ter, which is external and vifibie, to make Christians vifibly and externally, as well as one of the Spirit, which is Internal and Invisible, to make real and true Chriftians: The Former, that initiates into the External and Visible Church: The Latter, into the true Affembly of the First Born: And the Subjects of the Two Baptisms are no more to be confounded, than the Baptifms themselves.

Thus I have given you all the Satisfaction, that under a great variety of diftraaive and furprizing Accidents, I was capable of giving; and I have done it with the Temper and Moderation that becomes. a Seeker of Truth; without the Com mon Pomp of Figures, Infolence, and Triumph: a Thing foarce pardonable in the Heat and Fervency of a Difpute; but which doth very ill become a Writer. And yet, if I had used any Warmness in the Argument, feeing it is in the Cafe of Infants, that cannot speak for themfelyes, it had been fomewhat Excufable; and the rather, for that our Saviour was fo Zealous for them Himself, that when fome fit may be of your Perfwafion) would not have had them brought unto Him to

be

be Bleffed, it is faid, He was much Difpleafed with Them. But I am not fo with You, for that Occafion you have given of fearching out the Truth to,

The Second Letter.

Dear Sir,

Y

I

Ours of March 16th, came to hand the 20th; in which the Declaration you begin with, That notwithstanding all that I have faid, your Apprehenfions concerning the Matter in dispute between us, are the fame they were, and That rather you are the more confirmed; doth no whit surprize me. affure you, I never had the vanity to hope, to convince a Man of your Perfwafion. I was not the first Aggreffor: I well knew the Confidence, that goes along with Conceits of higher Adminiftrations; and I alfo knew, that fome Dyes and Tinctures of Mind, (of which I took, and do take That of Yours to be One) are as uncapable of being washed out, as Thofe in the Skins of Leopards and Blackamoors.

After

After a Smoothing Preface, you proceed to (as you call them) Saber, and (you hope) Inoffenfive Reflections; which yet, to deferve the Epithetes you give them, must have been compofed of Ethicks, as well as of Logick; must have been Reflections on Arguiments only, without any fquinting on Perfons; and muft have confifted of fomething else, than of Ambuscadoes of words, of bold Affertions without Proof, of Evafions in ftead of dire& Answers, of Partial Repetitions, and of Triumphs before the Victory. These are the Arts and Methods of Impofture, used to deceive the Vulgar, but very improper in Inquiries after Truth; and of no Influence, no Operation, in the least, on prudent and more Judicious Difcerners.

Your First Reflection is on the Caution which I gave you, about mif-improving my Conceffion And here, after all the Evafion, Circumlocution, and Wood of Words, in which you think to hide; it is certain ftill, that either thofe Pious and Learned Men, who prove the Baptifm of Infants from their being the Seed of Abraham, do by the Seed of Abraham mean as you and I do, or they do not; and if they do not, as you do not, you dare not fay but they do not; efpecially your Presbyterian Opponents, (of

which I would be principally understood ;) Then fhould you raise a thousand times more Cloud and Duft than you have; yet ftill it would be visible, that all your Fifteen Arguments against Infants being the Spiritual Seed of Abraham in your Senfe, and my Conceffion that they are not fo in that Senfe, do in no degree affect thofe Exceltent and Worthy Perfons: For They taking Spiritual Seed in one Senfe, and You and I in another; They for Perfons of a Religious Confideration, and fome way Holy, and You and I for Actual Believers; though you may think you do oppose them, and alfo that I do; yet indeed you do not; nor 1 neither: for Oppofition must be Secun dum Idem. Ay! But (fay you) the Senfe "in which They call Infants the Spiritual *Seed of Abraham, is a Senfe the Scrip

ture knows nothing of. But, fay I, Whether that be fo or no, is ftill in queftion. between Tou; and were it out of queftion, as you would have it, what were that to me, who neither did, nor do infist on that Argument? But in queftion it is, and like to be fo for all that You, or any of Yours have hitherto faid; nor are They without Scriptural Grounds. For are not the Children of Believing Parents fome ways Christ's? And can they be fo, and no ways

Abra