A Just Provocation of Master Tombes

A Provocation of Master Tombes, to make good his charge, &c.

MAster Tombes met with my book and read it, and beginneth with the title as though he would answer it, but after he findeth an excuse, why he should not; he only findeth some few absurdities, which had they been faulty, as he pretendeth, might have better excused him for slighting the rest: but if those which he findeth fault with, be unjustly called absurdities and errors, the general will appear to be unjust, until he answer the book: I shall first clear myself of those faults which he chargeth upon me.

The first is, that I called his exercitation scepticke, which he clecreth, by setting down out of Gellius, that a scepticke determineth nothing but always stands considering and seeking, which he proves to be unduly placed upon his exercitation, because Mr M • rshall saith, he is too confident: and because his examen is positive: what if Master Marshall upon some occasion doth accuse Master Tombes of too much confidence? is not his exercitation therefore scepticke? may not Master Tombes in some things be too confident, and yet his exercitation remain skeptical? or is this a good argument, to prove his exercitation not skeptical, because his examen is positive? he confesseth, that he did propose his thoughts in his exercitaion to the Committee of the Assembly (as he conceived befitting him) under the for •… of doubts: I blame him not for being doubtful, I wish he had continued doubtful still, until he had received satisfaction: but I say as he confesseth, his exercitation was skeptical and doubtful, but do I therefore accuse him of adhering to nothing in sense, reason, or faith, he saith, (if I understood what I say) by saying that his exercitation is scepticke, I do so accuse him: but if he understood what he said, he would not say so, what is an argument a particulari ad universal good; Mr Tombes is scepticke in his exercitation therefore in everything? Mr Tombes his exercitation and examen are against Paedobaptists, therefore every Sermon he maketh, every word he speaketh, is against Paedobaptists, were no good argument; but Master Tombes saith, he could give better reason, to call me fantasticke, then I bring for this new name I pin on him: truly, I brought no reason for calling it scepticke, it was notum per se, it was doubtful, all men at first view may perceive, and Master Tombes is constrained to confess it; neither doth he bring any reason for his denial, but the grossest and most illiterate folly in the world, there is not show enough to make it a fallacy, because his examen is not, his exercitation is not scepticke, but when he doth bring forth those reasons he can to prove me fantasticke by, he shall have answers, or thanks for disclosing my infirmity to me; I will not serve him, as he doth me; rail at his arguments, I dare not touch.

I term my book satisfaction to his exercitation, I intended it so, and I hope it will prove so to the judgment of the learned, though Master Tombes will take none: because he was not skeptical at first, but a confirmed Heretic, and an Hypocrite, appearing under doubtful terms; and had I known the deceiptfulnesse of Master Tombes's heart, I would not have graced his book with the name of scepticke, to be doubtful in matters of error, is far better then to be positive; so the word scepticke was given in favor, not in malice; from sound reason, not fancy, whatsoever Master Tombes saith. For my book, I hope it shall not, disgrace the judicious Licenser, but I shall get from the Licenser of your book, and yourself, better satisfaction by the Lord's and Commons (that sit to do us all justice) then to bespatter you with some few flashing words.

I conceive I have stated up the question out of Scripture so, as may make all Anabaptists seal up their mouths (as it hath already sealed up yours) you find some passages something varying from the common tenet which you represent to the common view, without entering into the state of the question, requiring it or considering the strength of the arguments that prove it, or the Scriptures that evince it: whatsoever I have affirmed in my book that you have not answered, I shall endeavor to make good, when I shall receive a just call so to do; In the mean time I address myself to answer what Master Tombes further saith against me.

Having repeated sundry passages of my book, he falleth upon some small confutation, his words are. Nor do I think the principal grounds of his new fancy will satisfy; that, Matth. 28.19, is thus to be expounded, make Disciples by baptizing, and teaching them; whereas he himself sundry times readeth it better, make Disciples of all Nations baptizing them, and it is vainly alleged that [by] is implied in the participiall expression anymore then 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 must be expounded, he met them by saying, or Math. 27.55. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they followed by ministering unto him, and I said justly Examen pag. 127. this conceit is so absurd, that I presume none that hath any Wit will entertain it, though Master Hussey say pag. 6. I think, if ever a man were out of his Wit, it was here; but I shall be willing the Assembly judge whether of us two need sail to Anticyra, to purge our brains. After a long collection of many words here and there in my book, which he representeth as absurd, (whereas my new conceits, as he hath observed them are sundry, and have their several grounds which he concealeth,) he saith the principal grounds of my conceit is, that the 28. of Math. 19. ought to be expounded, make Disciples by baptizing them, though I sundry times read it better. I never read the words so, but it is true in the stating the question I did take the liberty of an answerer to expound them so, make Disciples baptizing them, make Disciples by baptizing them; which I said was implied in the participiall expression, wherein I am confident the best Grammarians will bear me out. Clenard medit. Gracanic •… , pag. 281.40. participium vary redditur nune adversum quiddam indicans, nunc causam explicans, preinde quae participiae Gracia efferuntur nos latiui • ate donavimus per ejusmedi conjunctionem quae commodissime facit ad sensum.

The participle, ye see is variously rendered; sometimes it doth declare the cause, and if the participle do express the cause, then the cause may be expounded by the word [by,] and if in rendering Greek into Latin we may express the Greek participle by any conjunction that the sense will be are; why may we not express it by a preposition, that the sense will bear? the word conjunction in some latitude of Language may be called a preposition, a word joined to fill up the sense; which when the participle doth signify the cause as here it may, the formal cause of making Disciples; why may it not be rendered by [by] scire est per causam scire? I said it might signify modum agendi, this I have liberty to do, as an answerer to interpret Scripture as I please; if I do it as the words will not bear, Master Tombes hath his liberty to confute it by an argument: but see how Master Tombes doth confute it, by alleging two places of Scripture, where he conceiveth the participle may not conveniently be rendered by [by:] now see the strength of this confutation, participium saith Clenard, vary redditur: a participle is variously rendered, the participle cannot be rendered by [by] in Mr Tombes his assigned places, therefore nowhere, therefore not in the place by me interpreted; this is to take away Clenards rule, and the variety of rendering participles, if participles be variously rendered, then in some places they are rendered one way; in other places another, or else there can be no variety: Master Tombes therefore must find out some better argument, to prove that the participle may not be rendered by [by:] besides that, I said the participle might signify modum agendi, and even in the places alleged by Mr Tombes, the participles do signify the manner of doing. Jesus met them saying, all hayl doth not this saying all hail enter into the manner of the congresse, if the meeting of any 2 persons should be historically related, would not the history be lame if their conference were left out? & for that of Mat. 27.55. they followed him ministering unto him: doth not this ministering unto him signify the manner of their following him? that they followed him not directing him that had been as guides, or masters; but ministering as friends or servants helping him to such things as he stood in need of, 〈◊〉 doing such things fo • him as he required. Masters do use to follow their servants, to look to them in their work; and servants their masters, to minister unto them; and these followings (do differ) modo agendi, they are different followings: but I am not so straitly tied up, that if in this place the participle do signify, [by] that it must so signify in all places; but Master Tombes saith, that it was so feolish, that none would entertain it that hath any Wit: to which I said in my book, that Master Tomb • s, notwithstanding he had said, none would entertain it that hath any Wit; yet he proveth it no better then by saying, if this were true, they need only baptize them, and not teach them: notwithstanding Christ commanded both to baptize them, and teach them; and for this I said, if any were out of his Wit, it was here; and this willingly I refer to the Assembly, whether any but he, that were out of his Wit could affirm, that if Christ command to baptize and teach, it were sufficient to baptize, or that they need only baptize; is a command containing diverse things in conjunctive terms, executed by performing one part alone, and leaving the other part undone. I hope the Assembly will do us that right, to judge which of us two are out of our Wit, for one of us must needs be unadvised. Master Tombes talketh of a purge, to purge his brain; certainly he is full of fowl matter, for he vomiteth much bitterness, and black calumnies against me: my book is nothing but mistakes, sure he is sick, he cannot speak sense; he is light headed, it is the strength of his disease; he divideth my mistakes, into mistakes in Logic, Divinity, and sometimes in Grammar, but most of all of his meaning, and scope of his words, and strength of his arguments. See here be four kinds of mistakes, Logic, Divinity and Grammar, he meaneth sure English Grammar, by the mistake of the Printer; or haste in the business; but the foulest is, in his meaning, scope of his words, force of his arguments, it seemeth he hath a sense, and his arguments have a force, that neither Grammar, Logic, nor Divinity can find cut: what kind of words and arguments be these that a man may miss in, when he doth not miss either in Grammar or in Logic (let Divinity alone) Rhetorical arguments have no strength, but as they may be reduced to Logic?

Surely, if he have any such meanings in his arguments, that Logic cannot find out, I may be mistaken in them; and such is the sense of some of them: for, by rules of Logic they have no sense at all, as I have made plainly appear; but let me tell Mr Tombes, his general charges be illegal, and not allowable in any civil commerce, and costs are justly awarded, and loss of his cause, against any that layeth only general charges in declaration against an adversary, as your neighbor-Lawyers will tell you: you are bound in common right, to give me satisfaction, and convict me of these mistakes; when you tell the world, that know not what Logic, Grammar and Divinity meaneth; that my book is nothingelse but such mistakes: or else men of judgment must condemn Master Tombes for a senseless ignorant railer; but let Master Tombes candidly show any mistakes in Logic, or any of these on which the state of the question doth depend, and I shall love him, and thank him for his labor: Mr Tombes telleth me that I end with a challenge to him, but he maketh more account of his time, then to answer my wild notions: truly it seemeth my notions are too wild for him, to catch; such as will cast their rider if he be an Antepaedobaptist. If he had let them alone, and not railed at them, he might have chosen whether he would have answered them or no; but now he is bound in reason and charity, to make his general charges good in particular. Answer them, perhaps he will not, because he cannot; then better words would have becomm'd him.

He will not answer my challenge, he dealeth very plainly with the world therein. I challenged him, not to answer my book, but to produce some argument from Scripture, or sound reason, that shall reasonably conclude from the words, without any adding or subtracting, which may agree with the sense of the words produced. This challenge he refuseth, which in plain terms, is to affirm, that he will never argue against Infant-baptism, either from Scripture, or sound reason; but he will add or diminish something from them: wherein if he be as good as his word, he will keep his old custom.

He further telleth me, that he will not answer my book, unless he have time to write a book to make sport withal; surely I did not write my book with that levity of spirit to make Master Tombes sport, but vindicate truth, and to confute his error; but if he will needs dance, I make no question but I shall make him dance naked, wlthout any rag of truth or reason to cover his shame from the view of all the world.

Last of all, Master Tombes doth charm me to hold my peace, and scoffeth at Divinity schools; which if Master Tombes and I had, I confess we should both write better: but in the mean time, I shall make a shift to write well enough, to find Master Tombes his vanities, if he write no better then yet he hath done; and as for holding my peace, for Syons sake I cannot, as long as any Antipaedobaptists dare so boldly out-face the truth.