Truth prevailing against the fiercest opposition being a vindication of Dr. Russel's True narrative of the Portsmouth disputation ... Also, a sermon upon Mat. 28. 19. by Mr. John Williams ... As also An answer to the Presbyterian dialogue, by another hand / published by Mr. John Sharp ... who was moderator at the disputation in Portsmouth.

Here begins the ANIMADVERSIONS of Mr. John Sharp, Minister of the Gospel, and Pastor of the Church of Christ at Froome in Somersetshire, who was Mode∣rator at the Disputation in Portsmouth.

IT may be thought strange that I should appear in this nature to the World, in the matter rela∣ting to our Opposers Disputation and Contro∣versy with Dr. Russel; it is not as tho the said Doctor had any need of my Assistance (and therefore I intend no long Apology) but only for these Reasons following.

1. Because it is the Cause of God, wherein his Truth is eminently concerned.

2. Because our Opposers have condemned our Nar∣rative in that which they allow in themselves in their own Narrative.

3. Because Brother Williams is dead, who was able to have vindicated what he then offered (tho he is now brought in as one then rambling in his Discourse. See their Narrat. p. 59.)

4. Because it is fit that the World should be informed how unfairly they dealt by us, both at the Dispute, and now since in their Narrative.

In these my short Notes I shall not strictly tie my self to this or that particular method, but shall begin first to take notice of their declaring publickly, in the Appendix to their Narrative, p. 64. that we made the first Disturbance; whereas all that were present may remember how they acted towards us, making the first Disturbance themselves: And therefore I do assure

all, where-ever the Narrative may come, that it was not as they relate it; and I am ready to think they themselves might forget it, by having so much busi∣ness upon their hands, or else it must be to make those that are at a distance believe how well they carried it towards us, tho I was forc'd to reprove the People and them too, which I should not have done had they not acted towards us in that manner as they did. I am ready to give my Testimony before a Magistrate, if required, that they themselves did make the first Di∣sturbance. How this might be improv'd against them, I will leave themselves and others to judg, if it were managed by their own Pens. Let them but remember their Deportment towards Mr. Williams when he quoted Erasmus, and seriously reflect upon it. Also I would not have Mr. Leigh forget, when he was charged afterwards with hissing, and he de∣nied it, saying, he did not hiss: Mr. Williams being present, said to him, Sir, You did hiss; he the said Mr. Leigh answer'd and said, It might be an Inter∣jection, making as if it was but a small thing. And tho Mr. Williams is dead, there are those that were present that can give evidence of this; and I my self can give it more fully, as I received it from Mr. John Williams, if there shall be need. But I would beg of you, Mr. Leigh, if you come to read this, that you would not be in an heat, as you were then; for, if you are, much Water will not quench it, if I may say by you as you said (Nar. p. 60.) by Mr. Leddel, you being, as I suppose, concerned in drawing up your Narra∣tive. But must this be your way of ridiculing the Ordinance of Christ (as by us pleaded for?) I did think we should have been better treated at your hands. I mention not this out of any disrespect to you, but that you may be sensible that it is true what is said before, and that you were in the mistake.

Our Opposers may also remember how ready Mr. Robinson was at all times to make Disturbance, saying to Dr. Russel, If you know not how to form your Argument, I will tell you: which the Doctor had no need of, for he offered more than they did know how by any fair and due method to evade, or than ever they will be able to answer. I never perceived that he was at a loss at any time to form his Argument, or to give them an Answer. But Mr. Robinson was so often in this abusive work, that Mr. Bissel said, Gentlemen, Ye do not fair by Dr. Russel, ye ought to give him liberty to offer his Arguments, and when he hath done, then to make the best of them. And, I suppose, it was for this piece of Service, that his Copy was by them afterwards look'd upon to be but as a Lawyers Breviate, containing only hints for Me∣mory, as they slight it. Append. to Nar. p. 56.

Next, when they would have set Mr. Williams and the Doctor at a difference about their different Opi∣nions, Dr. Russel replied, If I am not of his Opinion, I am of yours, Sir, (speaking to Mr. Robinson.) Then Mr. Williams said, If you say an hundred times as much more as you do, you shall not set the Doctor and I to∣gether by the ears: And here they fell a laughing, shewing their Rudeness.

Again, when Dr. Russel gave them the liberty of the whole New Testament to prove Infant sprinkling was any part of the Counsel of God, I said, They might take it any where, from Genesis to the Revela∣tion, if they could but prove it. Hereupon Mr. Ro∣binson rudely said, What, Sir, the New Testament in Genesis? But Mr. Williams replv'd, Yes, Sir, the New Testament is in Genesis: To which he made to An∣swer. And here I will take notice of their words, pag. 66. So that Infants may be baptized, if we can bring good Proof for it out of the other parts of holy

Writ. Here these Gentlemen forgot that there was given them such large liberty to prove their Practice out of any part of the written Word: but, as they did nothing then, so they have done nothing since by their printing, to bring any good Proof for their Infant-sprinkling out of any part of the Old or New Testa∣ment; and therefore I must conclude they cannot find it in Holy Writ: for they have been in their Studies before and since, and they knew what they were to be engaged in; and if they had not been prepared before the Dispute, they should have taken better care since.

Also there was much said upon Mat. 3. 7. and Luke 3. 7. between Mr. Robinson and my self; and if any of their Notaries have taken it (or any thing else that will serve their turn) let them bring it out if they please, yet so as not to wrong me: For I do deny that my Reply, which they have put down, p. 40. was to Mr. Leigh, for it was to Mr. Robinson, and I never spake the words as they are there put down to my wrong; it was so much of it that I did then speak, that I do not remember all that I said to him, but yet this I do remember of the words, That all that appear to be a visible Generation of Vipers ought to be cast out of the Church, that is to say, without they repent. He did confess that they did suspend them for a time: And I replied, By the Rules of Christ such ought to be excommunicated, and they did not act ac∣cording to Rule, if they did not do it.

Further, when upon Acts 15. 10. I spoke, they need not stand so long upon the former part of the Chap∣ter, the 9th Verse would clear who were the Sub∣jects, and repeated the words: Mr. Robinson inter∣rupted me, saying, Sir, where are you now? I re∣plied, If I have transgressed the Rule of a Moderator, I would ask the Peoples Pardon. Thus neither I nor

those of us that were to speak in the Dispute could speak, but he was ready to interrupt us; tho all there present may remember that we acted towards them very soberly: but had we done otherwise, I do not question but you would have heard of it be∣fore now.

They made an Apology of their not being willing to have a publick Dispute before the People; and I having heard something of that the night before, told it to some of our People there: they told me that they would have disputed them in private, if they would have discoursed it according to the Scrip∣ture. When they were thus making their Apology, I replied, that they might have had it in private, if they would have discoursed it according to the Scrip∣tures, and that they had been offered it before we came thither: This they could not deny, and alledged no further; and yet they would plead their Inno∣cency since on purpose to blame us.

Mr. Leigh offered to argue it with me, but I re∣plied, I thought Dr. Russel and Mr. Williams were able to manage their own Arguments, and therefore there was no need of that: Yet I have been heartily sorry since, that I did not offer then to change a plain Proposi∣tion with any of those our Opposers, it being so fair an opportunity to bring you to the Scripture, by which means the People would have had more light into the Truth. And when the Arguments on our part were brought to bear, and were back'd by the Scriptures, I desired our Opposites to grant, or deny, or distin∣guish, or give another sense of the Scriptures, but they would give none.

When Mr. Robinson was giving the aforesaid un∣fair Representation to the People, I desired he would forbear, if not, I would oppose him; and yet he went on (as he used to do in the Dispute) and gave

a further account to the People. I desired him again to desist, and if he would not, I could not, nor would forbear him: but, if he would give the Doctor leave to speak for himself, I would forbear; and so with much ado I did get him to forbear.

When I was called upon to conclude in Prayer, and it was said it was my place, Mr. Robinson would not leave off, but as he began, so he did continue to the end, and said it would be but vain Repetitions if he should: I replied, I would offer no vain Repeti∣tions for them; I hop'd I made Conscience of the Duty of Prayer as much as they did elsewhere, and I would not do it there for them.

And now I would not have them talk too much of their Copy, and condemn others; I would have them to remember, that Mr. Smith was not capable to repeat one of the Doctor's Arguments when he was call'd upon to do it, after that Mr. Liegh had denied one part of it, and the Doctor desired him to repeat it, and he could not do it, which the Doctor improv'd upon him, and said, Do you not know what you deny? And if he fail'd in the present, I know not what he might do afterwards: But I do not question their Abilities to help him out. And as for Mr. Ring's Copy, they pretend in their Narrative to find a mul∣titude of Falshoods, Additions, Alterations and O∣missions in it; but nevertheless it is judged that he is as good a Writer as the other; and as for their Narrative, it will be particularly examined by the Doctor himself; and how many such faults he will find there, our Opposers may judg themselves, that have gone so large as they have done. They have made them speak on our side as mean as ever they can, and as full for their own. But I believe that all who look into the nature of the management of the Matter and the Arguments, will fall in with

those that are most agreeable to the Word of God, and are fairly drawn from thence. For, I hope, all Persons will consider, that if our Opposers had Ar∣guments offered them by such mean Men as they have represented the old Gentleman to be; what would they have done if they had had Men that had been thorowly furnished for that work? The less they make us, I think they make themselves the more mean. Could they not much easier have overturned their Arguments without so many Reflections? Can they think that will credit their Cause, or make them look greater? Doth this agree with that Cha∣racter which the Post-man gave of the Doctor, as op∣posing Infant-Baptism with all the Subtilty and So∣phistry of the Schools? Surely that doth not agree with this diminutive Description they now give of him: They could know little of his Abilities in the sacred Languages, for they did not discourse much at that time out of any of them; and if they had, what advantage would it have been to them to have known one anothers Abilities in the Languages, unless they could have convinc'd him by their Abilities? But tho they profess to have them, neither he nor others that wanted Conviction from them, had it by their giving us one instance of Precept or Precedent for their Practice of sprinkling Infants, instead of baptizing or dipping them when Adult Believers, that it was either commanded or practised by Christ or his Apo∣stles: for I my self should have been glad to have re∣ceived Conviction then or now by their Writing, i•• it have any foundation in the Word of God; and yet it seems they would have us believe it without and blame us for not believing it upon their word We could easily believe it, if it was as easy for then to prove and maintain it, as commanded or grounde•• in the revealed Will of God, to be observ'd an••

practised by them and us. But until I receive such convincing Light and Satisfaction from them out of the Word of God as the Rule for our Practice in this matter, I shall, notwithstanding their Abilities in Languages, and for all what they have said as yet in the Dispute, or written since in their Account of it, continue in the same mind, and the same Practice, when those that believe do tender themselves to be baptized, according to the Practice of the Apostles. If you, Gentlemen, that are our Opposites, or any of you can still convincingly prove, that your Practice has any Precept or Precedent in the Word of God, I will own it to be of Divine Institution: In the mean while this plain Argument for our contrary Faith shall satisfy me.

If Infant-Baptism hath neither Precept nor Prece∣dent in the Word of God, then 'tis not of Divine Insti∣tution:

But Infant-Baptism hath neither Precept nor Prece∣dent in the Word of God;

Therefore it is not of Divine Institution.

When you have prov'd your Practice as we have done ours, then you will have a great many more of your side; and till then, you ought to deal more kindly and fairly by us than you have hitherto done, especially in the Dispute, as I have partly shew'd: and I must needs say, I am afraid you will not hereafter deal so kindly and fairly by us as you should, since you charge the dead with that which is false, and yet pretend to tread softly over his Grave, pag. 62. for immediately in the next words you give us Mr. Far∣rel's Misrepresentation against Mr. Williams (now dead) there are two Witnesses that were with him, and they wrote it down as Mr. Farrel spake it: and I my self had it from the old Gentleman's own mouth in the presence of several Witnesses, together with his

Arguments, and carried them to Dr. Russel; and I have sufficient reason to believe it is true, and that he has abused neither Mr. Francis Williams nor Mr. Farrel in what he has said of them; and all that knew him, did know he was as able as most Men to retain what he had heard, and to give an account of it, but more especially, when others with him took such particular care to put it down in Writing, that they might not be mistaken in any thing afterwards. I believe that poor Story had never come into print, had old Mr. John Williams been living.

Furthermore, I would have the World judg be∣tween us (or at least those that are both judicious and unprejudiced, and so able to judg between us and our Opposites) how that pag. 66. they condemn our Ar∣guments by wholesale, speaking in these words, All the Arguments they offer'd were trifling Cavils. Now I would have you, Readers, to consider, Is not this a very easy way of refuting to condemn all, when they are not able to answer one of them? Ye may see from hence whether it be they or we that did trifle: For in the next foregoing Page you may see how they do particularize the matter, and say it is false (tho what of it is so, those that are concerned in it may look to it, as in the case of Brother Duke.) Now in that Passage (pag. 65) this is to be minded (to observe how well it does agree with what they say elsewhere); they say in these words, But that none of us would re∣fuse to dip a Person in such a case, is true: We never pleaded against dipping as one way, but as the only way; not against its Lawfulness, but Necessity. And yet presently after they tell you, that the Anabaptists Cause does rest on weak unscriptural Principles, how loudly soever they pretend to Scripture. Now I must say, if our Cause, viz. of dipping Believers, be weak and un∣scriptural, they ought then to plead against it, and

refuse the doing of it, which it seems they do not do by their own Confession aforementioned, but on the other hand they in plain words grant its Lawfulness. Now if it be lawful, that is, consistent with, and agreeable to the Command of God and Christ, and the Practice of the Apostles, then it cannot be un∣scriptural, nor our Principles so weak as they would make them in the Eyes of those who are for our Cause, and own our Principles, tho these Men make so loud, a noise against them as weak and unscriptural. We oppose the Principle and Practice of our Anta∣gonists as unscriptural, weak, and unlawful, in so far as it is neither commanded by God or Christ, nor implied as so commanded by any scriptural Precedent. But if they will evade our arguing, and say, as they seem to do in their forecited words, That our Prin∣ciples and Practice of baptizing or dipping Believers is scriptural indeed, but it is not the only scriptural way, but there is a second scriptural way, viz. of dipping those that do not believe, as Infants do not, by the preaching of the Word; and also a third, of sprink∣ling those that do believe, together with Infants that do not believe: and that these other ways are intended in the Command of Christ, and implied by this or that Precedent as commanded, and consequently are as well scriptural ways, as that of dipping Believers is (for this is the Question now between us) I say, if they can prove these other ways as distinct or diffe∣rent from ours, to be also scriptural, i. e. intended in the Command of Christ, and implied by some Precedent in Scripture, let them produce it if they can do it, for they have never done it yet: If they cannot, then theirs shall be their own darling Notion, and they have no reason to charge ours as our dar∣ling Notion, unless they can prove that their bare ipse dixit, or say-so, is sufficient proof against us that

deny it. And indeed we need do no more than to deny this their darling and unscriptural Practice and Notion, till they are able to prove it: Because he that will not only affirm, but also convince another of his Principle and Practice as commanded in Scripture, ought in all reason to prove it to be so, 'ere he can blame another that denies it, that he hugs a darling Notion in his Bosom. Set the case some Papists should blame these Gentlemen that are our Antagonists for disowning the Baptism of Bells as being unscriptural, would it not be sufficient for them to say, that it is no where commanded in Scripture by any express Command, or any Practice that implies such a Com∣mand? And if the other should demand a Prohibi∣tion or Command to the contrary, or else they would continue to blame them as hugging a darling Notion, a weak and unscriptural Principle, would our Opposites not think this very unreasonable and weak? Well then, I do not question their Ability in making the Application in our case: For, if it be good in them, it's so in us.

Further, how do these their Reflections afore∣mentioned, and the Introduction to their Narrative agree together? For in the beginning of that Intro∣duction (which I suppose was penn'd by Mr. Chandler) are these words, Must I again be call'd out to engage in this irksome and unpleasing Controversy? who had much rather spend my time in healing Differences, and provoking all Christians to love one another; and then follow some Expressions of Arch-bishop Tillotson. But O! had he or they taken Dr. Tillotson for their Pattern, to write after his Copy indeed, I am per∣swaded we should have been more fairly and chari∣tably treated by them, or by this Prefacer in parti∣cular than we are. For, we have a Passage cited by the Doctor, p. 59. where that great Man Dr. Til∣lotson

does say, Antiently those who were baptized put off their Garments. Now this saying is so far from ridiculing us or our Practice uncharitably, that it makes for us; for he does not say they exposed their Modesty by putting off their Garments; nor does he there trifle as they do about the Eunuch, p. 81. And whereas in the said Introduction there follows these words, I had much rather be dressing my own Soul for Eternity, and preparing others for those calm and peace∣able Regions, where perfect Charity and Good-will reign for ever, than in fomenting and increasing those Divi∣sions among Christians which are too unmeasurably wide already; I do wish with all my heart all of them had put this desire in execution: I for my part would not have hinder'd them, nor do I know any that would that are concerned on our side in this Controversy, wherein our Antagonists have not only not pressed after that Charity and Good-will the Introduction speaks of, but also (I think) have laid a foundation for a greater Division, unless God by his Power and Providence over-rule our Spirits on both sides: For they have ex∣posed us and the Truth wherein we differ from them, as very ridiculous and trifling: However, the Truth which we believe we cannot part with, we are to buy the Truth and sell it not; and instead of making us to part with it, they have rather given us more ground to believe it to be Truth.

Mr. Chandler, p. 2. begins the Abridgment of his Sermons thus, Here I must unavoidably dip my Pen in the watry Controversy: I love not to meddle with Mat∣ters of Dispute. It is a sign he does not (if I may say so) or else he had not lov'd to meddle with the matter of the Controversy which Dr. Russel had with Mr. Allen about singing; I suppose neither was at his Sermons, and what should make him bring their Con∣troversy in thither, I do not well see, unless he loved

to defame Dr. Russel. He says indeed there, p. 12. that he mentions it to convince Mr. Webber and his Adherents, what a doughty Champion they have chosen for themselves. But you may see thereby the Charity and Good-will he has towards us and Dr. Russel in special, notwithstanding his pretence that he aim'd at some Conviction, tho he might very well know that this exposing Dr. Russel behind his back so publickly about the point of singing, and drolling upon him as a Hackny Disputant, at a time when it did become Mr. Chandler to be more solid and serious, would signify nothing at all for any Conviction in the Point of Baptism. If Dr. Russel had been out in that Point, it will not follow he is in this. However, if Mr. Chandler had not only mentioned Dr. Russel's Argu∣ments in that Point, but also had taken off the strength of his Arguments, Mr. Allen perhaps would have had reason to have given him Thanks for it. To slight them as Mr. Chandler does there, p. 13. by saying, These were the Arguments for want of better he trifled with at Portsmouth, was not to answer them: For, tho Mr. Chandler says in the Page before, that Dr. R. advances the very same Arguments against the Practice of singing Psalms, which he does against theirs for Infant-Baptism; yet he may know in his Conscience there were more, and they were all in my opinion so good against his Practice of Infant-sprinkling, that he was not able to answer them as he should, nor any of the other that were present to help him. But by reason I have told him so before, I needed not to have told it him now again, but that there was some occasion for it; and I might have added, that I think he and his Helpers had rather need to cry to others, Come and help us (as in that 12th Page he has the like words) for the help he has had already, does him little Service to overthrow our Cause, and to

convince Mr. Webber, and his Adherents (as he calls them) out of it* 1.1. But if others are called to assist him, it may do him perhaps more Service, to wit, to moderate him, and make him write more fairly and handsomly of his mistaken Brethren, as he counts us. I wish he had kept to that Lan∣guage, and then we had not had all that Railery, Reflect∣ing, and Trifling that was and is used by him. Mr. Chandler, who was it that trifled with incompleat Disciples, you or we? Who gave Mr. Ridge's matter a full account, you or we? I know, and am satisfied, that the Doctor has given a true account of it, and in his own words, as near as words can be spoken.

I heard a Gentleman say that Mr. Chandler was a Fool, and deserved to be knocked about the Ears; he ought to have accepted the Argument, and given his Instance, which himself would have done if he had been there.

Whatever M., Chandler may suppose, I am sure his refusing to give an Instance upon an universal Ne∣gative (when so often prest to do it) neither made for his own Credit, nor yet for the Credit of his Cause: For, it made others conclude he could not do it, and that if he could, he would have condescended to have done it in so publick an Assembly, if he had been furnished with any to have given. But the plain truth is, as he could not then give us so much as one single Instance for his Practice, so he hath not been able to do it since: for if he could, we should have had it.

For, in a Point of that moment it is a shame for him now to excuse it with this or that Nicety in Disputation, which (whatever he may think) rather shews, that he aims at and strives more for mastery in controverting, than that he himself doth heartily believe his own Practice to be scriptural; for, if he had so done, he would have condescended to any method to clear up that which he preaches for Truth, and pretends to have such a hearty desire to convince us of.

There was another said, he did not understand what was an incompleat Disciple of Christ; and yet he is one that understands an Argument (in my opi∣nion) as well as Mr. Chandler, tho he did not then walk with us, nor the other neither. His incompleat Disciples are such as the Scripture never taught him to call so; and (I think) Mr. Chandler is grosly mistaken to suppose he has by this trifling Distinction salv'd the Credit of his absurd way of vindicating his Practice, and thereby evaded the strength of our Arguments: For, they that are serious and judicious Christians can easily discern it to be a fallacious and evasive shift, to cast a Veil over the Minds of those that are ignorant of this Controversy, and do not allow themselves the liberty to examine it: For it is wholly unscriptural, and groundless, and imperti∣nent, as it is applied by him in the Case under Consi∣deration.

But further: What a stir do these Men make about the word equivocable: If there were two Letters ad∣ded at the Press, or (to suppose the worst) that it were wrong spelt, it had been the Corrector's place to have mended it. It was very much there had not been more than one Error in mispelling in the Doctor's Narrative; for it's too common a fault in printing. And it is to be observ'd, that there is no Errata made

to the Doctor's, there being few or no faults in it. But they were forced to make an Errata at the end of their own Book, which (by their own Confession) hath more Errors in it than they have noted, which they excuse by saying, they can create no difficulty to an intelligent Reader: And they also tell us of several Letters dropt out in working, &c. which if any complain of, they may charge it partly on the different Inclination of the Corrector, and partly on the difficulty of bringing our common Printers to any Exactness.

If by a Corrector of a different Inclination they mean a Baptist, the Doctor saith he doth not believe it; for (if he be not misinformed) he is a Man of their Perswasion in the Point in Controversy: But this he is certain of, that the Gentleman who cor∣rected his Copy when at the Press, is a zealous Mem∣ber of the Church of England, and (to his know∣ledg) a Contender for Infant-Baptism; and yet he must give him this Character, that he was very faith∣ful to the Trust reposed in him. But an oversight may be by the best of Men: But he is under a disad∣vantage about it where to charge it, because the written Copy was never returned. But it is so insig∣nificant a Trifle to what (they confess) is in their own, that it's not worth contending about: And certainly it deserved no such ridiculous and base descanting on it, as to call it a word of the famous Doctor's own coining, with other Expressions which they in their Spleen have vented against him. Is this their Chari∣ty and Good-will towards us? Surely, a little Cha∣rity would have serv'd to have excused so inconside∣rable a fault; especially, when they only guess that he was chargeable with it; not knowing but it might be an Error of the Press, seeing there were so many in their own which they boldly charge upon the Cor∣rector and Printer.

But they have not yet done with it; for they say, if he intend equivocal Expressions, they are his own peculiar Talent: Perhaps few Jesuits herein equal or exceed him at that sort of Weapon. I cannot but wonder (Gentlemen) that you should thus proceed in this manner, what can it be that thus moves you to speak against the Doctor? Doth this agree with that Charity you speak of (to those you call mistaken Brethren) in the beginning of your Book? Can you think that he deserved that Character from you (when you call to mind with what coolness of Spirit, and evenness of Temper he behaved himself, during the whole time of the Disputation) I appeal to your own Consciences whether you think he deserved such an uncharitable Insinuation and severe Reflection? Doth this also agree with Mr. Chandler's short Re∣quest, p. 2. that God would grant that Truth may prevail? Surely, this doth not shew you had any de∣sign it should prevail upon the Doctor, and upon us, either then or since; for your Practice contradicts your Expressions hitherto. I know not what you may do for time to come: But if you go on as you have begun, I fear you may give the Government occasion to repent of allowing the liberty you speak of: At least you may have cause to repent of allowing your selves such a liberty as ye do against us.

Who was it that trifled about the Mother of our Lord being a Believer, you or we? And who fairly improved it to the World, you or we? What reason had Mr. Leigh to allow the Eunuch to be a Christian, and consider him as such, altho (as he faith) he was but a Proselyte of the Gate? And yet in p. 31. to deny (in his sense) the Virgin Mary to be a Christi∣an, and represent her a Jew, distinct from that of a Christian, and that Christianity in that sense had then no being. There were many Believers in Christ

throughout the several Ages of the World, both be∣fore the Jewish Oeconomy, as well under it, witness Enoch the 7th from Adam, who prophesied of him, Jude 14, 15. And were not Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, with all the rest mentioned in Heb. 11. with many others, true Believers in Christ? This you know is not to be denied. And are not all true Believers in Christ real Christians? And shall the Mother of our Lord be denied this Appellation? when the holy Scripture calls her a Believer in Christ, Luke 2. from v. 30, to v. 35. where it is thus written, And blessed is she that hath believed: And Mr. Leigh then con∣fessed it.

The Answer therefore Mr. Williams gave to your Demand was good and proper, altho you thus trifle with it since, and change the word from what was then spoken: For, by what hath been said you may see that if it had been the word Christian, as it was not, yet if she was a Believer, then a Christian; for all true Believers in Christ, whether Jews or Gentiles, are Disciples; and you know the Disciples were called Christians. And altho that Name was first given at Antioch, yet they had the thing before the Name was brought into use, and imposed upon them.

And altho they then offered, upon giving you such an instance, to give us the Cause: Yet I do not think they were willing either then or now to give it us, for they have no mind to part with their Practice; for, if they had, they would not have used such poor shifts as they have done to support it. And amongst other Artifices they have made use of, this was one, to send a Certificate (before their Book was printed) down to Froome by the hands of Tho∣mas Smithwick and Hugh Wats; and I doubt not but the Men are so honest, that they would not bring such a thing, if it had not been given them so to do:

And the World shall have it in the same words as I had it delivered to me in my own House.

Mr. Chandler's and Mr. Leigh's Certificate.

THese are to certify all whom it may concern, That Dr. Russel's Narrative of the Portsmouth Disputation is full of palpable notorious Falshoods, and that there are many Alterations, Additions and Omissions, even from Mr. Samuel Ring's own Co∣py which he hath honestly given to us. We can procure the hands of vast numbers both of the Church of England and Dissenters, and some Ana∣baptists themselves, that will acknowledg we ob∣tain'd an intire Victory. The Governor and Mayor have promised their Testimonials, but being both now at London, we cannot send them at present, but shall publish with all convenient speed a full Answer to Dr. Russel's Book, with the Attestations of the principal Gentlemen present: Therefore we humbly desire all Persons would suspend their Judg∣ment of this matter till they have a view of our Answer.

Signed by

• Sam. Chandler,
• Will. Leigh.

Portsmouth, June 1. 1699.

And now I hope, Reader, that Mr. Chandler and Mr. Leigh will not be angry for spending our Judg∣ment upon their Narrative, themselves giving us that liberty, as (I suppose) is implied by this Certificate: For, altho it was sent to their own Friends, yet it being directed to all whom it may concern, I have reason to think it concerns me. But I am sure it did concern them to make it appear that the Doctor's Nar∣rative was such as they have represented it to be,

which I am certain they have not yet done. Had they procured those vast numbers both of the Church of England and Dissenters, and also some Anabaptists (as they are pleased to call us, tho they know we disown both the Name and the Thing thereby signi∣fied) that would have acknowledged under their hands, that our Antagonists had obtained an intire Victory; and if upon examination they had been found to be Persons of Credit and Reputation, such as they promise by their Certificate, then they would have gained more by that, than they have done by all those undue Reflections they have cast upon us: For, such a course of Procedure serves rather to convince the sober and judicious, that they have taken this method to blast our Reputation, because they knew not how otherwise to evade the force of our Argu∣ments against them, nor to justify their own Practice of Infant-sprinkling: for that had been their proper business, if they could have done it.

They say in their Certificate, the Governor and Mayor have promised their Testimonials. The Mayor's we have not, nor yet the Governor's, to any thing more than what relates to that first Advertisment that was put into the Post-man; and I expected they would have done as they promised. Gentlemen, will you thus adventure to charge the Governor and Mayor with Promise-breaking? I think that to be worse than to give his Honour a diminutive Title (as you phrase it) And to give the Mayor a Title that is thought (by some) to be above him. That will not repair the damage he may sustain in being represented by you as a Promise-breaker. But I think he is more a Man than to do such a thing as that, notwithstanding what you say in your Certificate.

As touching Colonel Gibson I do, and shall thank his Honour for staying till the Dispute was ended;

and also those Gentlemen that perswaded him to it, if that which is said be true, that they told him, if he went off there was danger lest the provoked Mul∣titude should do Dr. Russel some mischief: But this (like other things) depends upon their bare Affirma∣tion, and how much Credit may from thence be given to it, we must leave to the Reader to consider. For my own part, I have so much Charity for the Church-of-England People there present, that I cannot think, by any thing I could observe, that they had the least inclination to do the Doctor any Mischief. And as for our own People, I am sure they had no cause for it, if we take the Doctor's Argument as it is in it self, se∣parate from Mr. Robinson's perverse Misconstruction and Misrepresentation of it. But as the Doctor did, so (we hope) we also know better things than what Mr. Robinson hath abusively put upon the Doctor's words: For we can and do make a difference between the nature of our Children, and that of Pigs and Dogs. But it is their business, and Mr. Robinson's in particu∣lar, to make a difference between what God can do in an extraordinary manner by his immediat opera∣tion upon Infants; and what can be done for, and upon them mediately, by the Ministry of Men, and that before they have the use and exercise of Reason: For they know his Argument was this,

If Infants are capable to be made Disciples of Christ by the Ministry of Men, without the use of Reason; then the Beasts of the Field are also capable.

But the Beasts of the Field are not capable:

Therefore Infants are not capable.

Now, as I may appeal to the judgment of all so∣ber, judicious and unprejudiced Christians about this Argument, without supposing that any of them will put such a Construction upon it as Mr. Robinson hath done, that it carries with it a full Comparison with∣out

exception, betwixt the Human Nature of Infants, and the beastly Nature of Brutes; when they do but consider that it was used by way of Retortion only: So I may also appeal to the Consciences of Mr. Ro∣binson and his Assistants, whether they could possibly imagine from hence, that the honest intent and mean∣ing of Dr. Russel's Argument was such as they repre∣sented it to be, in pag. 75. of their Book: As having thereby set our Infants upon a level with Brutes, and that there is no difference between our Children and our Dogs; and this to be his fixed Opinion, as they express it: And this after he had declared himself so fully to the contrary in his printed Narrative. For, altho they might pretend to have forgot what he said about it in the Dispute; or, their Passion might have hinder'd their Understandings from being imployed as they ought in their attendance upon it; yet when they had it before them in print, wherein he hath vindicated himself from such a Misconstruction, I cannot see but they must needs know his true intent and meaning therein.

And, for my part, I believe all that read this Argu∣ment, and consider what the Doctor hath said about Infants, will be of my mind: Especially if they con∣sider what Mr. Williams said concerning Infants, That they had a Right and Title to Glory by the free Grace of God, and the Righteousness of Christ. And let me add but one thing, that they are made meet for it by the work of the Spirit, which (to us) is altogether secret. But it never came into our Hearts to imagine any such Priviledges to be intended as a Donation for the Beasts of the Field.

And if after all this, these Men shall still persist in it, and charge either the Doctor (or any of us) as they do him in their Narrative, that it is our fixed opinion, that there is no disparity, no difference, no

unlikeness at all between our Infants and the Beasts of the Fields, notwithstanding all that hath been said by us to the contrary, how can we help it? But this I desire the Reader to observe, that in pag. 76. where these words are, there are also words which they cite out of his Apology, that will testify in their Consciences that he allowed a disparity: And that the Parity implied in his Argument was only in a certain respect, as hath been already mentioned. But what may not Uncharitableness and Ill-will do, when such Men are resolved to pervert the words of him they contend with? And altho you talk never so highly of your Charity in the beginning of your Book, yet your Words and Actions to the contrary make it ap∣pear to be no other than an empty sound. For, a small measure of true Christian Charity would have enabled you to discern that gross Uncharitableness and Ill-will against the Doctor, which you have so often discovered in your Reflections on his Narra∣tive.

What mischief therefore it should be supposed the Multitude should do the Doctor (as you intimate, pag. 75, 76.) I know not; nor yet from whom it should come, unless from your own Party: For the rest of the People were very civil to us, they made no disturbance at our going off, nor any attempts when we were in the Street; altho all the thanks they have from you is, to call them the provok'd Multi∣tude. Whereas, if it had been true, the blame must have lain upon Mr. Robinson, who did use his Endea∣vour to provoke them; but as it was altogether with∣out cause on our part, so it proved to be without success with respect to the People, who departed in a quiet and peaceable manner.

The Church of England hath less reason to be of¦fended with us than with you: for, we deny nothi••••

to their Children, that we allow our selves to do for our own. If their Children are sick, we pray for them, if desired, &c. But it is you that put an affront upon those of that Communion by your Practice: For, whereas you say you baptize the Children of Believers, consider'd as such; and yet some of your Party have made some scruple of baptizing those whose Parents are not Members with you (as I have been inform'd) Do you think that all Parents in the Church of England are Unbelievers? And altho you profess to have a large latitude, it may be more than others of your Brethren; yet you do not often bap∣tize their Children, which gives some seeming inti∣mation, as if you made such a distinction betwixt your Children and theirs.

For our parts, we look upon our Children to have no more from us by Generation, than the Children of others have from them. And I dare not say (as you intimate in your Book) that the Line of Election runs to the Believers Seed. For, I know many that have been converted, and yet their Parents (to all visible appearance) were unconverted. Nay, the Children have been instrumental in the hand of God, for the good of their Parents: And (on the contrary) some Godly Parents have had very Ungodly Chil∣dren, to the great grief and sorrow of their Souls.

Now therefore, if there was any cause for the Multitude (as you call them) to be offended, it is most likely to be at what you said (and not what the Doctor then said) that you should look upon them as Unbelievers; for so you do by your Practice and Writing, tho other things are pretended by you.

I would not have any think I am against the Do∣ctrine of Election, I hope I own it as a Truth: And when your Children and mine come to be regenerated, it is a sure Character they were elected. And where∣as

you talk of the Parents Faith being imputed to their Children; I must tell you plainly, I have heard of the Righteousness of Christ being imputed, but never that the Faith of the Parent was imputed to the Children before. It may be you will say, you do but suppose it; or, why may it not be so? It's the same method indeed that Mr. Chandler takes in his Sermons: But in my judgment, it is a way to make Men turn Atheists and Deists, and to ridicule all Re∣vealed Religion, to make the holy Scriptures a nose of Wax, to serve your turns. I beg of you for time to come, to leave off such ways and methods, and to argue upon a firm and more certain Foundation.

But you proceed further in your Certificate, and say you will give a full Answer to Dr. Russel's Book.

If you had perform'd your Promise herein (as you have not) I do believe I should have been of your mind.

Neither have you been so good as your word in giving us the Attestations of the principal Gentlemen then present at your intire Victory, unless by them you mean Mr. Smith, Mr. Maultbey, and Mr. Will. Wallen, whom you produce as Witnesses in your Book: And if so, how can these be the princi∣pal Gentlemen present? And if they are, where be the Attestations under their hands, that you obtained an intire Victory at the Dispute? Or, is there any else hath done it? We find no such in your Book. I would have you that are so rigid in charging Dr. Russel's Narrative as false, by reason of some Omis∣sions (as you say) in it; (whereas he was not willing, if he could have done it, to trouble the World with all those passionate Expressions that past from Mr. Ro∣binson, or others, that were of little concern to the World, lest he should have made it swell into too great a Volume; even as I my self think it not convenient

to make this my Writing swell with the several Re∣marks that might be made on many other Passages of your Book, lest it be made too chargeable for the Purses of our poor People.) I would, I sav, have you and others consider whether the same Objection doth not fall as heavy upon your selves, seeing you have not performed your Promise under your hands, but have omitted to give us those Testimonials: But I suppose you were not able to obtain such a Testi∣mony from those Gentlemen, or else we should have had it in your Book.

But there is one thing I would remark, which is this, That in p. 70. of your Narrative, you use this Expression, That false Lie. Now altho I do not allow your Charge to be true, yet suppose it had, could not you, by all your Learning and Skill, have found out an Expression less liable to exception? Pray, Sirs, when did you ever read or hear of a true Lie, that you tell the World this is a false Lie? Are there any Lies that are not false? Now I think this de∣serves as much notice as that of the addition of a Letter, and much more. And yet how strangely did you improve that against the Doctor: But I shall not deal so by you.

Thus, Reader, I hope I have made it appear how our Antagonists have no reason to boast so boldly as they have done of a Victory at the Dispute. But whereas on the other hand, they charge it as an egre∣gious Falshood on Dr. Russel, p. 64. as if he had boldly published amongst and by his Friends in London (tho not in his Narrative) that he, to put it out of doubt, and his Friends had carried the day at Portsmouth, added, the Bishop of Salisbury had received a Letter from Colonel GIBSON, wherein he applauded our Performance. Now for the undeceiving of the World I think good further to add, that I charged the

Doctor with this Report (for which his said Enemies call him in the place aforecited, a Falsifier of Reports) but he told me he never said so, nor thought so, and therefore it must rest upon the Asserter, till he can bring forth his Evidence that the Doctor said so, and that it was from thence that such a Report has spread abroad. However, this may serve as another In∣stance of their Spleen and Virulency against him, and how eager they are to snatch at any thing to asperse him, and to render him little, yea to de∣grade him in the highest manner. And hence it is that they cannot forbear to trifle with his being a Gra∣duate, as in the last quoted Page: Wherefore for the satisfaction of some Persons that may have read their Reflections on him and his Degree, I shall here add the Certificate following, together with some other Certificates that I have lately procured, or have been sent to me out of the Country.

WHereas it is render'd doubtful by the Presby∣terian Ministers in their account of the Ports∣mouth Disputation, whether William Russel be a Gra∣duate Doctor in Physick of the famous University of Cambridg: These are to certify whom it may concern, that we whose Names are under-written have seen his Diploma, with the Seal of that Uni∣versity thereunto affixed; and concluding with these words,

Dat. Cantabr. in Senatu nostro. Given in our Senate at Cambridg, June 11. 1688.

Wit∣ness our Hands,

• William Salmon,
• Francis Salmon,
• John Wells,
• James Halsey,
• Edward Jarvis,
• John Sharpe.

I have also seen a Book, entituled, A Register of the Doctors of Physick in our two Ʋniversities of Cambridg

and Oxford, Printed Anno 1695. diligently and carefully collected out of the Registers of both those Universities; beginning at 1659. and ending with 1694 inclusive: With the Names of those that were created Doctors in Physick during that time (which is 35 years) placed both in an Annual and Alphabetical Order. In both which I find Dr. William Russel's Name inserted in its due place and order.

From whence it is evident that Dr. Russel is in the right, and themselves in the wrong: And also it serves to discover another mistake of theirs, which they (through their ignorance) charge upon him, viz. for saying the Senate at Cambridg, which they call a word of his own coining, and do greatly ridicule him for it; whereas it appears by his own Diploma, that the Vice-Chancellor, Doctors and Heads of Colle∣ges, &c. (when assembled) do call themselves a Se∣nate.

Besides, the Doctor doth assure me that the King's Letter was thus directed: To our Trusty and Well-beloved, the Vice-Chancellor of our University of Cambridg, to be communicated to the Senate there.

So that it appears to me it is the common Appella∣tion given to them (as that of Convocation else-where) altho these Men are so ignorant as not to know it, or so malicious against the Doctor, as not to allow it him. It therefore gives cause of doubting, whether either of them ever saw (in a true and proper sense) the inside of any University in their Lives.

Here follows Mr. Bowes's Letter, wherein he hath vindicated himself from Mr. Chandler's unjust and scandalous Reflections.

From Stubinton, Sept. 29th, 1699.

Much honoured and beloved Brother Russel, to whom Grace, Mercy and Peace be multiplied, through our Lord Jesus Christ.

THese Lines come from your Brother in the Faith of our Lord Jesus, Thomas Bowes, and are to inform you of the horrid Falsities that are inserted in Mr. Chandler's pretended Narra∣tive, which he would fain have the World believe is impartial, tho indeed it is no such thing: which I hope will evidently appear to all Men who are not pre∣judiced, especially when the falseness of what he hath writ concerning me and others is made manifest.

For if he will adventure so grosly to belie his Neigh∣bours, who can disprove him, and have opposed him to his face; no wonder if he belie the Dispute it self, and the Disputants, rather than hazard his own In∣terest, which seemeth to lie at stake.

I shall now give you an account of those things in particular concerning me, which may be found in his Book, that are most notoriously false. And take them as followeth, viz.

In his Introduction near the latter end, he is bold to assert, That I and my Party did suspend from our Communion one Isaac Harman a Joyner, for hear∣ing Mr. Webber, which is horridly false: For there was never any such-thing acted by me and my Party in this World towards that young Man, nor any other Person, for going to hear Mr. Webber.

This Man hath but little regard to Truth it self, that he can boldly charge this notorious Falshood upon me and my Party, without being able to pro∣duce his Author for it, when it was required of him. He hath indeed confidently asserted, that the young Man told him so himself. But the truth of this is like some of the rest of his impartial Narrative.

For the young Man went himself, with one of our Friends with him, to the Meeting where Mr. Chand∣ler had been preaching, and there charged him with the falsness of what he had written, to his face be∣fore many of his Hearers; and did then offer to attest upon Oath, that he never had one word of Discourse with him in all his life time, neither about that nor any thing else.

And Mr. Chandler did consess before those then present, that he could not say he had.

Yet so unchristian-like was their Carriage to him, that at his first appearance Mr. Williams, the Presby∣terian Minister, bawl'd out, and said, Where is this Man that fears neither God nor Devil?

To whom the young Man replied, that he had a Soul to be saved as well as Mr. Williams, and did fear God as well as himself.

But that well qualified Man Mr. Chandler, did in his fury lay hands on him in such sort, that his own Hearers cry'd out, Pray Mr. Chandler do not strike him.

But alas! this great flood of Heat was soon turn'd into the cold ebb of Dissimulation, when they saw that way of stirring made them stink.

For the next Evening Mr. Williams sent one of his Hearers to Isaac Harman, and desired him that he would come to his House, and have some talk with him in a moderate way; and did acknowledg he was sorry that he should carry himself in such a

passionate way to him the night before.

To this the young Man complied, and went to his House, where Mr. Williams treated him with many hollow Compliments. Now it was, Mr. Harman: But the night before he cried out, that he neither feared God nor Devil.

But when he saw he could not obtain his end by Flattery, he told the young Man he would have him put into the Post-Boy.

But I wonder Mr. Chandler should be so forward to ride Post, since the baseness of his Horse, and his own Infirmities have so often brought him to the ground.

But again, in his Introduction he is pleased to charge me with no less than four more as great Lies as is possible for any Man to pen. For,

1. He asserteth, that I applied my self to Mr. Ring for a sight of those Sermons which he had writ; which is utterly false.

2. He is bold to say that I read them, which is a horrid Falshood; for I never read them in all my life time.

3. He saith, I having read them, spake words to this effect, viz. That if we suffer Mr. Chandler thus to go on, it will prejudice our Cause.

But this is as false as any of the rest: For I never spake those words to Mr. Ring, no, nor to that effect; which Mr. Ring must witness, if he be not biass'd, and will but speak the Truth: But if he will not, they that were with me at that time will justify that I spake no such words, nor to that effect. And it is as false that Mr. Ring replied, Mr. Chandler takes but the same liberty in his own Congregation that we do in ours; for he never replied so to me. But (perhaps) Mr. Ring will give him leave to bely him and the Truth it self, rather than by opposing him hazard

his own Interest, and the loss of a Place at his Lecture. But I shall not give him leave so to bely me, tho indeed he hath the Confidence to take it.

4. And lastly; (tho indeed these are not all the Lies he is guilty of concerning me; yet, I hope, it will be the last time he will venture so grosly to abuse me, and so greatly to sin against God) Mr. Chandler doth also tell the World, that I was a Man dissatisfied, and went over to Gosport to Mr. Webber, which is a notorious Lie; for I never went to Mr. Webber, nor ever sent to him about the Disputation first nor last: Yet this Man would have the World believe that what he hath written is Truth, and so deceive himself and them too (in the end) that hearken to him: For nothing can be more false concerning me, than what he hath writ for Truth; and therefore I shall charge those Lies upon Mr. Chandler as some of his own inventing, till he doth produce his Authors, which (I believe) is as hard to bring forth, as the young Man that told him he was suspended, and asked his Advice about it; for as yet he is invisible.

And I cannot imagine where he will find Authors for such Forgeries, unless he bespeak them. For I can attest upon Oath that all those things are utterly false and groundless, and therefore ought not to be called Mistakes unless there had been something in them.

Again, he is also pleased to say, that if I could believe the Doctrine of Original Sin, as they believe it, I should think Infants had need of Baptism: And, that I wonder'd that the People at Gosport should be against it.

Now whatever I did say, I can safely declare that I never spake what Mr. Chandler hath written: And so I told him to his face, and did offer to make my Oath of it.

For if I had said what they have written, I should have wronged my own Conscience, in saying that which I did not then believe, nor do yet believe; but I am sure that he hath wronged himself and me also, in saying and writing that which I did not, nor could not speak.

But alas! any thing that does but drop from the Goose-quill of this Man (tho it be never so false) is good enough to please those that follow him; with whom I leave him till the Judgment Day of the great God, where he and I must give account of all things.

But if he in the mean time hath any thing to object, I am his Neighbour, and shall be ready to make good what I have charged upon him, by more than a single Testimony. Witness my hand,

Thomas Bowes.

Here follows a further Testimony, signed by the principal Brethren of the Church at Portsmouth, to prove Mr. Chandler a false Accuser in what he hath printed about Isaac Harman.

WE whose Names are under-written do testify, That Isaac Harman was not suspended from our Communion for hearing Mr. Webber preach, nor for any thing else. Witness our hands,

• Thomas Bowes,
• Isaac Harman,
• Edward Fishbourn,
• James Goodeve,
• William Oakely,
• Walter Addis,
• George Kelley.

Notes

• * 1.1

  But I hope Mr. Web∣ber is not to be taken off from the Truth he hath owned by their ridiculing the Doctor and his Argu∣ments, nor to continue in that wherein he hath not sufficient warrant to bear him out in the Word of God. I hope Mr. Web∣ber is not so easy a Man as to be thus prevailed upon by him.