protestant Reformers, who detected and cast away to many Antichristian Admonitions, should yet hold fast such a Principal Foundation Stone of their Building; though it is granted, with the rejecting of many of its Superstitions, and also upon other pretended Grounds. For when the Rottenness of the Popish Grounds aforesaid did appear for Infant’s Sprinkling, it had certainly fallen to the Ground, but for some new Contrivances to support it, though therein they have not been so happy to agree amongst themselves in their Conclusions.

The Differing Concepts of Faith Which Protestants Allow for Infant’s Baptism

For some are for Baptizing all Children, whose Parents are ever so wicked; others only the Children of Professors; whilst others are for the Baptizing of the Children of such Professors only, whose parents are inchurched, viz., belonging to some particular Congregation. Some are for Baptizing Children upon their own particular Faith, (which with many confidences affirmed they have.) Others deny that with great Vehemence, affirming they ought only to be Baptized upon an Imputative Faith, viz., upon the Faith of others, though saying, it must be by the Imputative Faith of the Church; others of the Gossip; others of the Parent or Proparent in Covenant upon the account of Federal Right. So that some are for Baptizing upon an Ecclesiastical Faith, some an Imputative, some a Seminal, some an Habitual, some a Dogmatical, and some upon a Justifying Faith.

Richard Baxter’s Conclusions

Upon which Variety of Differences, you have Mr. Baxter himself in the beginning of his Book of the Sacraments saying, That it may seem strange that after 1600s years use of Christian Baptism, the Ministers of the Gospel should be so unresolved to whom it does belong; Yet so it is (saith he) and I observe it is a Question that they are now very solicitous about: and I cannot blame them, it being not only about a matter of Divine appointment, but a practical of such concernment to the Church.

Moreover, it is no wonder that such Contradictions should proceed from such contrary Principles; for if from one Baptism, Ephes. 4, Christ would oblige and engage us to Unity, let it not be thought strange, that from a Baptism so different from Christ’s such differences and Divisions should flow. For as one ingeniously observes, That as it happens to Travelers, when they are out of the way, one conjectures he should go this way, another that way, and sometimes at hot disputes and contentions about it, and in the contest many Byways are attempted: Yet still the further they go, the more they are out of the way, till they can come to the true Road again. So it has been with the Baptizers of Infants, they are fallen into many new devices to maintain it, which has occasioned many hot contests, branches and divisions amongst themselves, whose principal Arguments and Scripture pretences for the Practice, you have here also Examined and Answered.

The Ancient Waldenses you find from good Authority, were great asserters of this Primitive Institution of Believer’s Baptism; and faith impugners of Infants, as a Human and Antichristian Tradition and Invention. In addition, it is not very strange, that the Protestants, who pretend to derive their Succession from them, should so much degenerate in so principal a Foundation, and give thereby so much advantage to a Common Enemy to reproach their whole Separation? For since they assert but two Sacraments in opposition to their Popish seven, how lamentable is it that by this deviating from this Primitive Rule and Pattern, they should so miserably differ in both, but more especially in this of Baptism?

Objection I

But it may be objected, that if the business of Believer’s Baptism, be a thing so clear, as you would make it; how came it to pass, that so many learned and pious men, so many fearing God, both Men and Women, should so zealously and conscientiously cleave to such a piece of Error and Darkness, in Sprinkling their Children, while so few, in comparison, do embrace this great Truth of Baptizing Believers?

Answer

In answer to which Inquiry, I present the following Considerations for Satisfaction, viz.

That the Wisdom and Grace of God may more appear, that many times Reveals His Truths to Babes and weak ones, which he withholds from the wise and prudent, to prevent boasting, and that no flesh should glory in his presence, and to fulfil His holy and good pleasure, Who opens Hearts and Ears, and gives Understanding, as seems Him good.

To demonstrate that great Truth, that as God’s People went into Mystical Babylon gradually, so that iniquity prevailing by steps, so must their coming out be, some at one time, and some at another, as they came out of Literal Babylon.

 

Therefore has it been, that some Ages have recovered much of the Doctrinal parts, while yet they have been very corrupt in Discipline, and held fast many Dregs of Antichristianism; as Luther and many of these Reformers, that under their zealous pleading for the Doctrine of Justification against Popish Merits, &c., yet held fast Images in Churches, and Consubstantiation, and many other things. Again, many who have got light in the Discipline have yet been very corrupt in /Doctrines, if not in Manners. Many having recovered the Form of Godliness, that have not lived up to the Power; and on the contrary many who have lived much in the Power of Godliness and holy living, that have been zealous opposes of the Right Form.

And as to that of Discipline, how Gradually has it got Ground, sometime in the Negative, opposing false Worship and Superstition; sometime in the Passive part, some age getting and recovering one piece, some others another; as for instance; How zealous have the Protestants been in opposing Popery in one Age, and yet as zealous opposers of any further Light that sprang up in the next? Again, how zealous the Puritans and Non-conformists were in opposing the Hierarchy and Prelacy, and yet as zealous opposers of a further Reformation as to Church-order and discipline according to Christ’s Pattern? Oh what a strange thing was Independency among many holy, zealous and learned Men a few years since, and how few where those who stood up to assert it! However, especially what a monstrous, prodigious thing was Anabaptism!

Another reason may be from the inconsiderable persons, as to Gifts, Parts, Learning, Worldly Power and Greatness, that have been in the Profession and Practice of it, few but the Poor having embraced it.

Another from the Contemptableness of the things itself, in the Administrations thereof, being calculated not for the Meridian of fleshly Wisdom, or show, but the quite contrary; yet exceedingly accommodated to further Grace, Humility, Mortification, self-denial, to increase Faith, Love, holiness, &c.

5. An other may be from the Reproaches and Slanders cast upon the Professors thereof; or real falls and scandals of those under it, who may be suffered to fall for the offence of others that seek it; for it is said, That offences must needs be, Matt. 18.

6. And lastly, to instruct Humility in all attainments, having nothing but what we have received, and therefore to exercise Tenderness and Compassion to those who differ, know that he who is first may be last, and he who is last may be first.

 

Objection 2

But, why have you so many quotations from Paedobaptists? As though it were probable that men who so much oppose your practice would advantage you by their assertions, if truly urged.

Answer

To which I reply, that it must be granted that there needs no better Testimony than the Confession of Parties themselves; and herein, I conceive, there is enough from their own Pens, to contradict and condemn their own, and to justify our practice in every part thereof. In addition, if they have injured themselves by their acknowledgement, it will be their parts to show their own mistakes or to reconcile, if they can, their contradictions.

It is not so much from the force of the Authorities, as the strength of the Reason urged by them, that there are produced; not that any new thing is brought forth by them that has not been offered by some of their own; but Arguments from some Persons of Note among themselves, prevail forty times more than the very same, from persons they have a prejudice against, and therefore Paul quoted their own Poets, Acts 17. And, by how much they are against the Truth in their Practice, by so much the power and Providence of God may appear so, to make their own Pens and Tongues to fall upon themselves; witness what more especially is quoted from Mr. Baxter’s Right to Sacraments, and Dr. Taylor’s Plea for the Anabaptists in his Liberty of Prophecy.

Objection 3

But, it is possibly to be imagined that Mr. Baxter, that has been esteemed the great Maule of the Anabaptists, should make Assertions so much in Contradictions on to his former Position? Has he then changed his mind, and revoked his former Apprehensions?

Answer

That he has made all these assertions, and many more to the same purpose, his own Books are witness. From whence they are faithfully quoted especially that which he calls The Second Disputation of the Right to Sacraments. From whence it is that Mr. Tombs fetches the twenty Arguments he wrote against Mr. Blake, and improves them all against him, discovering Contradictions to his former principles in every one of them, in his Book which he calls Felo de se, or The Self-Destroyer; to which Mr. Baxter has never made the least reply, that I have heard of; though in the end of Mr. Tomb’s said book he provoked him to a Reply, by these words, viz., by the reading of this Book, all intelligent person may perceive Mr. Baxter’s deceitfulness, or heedlessness, and if he persist on defending Infant Baptism, his unreasonable pertinacy in his own conceit and if he does not declare his forsaking his Doctrine in his Book of Baptism, his impenitency and unrighteous, dealing with the Church of God, which he has injured. Therefore how much is he concerned to give some account, how such Assertions can be reconciled to his former Writings, which in the apprehensions of such ignorant Creatures as we are, seem to be as contrary to each other, as Light to Darkness. Though I doubt not, but that through the Profoundness of his Speculation and Subtlety of his Distinctions (having therein so much out done Thomas Aquinas himself in his late Writings) he will as soon Reconcile these seeming contradictions, as many of his former, wherein he has so much abounded, (non more than I know of,) being, as you find, sometime a great opposer, then a great Defender of Episcopacy; sometime for Nonconformity (in some Tents he has seemed to shelter himself in the Storm, and with their Indulgence to come forth again.)

And as to these other Quotations that are so often cited from Dr. Taylor’s Liberty of Prophecy; I know it is usually said, that what he wrote therein was not his own Judgment, but done on purpose to set the Parliamentarians together by the ears, in taking so much the part of the most hated Sect among them. To which I souls say that surely Dr. Taylor had the Reputation of a person of more Integrity, Conscience, and Honesty than so egregiously to prevaricate in the things of God.

Yet if that really was his design in bringing forth so much Truth (with such fullness of Demonstration) though in guile, envy, and deceit, we are yet therein to rejoice, as said the Apostle, Phil. 1:4. And the more also to magnify the Power, Wisdom and Grace of God, so to take the wise in their own craftiness, and that can make Balaam himself, that designs to curse his People, the bless them altogether.

Objection 4

But, why do you take so much paints, and quote so many Authors, to prove Believer’s Baptism? Who ever denied it? For is it not all along urged that Pagans and Infidels should not otherwise be Baptized, but upon profession of faith, and that the Children of Christians, if not baptized in Infancy, should be baptized upon Profession of Faith?

Answer

To which I Answer, That the Arguments in the first Part, are not so much to prove that Believers professing Faith are to be Baptized, but that they only are so to be, and not others. And that the Authors that are produced to prove Believer’s Baptism, whether from the Commission, Order, or Ends, therefore, do also by substantial Arguments conclude against the Baptizing of any others; and so necessarily, by their own Grants, exclude Ignorance and Unconverted ones. And besides, as so many of themselves acknowledge, the Catechumens were not only the Children of Heathen, but of Christians also, and such too as were born to them after their Christianity; witness those many instances given in the Fourth Century, and by Mr. Baxter himself. And as for baptizing professors, whether the Children of Pagans or Christians, we ask no more, because sprinkling of infants, as by many arguments as you will find, is a mere nullity. It is no baptism, if worse than none, as you will find made good, an ordinance being so profaned, and the Name of God taken in vain, where neither true Matter, nor right Manner is observed.

Objection 5

But, it may be said, and I have already met with it, To what purpose is this coming forth, in a point so controversial, at this juncture, where there is more need of healing than dividing Subjects?

Answer

That if Paul used so powerful an argument from one Baptism, Eph. 4, to press union and peace, then if there has been another baptism set on foot in opposition to it, that must needs be a makebate with a witness it being no less than an Error in a Foundation, nay that which does assert two foundations, and two principles; and if so, then what more hopeful endeavor can there be put forth to effect peace than to discover and remove such a rock of offence, by delivering from the false, and recovering to the true and one baptism? This union does not only deal the division between Baptists and Paedo-Baptists, but the Paedo-Baptists among themselves, who are, as you have heard, at so great odds in this point, and so solicitous, as Mr. Baxter tells us, in a practical of such concernment. Without which, there being such an error in the principle, such an error in the Principle, such a foundation of Antichrist held fast, all exhortations to Union, viz., in church-fellowship and communion, will signify little. Therefore let the cause be removed, the bone of contention taken away, the peaceable effects necessarily follow. A faithful pleading and pressing whereof, is the upright design of this undertaking, and is therefore with the more faith and confidence recommended to the blessing of God, and to the hearts and consciences of all sincere, upright ones, that desire to keep the commandments of God, and the Testimony of Jesus Christ.

With this earnest desire and expectation, that the candid, ingenuous reader, however contrary-minded, will overlook what of frailty and weakness he may take notice of, which may be too much; and eye principally the design, drift, and scope thereof. And that if by the multitude of quotations, through so ancient a track, he finds any particular mistake, misquotations, or misapplications, that he will not so dwell, or insist upon it, to reject the Truth of all the rest, that are full and clear without exception, which is the way that Carpers and Sophists take, and the method that Papists have all along taken in Reply to our Protestant-writers. Though this withal I can assure you, that I have not willingly given any such occasion; but have either transcribed the Authorities from their own works or from some authentic writers, that have so done, and especially from the Magdeburgensian History, so much esteemed among the Protestants, and whereof I shall be accountable to any judicious inquirer, that may doubt the truth hereof.

Though by the way, it must be remembered, that all human authority urged from antiquity, is at best but Argumentum ad hominem; it being Scripture /authority only, that is of divine force, and, as coming from God, can oblige the conscience. Therefore, if you will but please, before you make u p your judgment, and pass the definitive sentence, to read the whole, and laying all parts together, weigh them (with an impartial mind) in the balance of the Sanctuary; you will find, I doubt not, that as no Ordinance of Jesus Christ is more fully and clearly asserted from the Scripture, founded with greater wisdom and righteousness, or of more excellent use to the Church than that of Believer Baptism, however it has been contemned, nick-named, and reproached.

So no invention of man, or innovation of Antichrist has been more pernicious, either to the Church or World, or founded upon less of reason, righteousness, and truth, than that of sprinkling infants, though it has so long and so currently past for Christ’s ordinance of baptism.

Lastly, if any shall be offended at this witness, (though thus made good by a seven-fold demonstration twice told) let them know, (that the Providence of God has so ordered, as they will find herein) that they cannot oppose it, without opposing and contradicting themselves, there being scarce one argument in the whole Book, that is not substantially confirmed by some eminent men of their own.

Since the last impression I have met with Come more Objections, which (though they have been answered in part) yet I find it necessary to say something more unto; which are as follow, viz.

Objection 1,

 

That Mr. Baxter is much injured by Mr. Tombes in his Quotations out of his second Disputations, so often to in this Book, by so improving those Arguments which He only gives for Adult Baptism, against Infant’s Baptism, though without taking notice of the Caution he gives in the said Book that he would not be understood to include Infants-Baptism, having so fully asserted the same elsewhere.

Answer

 

In Answer whereto, I must refer you to what Mr. Tombes has said in the Epistle to his Felo-de-se (to obviate the same) which is as follows, viz.,

That though Mr. Baxter, in that his second Disputation intended only to overthrow Mr. Blake’s Tenet; yet indeed the middle terns and proofs of his Arguments do beat down his own! tenet of Infants-Baptism; and direct into the way of restoring Believers-Baptism; to demonstrate, that those who have adhered to Mr. Baxter, may see how ill he has dealt with them, and may, if God give them wisdom to discern the truth, be brought into the right way of Believers-Baptism, is this Writing framed in which thou has presented to you a remarkable instance of God’s Providence, clearing Truth by pen of its most eminent Adversary, and of his heedless writing, not observing how his own Arguments against another, fight against himself; the urging whereof, is that which Logicians approve of, and against the person, is ever counted a good Plea to argue for his own condemnation out of his own mouth and in this matter is good as to the thing, it being ) not only asserted by him, but also largely proved.

In the publishing whereof, there is no more wrong done him, than was done by Bishop Morton in his Apology, in alleging the Romanist’s Words in their Writings, as an Advocate for the Protestants, against themselves but much right to the Church of God, nothing is here set down as his, but his own Words. His Caution, that he means his Propositions in the case of Adult persons, and that he has elsewhere proved Infants-Baptism, are without wrong to him, left out, saith his Arguments do as strongly prove there should be none but Adult-Baptism,. As that none should be baptized upon the Profession of a bare Dogmatic Faith for though his aim be only to prove that the Faith professed which entitles to Baptism, may be justified, yet his Arguments to proves more; that none but such as profess such Faith, are to be baptized, and that this profession is to be by each Baptized in his own person, and no other to be baptized. Not one text he brings to prove that a parent, or Pro-Parent’s Profession does entitle to baptism; what he has disputed elsewhere for Infants-Baptism, is all answered elsewhere also, no where does he prove (though that is it he should chiefly have proved) that in order to Baptism, a Parent’s Profession is by God allows as the Infant’s own; but still he supposes it, which is the main point to be proved; which Logicians know is of all Fallacies the grossest, viz. The begging of the Question. Thus far Mr. Tombes.

And that Mr. Tombes has rightly and truly improved Mr. Baxter’s Arguments for Adult, against his former for infant’s Baptism, take two or three instances; and which you have more fully in the Book, and be yourselves the Judges, viz., in his Second Disputation, p. 149.

He reasons thus: If there can be no Example given in Scripture of anyone that was baptized without the Profession Of a saving faith, nor any Precept for so doing, then must we not baptize any without it; but the antecedent is true; therefore so is the consequence, and in proof thereof, produces the several examples of all particular persons baptized in the Scriptures. In addition, upon his instancing of Philip’s answer to the Eunuch, If thou believe with all thy heart, thou may; said, And to say that, Philip answered de been see, meaning, that it includes not the negative, otherwise thou gayest not; is to make Philip to have deluded not decided or resolved. Concluding, that there is not the least word of Scripture that gives us the least intimation that ever any man was baptized without a profession of a saving Faith.

And in his 10^th Argument, p. 116, 118, saith, that Christ has instituted no baptism but what is to be a Sign of present Regeneration wrought; but to men that profess not a Justifying Faith, it cannot be administered as a sign of present regeneration, therefore he hath instituted no Baptism to be administered to such. The Major is plain, said he, John 3:5. Titus 3:5.

In addition, in his Rag. p. upon the Eunuch’s not being admitted to Baptism without faith said, he observes, that Baptism is the Seal of God’s Promise;

1. That the Constant Order is that Baptism follow faith;

2. That it is no better than an impious Profanation, if it go without Faith; that is, if the Party seek it without the presence of Faith.

If the Pastor administer it without the Profession of Faith; And whereof many more might be added; even the whole Twenty Argument that Mr. Tombes ‘ mentions, and many often repented in the Book; but let these suffice. And may we not with admiration what should oblige Mr. Baxter so fervently to assert, and so strenuously to probe the baptism of Believers after Profession in the very Method, and Way that is so fully owned by the Baptists themselves. Is it that he may make amends for all the bad words he hath heretofore given them, and so fully now at last justify, confirm, and plead their Cause, he hath so endeavored to disgrace and pour contempt upon? For, if otherwise, to what end should he take all that pains to assert, defend and so zealously to plead and press that Faith and Profession there of should precede Baptism and that in a Country, where for so many Ages, none without the sin of Anabaptism, or being baptized again, having, as judged, been so well baptized in Infancy can practice the same. Can it be thought to be for the sake of a Blacker, a Turk, Jew, or some such person, that it may be, once in ten or twenty years may have been sprinkled? Surely not to be imagined: Or, Secondly, is it indeed to pull up infants Baptism Root and Branch? For it impious and profane do baptize any without Faith, and do go out of Christ’s Order, what can more enervate such a practice? Do Scripture Precept and Practice warrant another Baptism besides the Adult Baptism, which he tells us, with so many undeniable Arguments, is only? And can there be a Practice of another Baptism, whereof neither Precept nor practice without setting a post by God’s post erecting another Principle and Foundation in the Christian Religion without Christ’s Institution, without being esteemed, as he intimates, impious and profane.

Therefore did Mr. Tombes, in a Letter (written some two or three years since, which he lately showed me) with much importunity, press Mr. Baxter for a candid and particular Recantation of his Book of Infants-Baptism, he having by such substantial Arguments (as he had demonstrated in his Felo de se) so effectually done the same in those his twenty Arguments; but his answer to him (which he also showed me) was in my judgment altogether unbecoming either Mr. Baxter’s Gravity, the reason, or the Candor of the Motion, being so full of severe and contemptuous relations and reflections.

In the next place, there is another Passage, that I hear some are very much offended at; which t may be meet to be a little more particular in a reply to, viz., That I have called Infant’s sprinkling, or Baptism, Antichristian. To which I say, that I have not only called it so, but have by so much substantial evidence, made it so well appear, which they will do well to take into consideration, viz.

1. Because there is neither Scripture Precept or Practice for the same, as confessed by so many eminent men of their own, bespeaking it of the same Antichristian Birth with others of their Antichristian Inventions;

2. Because it is asserted to be an Apostolic Tradition by so much Antichristian Forgery, of which you have such manifest and undeniable proof and demonstration;

3. Because never judged necessary (as confessed by so many eminent, learned men) till imposed by Antichristian Canons, as began in the Waldensian and Carthaginian Councils, by Pope Innocent the first, that, as you will hear, had so many Mark of Antichrist upon him, and afterwards continued and reinforced by so many Popes and Councils.

4. Because it was designed and decreed to such Antichristian and Blasphemous Ends, as has been made manifest, viz., That by the very act of sprinkling a little water in the face, to take away Sin, regenerate the Person, and save the Soul;

5. Because it has so effectually been managed to propagate, strengthen, and advance the Antichristian Church, State and Kingdom, whereby whole Towns, Cities, Countries, and Regions have by the Pope’s Christenings, received the denomination of Christians, the better to make up his National and Universal Church; yea, the whole Christian World.

6. Because the opposing thereof in defense of the true Christian Baptism (viz., that after profession of Faith according to Christ’s Precept and Pattern) has cost so much Christian Blood, by the Antichristian Decrees and bloody Inquisitions and Butcheries as is made.

Another Objection I have often met with, is, That whereas in the Title-Page it is affirmed that Infant’s Baptism was not practiced for three hundred years after Christ, it appears from Tertullian’s Testimony against it, and Cyprian, (and the Council of 66 Bishops) for it, in the Third Century, that it was practiced before. To which I say, That in my small search I cannot find there is any authentic testimony that it was practiced upon any till the fourth Century. If any do assert it, let them prove it. It is granted Tertullian spoke against it in Africa, which is clear evidence that some had been speaking for it in that Corner of the World, page 149.

Dr. Barrow said, That there is no just evidence for it for above 200 years; that he does believe that it came into the World in the Second Century, and in the Third and Fourth began to be practiced, though not greatly; And Mr. Barter’s Testimony from Antiquity, which you find p. 53, speaks much at the same rate. As for the Determinations of that which is called Cyprian’s (and his 66 Bishops) Council, you have the Exceptions against it, p. 147.

However, if it should be taken for granted that it was practiced in Cyprian’s time, 30 or 40 years will break no great square in the computation. Therefore to resolve the Cavil, and to prevent stumbling at the threshold, l have now, in this put it, as you had, [near 300 years) not that I see any other Cause to alter it but only to prevent the Offence of any before they come to consider my Grounds, being fully of the same mind, as formerly, therein.

Objection 4

Another, and one of the considerable objections I have met with is this, viz. That whereas I have asserted that the Waldenses were such great opposers of Infant’s Baptism, the contrary seems to be most manifest by those several Confessions of Faith recorded by Perrin, both of the Waldenses of Province and those of Bohemia also, testifying that they did own and practice the baptizing of infants, so well improved both by Mr. Marshall and Mr. Baxter, against Mr. Tombes.

To which l say, though I have sufficiently replied to both (whereof the objectioners take so little notice) proving that those several Confessions, both of the Waldenses of Province, and those pretended of Bohemia, were all of a late Date, via. None of them before the 16^th. Century, and also since the Defection of those French Waldenses, for as for those of Bohemia, they disowned themselves so be (falsely, as they say, called Waldenses) which may be satisfaction enough to the considerate reader as you have it at large in the First Impression, p. 327, &c.

Yet because I would more fully remove all occasion of offence that may arise there-from, I have now given you the several Confessions themselves, and the respective grounds upon which Perrin concludes they owned Infants baptism, with particular and distinct replies to each of them; and which you will find in p. 275, &c. of this Impression.

In the next place, the Reader is desired to take notice that since my last, I have obtained from Holland that large Book of Martyrs, called, the Bloody Theater, written in Dutch, by one Thielem J. Van-Beaght. It is a continuation of several Chronologers and Centurists, such as Twisk, Merningus, Montanus, Frank Merlin, &c the John Foxes in their days who have especially recorded the Doctrines and Sufferings of the Baptists in all Ages since our Savior’s time, brought down to the year 1660. Whereof you have here some brief Epitome; by the excellent Method, exactness of Quotation (through the greatest variety of Authors that ever I met with), and accurate co