mocked Acts 17. 32. But as wise and pious persons will not be jeer'd out of a practice that is solemn and serious and of weighty concern by the raillery of a few aieny-brain'd phantasticks so it is beside the question in hand and if any have thought fit to defer it on that account that is no argument of the unlawfulness of it § 9. Some perhaps imagining the Contract made by the Persons themselves though never so young but three or four years old so they could but answer themselves to what was to be required of them in order to their baptizing would afterwards be accounted by themselves the more obligatory and have stronger impressions upon them than if made by others have thought it fitter to defer it for a while I dispute not the prudentiality of the consideration but onely say that the prudency be it never so great of its deferring longer can infer no unlawfulness on its doing sooner And it seems to me that there are more weighty considerations inclining to and pressing for the hastening of it than that or any I have yet met with for the deferring because the generality have this way shew'd themselves inclined by baptizing their children whilest Infants § 10. And since we have so many weighty considerations moving to hasten it being we are assured by a late learned Father of our B. Gawden Eccles Angl. Suspir p. 299. Church that there is not any one of the Ancients that doth deny its lawfulness I see no reason why any suggestions or pretences of inconveniency unnecessariness or novelness in that practice by an inconsiderable number of persons either of elder or later times should sway us against the vogue of the Catholick Church to deposite a Constiâ—ution in which we see there is so much conveniency for which we see there is so great necessity of which we see there is so great antiquity antiquity reaching up both unto and also into the Apostles Age as being delivered unto the Church by them CHAP. XXXV The Argument from the sixth Article of our Church answered § 1. YEa but is it not the express Doctrine of our Church that Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation Yes And what then Is Infants Baptism therefore unlawfull No such matter It follows not I hope there are more things lawfull than what are either necessary to salvation or are contained in holy Scripture § 2. But what then follows Why this That supposing Infants baptism were neither read in Scripture nor could be proved thereby it were not to be believed as an Article of the Faith nor were the belief of it to be thought necessary to salvation But sure a thing is not therefore unlawfull because it is not to be received as an Article of the Faith or because its belief is not necessary to salvation And so this Article even on that supposition fights not with the lawfulness of Infants Baptism § 3. But we deny the supposition and say that Infants Baptism is contained in the Holy Nullum dari potest dogma ad salutem obtinendam cognitu necessarium quod in Scripturâ non contineatur express è vel implicitè analogiâ—e ità uâ— per consequentiam legitimam inde elici possit Wendelin Theolog. Proleg c. 3 Thes 7. Cum dico perspicuè intelligo vel in se vel per se vel in suis principiis per aliud Hier. Zanch. de Sacrâ Script q. S. prop. 1. pag. 194. Etsi enim non extet expressum praeceptum hac de re sc de baptizan â—is infantibus fidelium liberis colligitur tamen perspicuè ex suis principiis hoc est ex causis propter quas conferendus sit alicui baptismus c. Id. ib. pag. 195. Scriptures in that manner as other things are that are not expressed in it but yet may be deduced from it namely eminently though not formally implicitly though not expresly so as all Points of Faith are contained in the Creed that are not expressed in it or as all Duties are contained in the Decalogue or all Petitions are contained in the Lords Prayer that are not particularly and formally expressed therein § 4. And that it may be proved thereby I hope this Discourse hath already given a sufficient evidence And before I conclude I will yet add one further proof of it and that such an one as though some think not conclusive of the Point yet that acute Divine as well as Heroick prelate A. B. Laud thought to be a direct proof and neer an expression in Scripture it self 'T is Acts 2. 38 39. Then Peter said unto them Repent and be baptized every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost For the promise is unto you and to your children c. But how doth this prove Infants Baptism Why let that learned Man tell you in his own words For when St. Peter had ended that great Sermon of his Acts 2. he applies two comforts unto them ver 38. Amend your lives and be baptized and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost And then ver 39. he infers For the Promise is made to you and to your children The Promise what Promise What why the Promise of Sanctification by the Holy Ghost By what means Why by Baptism For 't is expresly Be baptized and ye shall receive And as expresly This promise is made to you and to your children And therefore A. C. may find it if he will That the Baptism of Infants may be directly concluded out of Scripture § 5. But Infants are not named here True Yet Children are But those children might be men Yes and they might be Infants also I conceive the word is exclusive of neither but inclusive of both Unless any will say that the Infants were no children or that the promise that was made to the children as well as persons of the then present hearers was made onely to such of their children as were men and not Infants which is easilier said than proved For the Apostle says to your children that is all of them not onely some of them all of them being capable of the thing promâ—sed and none of them being exempted from the benefit of the promise And where God has enlarged the bounds why should man enclose the Common where God has made a restriction Where God has been kind why should Man become cruel and shut out Infants from the benefits of a promise when God has opened a door wide enough to let them in to it § 6. It is true the word Children is not always to be understood of Infants but sometimes of Men and as true it is that it is not always to be understood of Men but sometimes of Infants and as true again it is that sometimes it includes both For when the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground Exod. 14. 22. Were
such circumstances St. Ambrose and Tertullian pleads a no preeminence of one river above another in this respect every river being a Jordan where Christ is and Gr. Nazianzen exhorts to break through all impediments to obtain Baptism even to run through fire and water to it 10 Some would be baptized but by such or such a Person a Bishop and he a Metropolitan too and one of Jerusalem and one well descended or if a Presbyter one that is unmarried and of the Angelick order and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. Nazianz. Orat 40. p. 656. so deferred their baptizing upon that pretext which nice curiosity Gr. Nazianzen gravely and largely rebukes them for 11 Some protracted their Baptism upon exception taken at the mixt company they were to be baptized with whereof many were to them unsuitable in quality and unequal in dignity whom Greg. Nazianzen gravely exhorts to an humble condescension in that particular and that from the example 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. pag. 656 657. of Christ into whom they were baptized who humbled himself to a far lower degree then so for for their sake taking upon him the form of a servant and from the no difference that there is amongst Christians considered as Christians 12 Some were apt to put off their baptizing on pretence of not having their Relations present whom they desired to have with them when they were baptized whom Greg. Nazianzen quickens to a present acceptance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. Naz. Ocat 40. p. 655. of the Grace offered without staying for their friends for fear of some sad intervening accident which should bring those friends to a fellowship with them in their sorrows whom they would have had partners with them of their joys 13 Some hung back from being baptized upon the account of the chargeableness of it in regard of a Present that was then to be offered a splendid Robe that was to be worn and a Treat that was to be given to the Minister that baptized them which considerations Greg. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 655. Nyssen de Bapt. p. 215. Nazianzen rejects as too minute and trifling to come in competition with Baptism which is of a higher concern than to be omitted on so sleight accounts assuring them that Themselves would be an acceptable offering unto Christ and their good life a pleasing entertainment to himself 14 Some checkt at Confessing of their sins at their baptizing and on that account delayed to be baptized whom Greg. Nazianzen exhorts not to be trouble at it in consideration that it was they way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 657. of Johns baptizing that the shame of that in this world was the way to escape eternal shame for it in the world to come and that it was a clear argument of the truth of their hatred and detestation of sin thus to triumph over it and expose it unto shame 15 Some stuck at the Exorcism that usher'd in Baptism and on that account made no great hast to be baptized which Medicine Greg. Nazianzen wishes by no means to refuse as being the touchstone for trial of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. Nazianz. Orat. 40. p. 657. Est autem Exorcismus conscripta verbarum series in quâ is qui baptizat diabolum Denomine adjuratum ab co qui baptizatur excedere ac procul fugere jubet Nicetas in Gr. Naz. Orat 40. p. 1066. See Dr. Cave Prim. Christianity Part. 1. c. 10. c. 316. the sincerity of him that comes to Baptism 16 Some as a worthy Author of our own notes deferred their baptizing in imitation of the way that was taken with the young Heathâ—ns converted to Christianity who were instructed in the Yet though this abuse of Baptism prevailed not upon that opinion only viz. that all their Actual as well as Original sins were washed away in Baptism and so had the less to answer for if they were baptized towards the later end of their days but upon the occasion which was taken of educating and instructing Infidells in the Faith for some good time before they were baptized which custom divers born of Christian Parents imitated yet we find none that the Church wilfully suffered to die without Baptism who were descended of true believers or had been competently instructed in the Faith of Christ Scrivener Course of Divinity pag. 196. faith for some while before their baptism and continued like them in the state of Catechumens for some good time before they would be baptized 17 Some deferred their baptizing in imitation of the Example of Christ and would not be baptized till of that age that he was of when he was baptized viz. thirty years old or thereabouts about which Age whether on that principle or for some other reason or occasion were baptized St. Ambrose St. Austin and St. Hierom Which pretense of theirs Greg. Nazianz. very largely and solidly refutes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 658 659. shewing that Christ had no need of any baptismal purgation that he was in no fear by any danger for want of it that he had particular reasons for his forbearance proper to him and incompetent to them and that there is no necessity of copying out all Christs actions in our imitations by several instances 18 Some forbore baptism out of a fear of being reproached for Tritheits the owners and worshippers of three gods because they were to be baptized in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Against which fear Greg. Nazianzen encourages his Auditors by proposing himself to be their Champion in the defence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 699. of the Catholick Doctrine of a Trinity of Persons in the Unity of the Divine Essence and offering to interpose himself between them and danger in that war and so they might reap the good of it to receive all the blows that should be given in that encounter 19 Lastly if I may have leave to conjecture some forbore being baptized out of fear of persecution for their Religion How probably this is conjectured will appear when it is considered how difficult or rather impossible it was for any in those days under persecuting Tyrants to hold or enjoy any place of power profit or honour either in Court City or Army or even life it self that was known to be a Christian and how ready an expedient it was towards the holding of such places and enjoying life and liberties and avoiding all persecution upon the score of Christianity by remaining unbaptized since they could not be proved Christians that were never christened And now having shown the Reasons why several above the Age of Infants did themselves delay their own baptizing it follows secondly that I shew upon what Reasons the baptizing of children in their Infancy was delayed by others Now to this it may
some pertinency to the Command of our Saviour to suffer them to come such not being to be denied reception into that kingdom of God as that Kingdom of God consisteth of But then how will our Saviours Command be pertinent to the present Occasion of his speech No question being made by his Disciples at that time about the final estates of children dying in their Infancy and the whole matter being that they denied admission of some Infants brought by others unto Christ to be touched by the Imposition of his hands and to be prayed over by him probably in order to their being made his Proselytes by baptism at which denial of theirs he being angry gave order that the children should be suffered to come to him namely for such purpose as those then came in all likelihood to be by his Imposition of hands and Prayer consigned over unto Proselytism and should not be hindred from coming to him § 4. And what were a declaration of childrens capacity for glory and fitness to come to Christ when he should be corporally present in Heaven if they died in their infancy to this matter especially at a time when Christ was not corporally present in Heaven but lived in body here below upon the earth § 5. Again a Command so given as this was would suppose an ability in those to whom it was given to do contrary unto that Command namely to hinder Children from reception into the Kingdom of God notwithstanding their greatest capacity for that kingdom But that was neither then in the power of his Disciples nor now is in the power of any man on earth Supposing children dying in their Infancy to belong to the kingdom of glory it is needless to command any man to suffer them to come to that kingdom § 6. So that neither of a Spiritual access of these children unto Christ where he is now corporally present in glory are these words interpretable such an interpretation of our Saviours words rendring them impertinent to the occasion of them And I hope none will say that our Saviour did at any time speak impertinent words § 7. And therefore not being able to imagine any other way by which our Children may come and yet may be hindred from coming unto Christ but that One way which hath hitherto been insisted on namely by being made Disciples to Christ by being baptized into the Name and Faith of Christ I conclude that this way our children ought to be suffered to come to Christ and ought not to be hindred from so coming § 8. And now the Point being thus explained and the Explication thereof thus vindicated I appeal to Common Reason whether or no there be not here that which the Antipaedobaptists of these days do with so much insolency demand of us viz. a fair and clear Scripture Ground for Infants Baptism If Children may come to Christ and must by the command of Christ be suffered to come to him and there be no other way of their coming to him but by Baptism what can be more plain than that in commanding that they should be suffered to come to him he commanded that they should be suffered to be baptized and forbad that they should be hindred from Baptism § 9. And by this time I hope it appears with how good judgment our Church hath appointed this passage of Scripture which as H. D. tells us was called of old the Scripture Treatise of Baptism pag. 177. Canon for Infants-Baptism and upon which as he saith much stress hath been laid since to prove the same to be read in the Congregation at the baptizing of Infants namely as containing in it a fair ground and a clear proof for Infants Baptism which I hope you do by this time see to be no such scriptureless thing as our Antipaedobaptists do pretend § 10. Yet least any man should think this Collection alone to be too weak a ground to bear that weight we lay upon it though by the way I must say that a Consequence from Scripture rightly made is a ground good enough to bear any weight that can be fairly laid upon it and as valid to all intents and purposes as if it were express Scripture it self that being eminently contained in the Scripture what ever it be that may be fairly drawn from it and that we have no better ground then a Consequence from Scripture to build other Points of our Christian Faith upon every way as weighty and material as Infants Baptism is yet I say I shall for your better settlement in the belief of this Catholick truth confirm it unto you by this one further Reason § 11. That by which Children may have Benefit for which they have Need of which they are Capable and to which they have Right that they ought to be suffered to have and ought not to be denied the having of But Children may have Benefit by Baptism they have Need for Baptism they are Capable of Baptism and they have a Right unto Baptism Therefore they ought to be suffered to have it and they ought not to be denied the having of it § 12. That Children ought to be suffered to have and ought not to be denied that whereby they may be Benefited for which they have Need of which they are Capable and to which they have a Right I suppose it not needful to prove For Charity will give them that Benefit for which they have need and Justice will not deny them that Right of which they are Capable I shall therefore forthwith proceed to make it out unto you that Children may have Benefit by Baptism have Need for Baptism are Capable of Baptism and have a Right unto Baptism And these things I shall shew you severally and in order beginning first with the Benefits that Infants may have by Baptism CHAP. VI. Baptism beneficial unto Children in regard of their early consecration thereby unto God § 1. IT will be found upon search that Baptism is beneficial unto Children more ways than one § 2. And First by Baptism they are offered and presented dedicated and consecrated unto God Baptism is a consecration of the Baptized unto God who are thereby Sanctified to his service Hence that of St Paul to the Corinthians 1 Cor. 7. 14. The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband else were your children unclean but now are they holy i. e. separate from the common unclean condition of Heathens and by Baptism admitted into the community and relation and state of Christians who are Saints by calling as being called to be Saints that is Holy Ones and by their very 1 Cor. 1. 1. calling consecrated unto God and obliged by their Naming of the name of Christ who is named upon them at their baptizing to depart from iniquity 2 Tim. 2. 19. § 3. Hence as Beza Nam Baptismo consecramur Deo quoniam ibi nostra adoptio in Christo per
can at the same age do towards his baptism I suppose the severity then threatned to the child was designed chiefly to oblige the parent And doubtless it would have been a great punishment to the parent to have his child through his neglect cut off from the communion with the Church and from the means of grace and from the hope of glory if not forthwith from life it self and no less would it be to us to have our children undone for ever through our neglect O how must it not needs make our own hell the more hot to find our unbaptized children there if through our neglect of the means ordain'd by God to preserve them from thence they should go thither as who is infallibly ascertain'd that they shall not § 5. And however it may prove at last that our children be saved though they die unbaptized yet since we have no assurance of that but rather some reason to fear the contrary we shall be guilty of their undoing and damning though they be saved since as to what was to our selves we let them be undone and damned § 6. I will evidence this by a parallel case There is said to be a thing called an Extasie or Trance into which people do often fall sometimes involuntarily and sometimes at their own will whereof Bodinus Bodin Theatrum Naturae lib. 4. gives several instances Now all the time that one is in an Extasie he seems to be no other but dead no sense no motion either of pulse or heart being perceivable in him Whereupon some have been carried forth to burial as dead who yet were not indeed dead but in an extasie and have revived at or after their burial and one instance hereof is given in that famous Scholar Johaâ—nes Duns Scotus who was buried in an extasie and revived after burial though killed after his reviving by his strugling in his coffin for life Now whilest one is in an Extasie he is not sensible of any woundings burnings or tearings so that some of those things that would at other times take away life do not kill such as drowning or hanging An instance of the latter whereof happened not many years ago at Oxford in a Maid recovered to life after hanging and some other A particular account whereof was given in a Narrative set forth at that time violences used to her for her dispatch after her cutting down Now put case a man is in danger of death by hanging or drowning and I may if I will preserve him from either in which case that act of charity becomes my duty if I do not my duty to preserve him I shall be guilty of destroying him even though it please God in that instant as I have read it hath happened in both these cases to cast him into an Extasie and preserve him He might have been hanged or drowned to death for me who would do nothing when I might have done something and ought to have done any thing that reasonably I could to have saved him and so I am guilty even of his death that did not die just as Esther should have been of the Jews destruction had she not done what she could to preserve them though they had not been destroyed but inlargement and deliverance had arisen to them from another place Esther 4. 14. And just so it being in our power to use a means for the preserving of our children from damnation if we neglect it we shall be guilty of their damning though they be not damned Because though it were Gods mercy they should be saved yet damned they might have been and damned they had been for all us who would make no use of the means ordained by God for their salvation § 7. And by this time I hope it sufficiently appears that as upon the account of the Benefits coming to children by Baptism there is Reason for their baptizing so upon account of the Danger they are in by Original Sin and the evil Consequents of it from which they are wholly or in a great measure rescued by Baptism there is Need to baptize them CHAP. XX. Childrens Need of Baptism shewn from Six other Considerations § 1. ANd yet there are other accounts which I shall name and not much more than name upon which Infants have need to be baptized § 2. And first considering that there are Benefits derived to us and descending upon us from Christ our Head by vertue of our Union with him as Members of him which we and our children have need of and we cannot hope otherwise to obtain either for our selves or for our children than by Baptism Baptism seems to be in this respect a thing which both we and our children have a very great need of § 3. To instance but in his Influences upon Care over and Intercession for his Members How shall we partake of those Influences of Grace which flow from Christ to all his Members by vertue of their Union with him if we be not united to him How shall we come to be any thing bettered by the care of Christ over his Members if we have no fellowship with him as Members of him How shall we be concerned in Christs Intercessions for his Body if we be not incorporated into it as members of it § 4. What need then our Children have of Membership with Christ in order to their partaking of those Benefits that are derived from him to his Members that need have they of being baptized into Christ that by their Baptism they may be made the Members of Christ § 5. Again our children being by nature born in sin and consequently children of wrath In my Baptism wherein I was made the child of God Cat. of Ch. of Eng. Being by nature born in sin and the children of wrath we are hereby made the children of grace Ib. how can it but be needfull that by some means they should be made children of grace That by Baptism our children are made children of grace and children of God our Church has told us But how they shall become children either of God or Grace otherwise than by Baptism we are not told If any thing the quite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost Hom. 1. de Poenitentia contrary The name of Son is given to none but such as are baptized if St. Chrysostom say true What need then our Infants have to become Sons of God that need have they to be baptized that they may become his Sons § 6. Further Heirship follows Sonship Whereby then we are made Sons thereby we are Baptism whereby I was made an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven Church Catechism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Just Martyr Resp ad Orthodox 44. made Heirs That as our Church hath taught and I have proved is done by Baptism Whereupon it follows that if we will be Heirs we must be Sons and if we will be Sons we must be baptized No baptism then no Son of God and then no
with Crispus and his house Acts 18. 8. And is to be supposed it was so with others of whose believing before their baptizing we read not as of Gaius and Stephanas 1 Cor. 1. 14 16. And this at this day is and ever hath been the way of the Churches dealing with adult persons § 19. But the Argument will not hold from Men to Children It follows not that because men that are capable of believing or disbelieving the Gospel are not baptized except they make profession of faith that therefore Infants who are neither capable of believing nor disbelieving must profess faith or not be baptized Faith being required of the one but not of the other § 20. When the Apostle commanded the Thessalonians that if any would not work neither should he eat 2 Thess 3. 10. did he mean the Infants should not eat that could not work 'T is plain he required working onely of those that were able to work not of those that were unable So in the case in hand 't is apparent that Believing is onely required of men able to understand and believe not of Infants neither able to believe nor understand For by the words immediately foregoing preach the Gospel to every creature it is most evident that it is of such persons onely as the Gospel may be believed or disbelieved by upon the preaching of it to them that it is said He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned not of such persons as the Gospel cannot rationally be preached to in order to the bringing them to believe by the preaching of it in regard of their incapacity to understand it and inability to believe or disbelieve it And so Infants are utterly unconcern'd in this Text. And as from it we plead nothing for them so from it can nothing rationally be pleaded against them § 21. I have read that Men must be converted and become as little Matth. 18. 2. children I suppose for humility and innocency that they may enter into the kingdom of God But I have not read that little children must be converted and become as Men for understanding or Faith before they can have entrance in Gods kingdom A profession of faith by persons of understandâ—ng in the names of the Infants is required by the Church and upon that profession it baptizes them But that understanding and faith which is required in Adult persons as praevious to their baptism is not by the Church required in Infants as necessaâ—y to their baptizing Nor can it be proved that ever it was by Christ or any Apostle of his exacted of them as it cannot be proved that ever Christ or any Apostle of his ordered the delay of their baptizing till it might be in them § 22. And lastly if Infants baptism be an Apostolical Tradition that is a thing delivered down to the Church to be practiced in it by the Apostles and Apostolical Persons and as practiced also by themselves as there is better ground to believe it than there is evidence against it then the thing is out of question They would never have baptized themselves nor taught others to baptize such as wanted faith because incapable of believing if mere want of faith notwithstanding such incapacity to believe did render them incapable of baptizing And if not believing did not in the Apostles Age and the Ages succeeding it make Infants incapable of Baptism then can it not make them so in ours there being no more reason for the one than for the other § 23. And so here is nothing in the Infants themselves that renders them uncapable of being baptized CHAP. XXIV Children not incapable of being baptized in regard of any thing required of them or to be done to them in Baptism § 1. SEcondly There is nothing in Baptism required of or to be done unto Infants which hinders them from it or renders them incapable of it §. 2 Not the Thing signifying Water with the application of it by way of Immersion or Assusion They may be dipped into water in case of strength or they may have water poured on them in case of weakness § 3. Not the Thing signified The Blood of Christ and the Grace of the Spirit For what can hinder why they may not be sprinkled from the guilt of the sin of their Birth by the blood of Christ in the Grace of Justification Cannot the blood of Christ satisfie for that guilt that lies upon Infants Or cannot God apply the satisfaction made by the blood of Christ unto Infants And what can hinder why they may not be cleansed from the corruption of their nature by the Power of the Spirit in the Grace of Sanctification Cannot the Holy Spirit mortifie those dispositions unto evil which Parvulis datur gratia operans cooperans per baptismum sicut adultis sed parvulis in munere non in usu G. Biel in 4 l. Sent. dist 4. are in Infants Or can he not infuse dispositions to goodness into Infants Is not the spirit of grace able to inoperate the grace of the spirit in Infants Is not he able to give them a temper of heart capable to receive his Infusions Is not he able to make Infusions of grace into their hearts suitable to their temper No incapableness of Baptism then in Infants on these accounts § 4. Again may not children as well as elder persons be taken into Vnion with Christ May not they be incorporated into him What no lambs in his flock but all old sheep No little members in his body but all great ones No babes in Christ but all strong men Cannot the water do the same for them Cannot the spirit do the same in them to unite them unto Christ that is done by it either for elder persons towards their Union with him Surely the application of the Water of Baptism to their Bodies does as well signifie and declare and the infusion of the Spirit of Christ into their souls does as well operate and effect their Union with him as the Union of elder persons For what should hinder No incapableness then of Baptism in Infants on this account neither § 5. Again look upon Baptism as the Door of entrance into the kingdom of Heaven and so far are they from being incapable of that that they are made a kind of standard to the capacity of others for it For our Saviour not only saith that of such as infants is the kingdom of heaven Matth. 19. 14. which implies that they themselves are qualified for it and have all things required in them for entrance into it but also he saith Matth. 18. 3. Except ye be converted and become as little children ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven which again implies that Infants are duly qualified for an entrance into the kingdom of heaven for why else must others be converted and become as they are that they may enter into it and not only so but that
Rome by whom for some certain hundreds of years they had been constraind to suffer their children to be baptiz'd § 7. So that it is needless to appeal for further evidence to the Conference at Mompelguâ—t * Anno 1529. or the Articles of Smalkald †Anno 1536. or book of Concord * Anno 1580. much less to the testimonies of single persons though men of note and eminence in their generation such as Luther Melancthon Calvin Zanâ—hy or any other of the many writers on this Subject in that Age. Who were by so much the more moved to write on this Subject in regard of an Opposition then made to Infants Baptism by the Anabaptists who as Melancthon saith were then Melancthon loc Comm. de Bapt. nuper nati newly come up whereas before there was great quietness in the Church about that Point § 8. Yet to shew that Infants Baptism was not the practice of the more Western parts of Europe onely but of the Eastern too and of those that followed the Greek Church as well as those that followed the Latine I will give two or three evidences of thâ—s practice among the Russians Ruthens and Moscovians § 9. In an Epistle written to David Chytraeus dated 8 Kal. Aug. Anno M. D. LXXVI De Russorum Moscovitarum Tartarorum Religione pag. 240. the Author relating the manner of baptizing among the Russians saith the Priest useth to pour a whole gallon of water upon the Infant Alexander Gaguin saith of Ib. pag. 232. the Ruthens that they baptize their Infants by immersion These receiving the Faith about the year 942 and retaining it firmly ever since are an Instance of Infants Baptism not for this Century only but for all the time from their first conversion And the same is testified of them by Johannes Sacranus Canon of Cracow Ib. pag. 193. who writing his Book in the year 1500 is a witness in this case as well for the foregoing as present Century And Johannes Faber writing to Ferdinand King of Ib. pag. 176. the Romans Anno 1525 concerning the Moscovites who as themselves say received their religion from St. Andrew and are very firm to what they have once received saith that they baptize their Infants by a threefold immersion if he be strong else by pouring on of water Now this Relation if true and why it may not be so I cannot tell speaks not only for the Century the Relator writ in but for time before how much 't is uncertain but for ought I know for all the time since their first conversion which reaches up to the very Apostles days § 10. And to shew that Infants baptism was not the practice onely of Europe but of other parts of the world and so hint at that which some other better read in History may be able sully to make out a Catholickness of it in respect of Câ—unâ—ries professing Christianity as well as Times I will give you a brief tast from Mr. Brerewoods Enquiries how it was about this Century and God knows how many Centuries before whether from the beginning or no in this Point with the Eastern and Southern parts of the world where Christianity is professed And to begin with the Christians of St. Thomas so called as being supposed to Chap. 20. have been by his preaching converted to the Christian Religion inhabiting in India in great numbers about Coulan and Cranganor Maliapur where St. Thomas is supposed to lie buried and Negapatan These baptize their Infants though not indeed till they be forty days old except in danger of death Next the Jacobites are a sort of Christians who inhabit in Chap. 21. Syria Cyprus Mesopotamia Bâ—bylon Palâ—stine and under other titles are said to be spread abroad in forty kingdoms And these all baptize their Infants signing them first with the sign of the Cross which they imprint into their face or arm with a burning iron Then the Coâ—hti or Christians in Aegypt where Religion was planted Chap. 22. in the Apostles days these baptize their children though not afore the fortieth day â—o not in case of death The Habâ—stine Christians inhabiting the Chap. 23. midland of Africa do also baptize their Infants but their Males not till forty days after their birth and their Females not till eighty except in peril of death The Armenian Christians are spread in Chap. 24. multitudes over the Turkish Empire but chiefly in the Armenia's the Greater and Lesser and in Cilicia And these also baptize their Infants Lastly the Maronites are a sort of Christians inhabiting Chap. 25. Aleppo Damascus Tripoli of Syria Cyprus and mount Libanus And these too baptize their Infants but their Males not till forty days after their birth and their Females not till eighty days after it So that from all the Quarters of the world where Christianity is professed witnesses come for Infants baptism § 11. But not more fruitful was this Century for Testifiers to this Truth then some of the foregoing are barren not from the rarity of the practice or opinion of men against it but from the scarcity of Writers in those Ages whose works are extant and from the little or no opposition made to it Yet in the barrenest and darkest of Ages we shall find a sufficiency of light and evidence to carry up this Practice through them to the Primitive Times § 12. In the middle of the Fifteenth Age about Anno 1452 we find Nicolaus de Orbellis giving his testimony to this Truth Yist 4. 4 Libri Sent. qu. 5. For to the question whether the effects of baptism be alike in all he answers by way of Distinction sayâ—ng that the Baptized are either Infants or Adult and that if the Comparison be of an Infant with the Adult the effect is unequal the advantage on the Adults side And upon the question whether the Infants of Infidels may be baptized against the Ib. qu. 7. wills of their parents he determines that though a private person may not compell in that case yet a Prince may And also he gives reasons why the Infants to be baptized Ib. qu. 8. should be Catechized though they be not able to apprehend any instruction which is a sufficient indication both of his opinion and of the Churches Practice in that age As for the Catechizing he speaks of that none trip at that it is nothing but the asking and answering to the questions solemnly used in bapti in by the Godfathers For he tells ye what the Godfather means when in the Person of the Infant he answers I believe And the Reasons for this he draws partly from the Church partly from the Godfathers and partly from the Infants § 13. Towards the latter end of this Century about the year 1487 flourished Gabriel Biel and he as the Author newly mentioned Omnes parvulirite baptizaâ—i rem Sacramentum sus cipiunt sed Sacramentum tantum qui fictè sine
not expressed in their extant writings that they did so § 2. Aâ—e all things written in the Scriptures that all the Twelve Apostles did in all places where they came and preached gathered and setled Churches Yea how little is there written of what was done by any of them And how many are there of them of whom there is nothing written at all neither what they did nor whither they went nor what became of them Did they nothing of whose doings nothing is written who are at least one half of the whole number of the Apostles And if they did any thing as sure enough they would be doing they might as well do that baptize Infants as any thing else for any thing that is written And where we find Infants Baptism in a Church planted by an Apostle as in Musâ—ovia Christianized by St. Andrew or in India by St. Thomas Why may we not think that planted there by that Apostle as well as other Christian Customs or Constitutions though in the Scripture there be a deep silence as to the whole Story And there is as good proof that they did not any thing else of all those things which our Saviour commanded them as that they did not that because no more is written of any thing else that they did than of that which is just nothing at all § 3. And they of whose doings any thing is written did they no more than just what was written Were they so exact in keeping and publishing Diaries of all their actions Not a word said not a deed done but what was book'd down How many persons do you read of that were baptized by Paul in all that time that he continued preaching the Gospel and planting the Church of Christ at Rome And do ye think none were baptized by him or at his command all the while Can there be a Church founded and formed up without baptism And if any were baptized where is it written in Scripture who what or how many they were Again do ye think the Saints at Rome did never commemorate the death of Christ in the celebration of the Eucharist If yea what mention is there of it in Scripture In what book chapter verse is it to be read No doubt both the one and the other Sacrament was by Pauls instructing and ordering received there and yet is the Scripture profoundly silent as to any such thing And who now will be so silly as from the Scriptures silence to draw a negative conclusion and say no such thing was done there because the Scripture says nothing of the doing of it The like may be said of other Apostles and the Churches planted by them § 4. Unless therefore that which is written were a perfect register of all that was done by all and every one of the Apostles as it is not of the doings of either all or one half or any one of them it cannot be proved that no one of them did any thing or appointed any thing to be done for instance to baptize Infants because it is not extant in those few scanty memoires and intimations rather than relations of some actions of some few of them written for the most part occasionally which are come to our hands that any one of them dâ—d it They might therefore do it though their doing of it be not expresly written in the Scriptures § 5. And that they did it or however so far delivered their mind concerning it that done it was and upon the account of their authority is most credible Because the Practice thereof is and has been looked on in all the Ages of the Church succeeding that wherein they lived as a Tradition of theirs And that Tradition from them is as credibly avouched to us as their writing those several Fpistles and Gospels which we receive for their writings and look upon as the word of God And we may as well receive the one upon that Tradition as the other and with as good reason reject the one as the other We have the Testimony of the Church for the one and we have but the Testimony of the Church for the other And if we may believe the Church when it tells us the Apostles wrâ— those Books why may we not as well believe it when it tells us the Apostles ordered that thing And if it be of no credit in the latter let our adversaries consider whether they do not by so saying derogate from and destroy all its credit in the former And so the matter is at last come to this that either we must have no new Testament Scriptures or else we must have Infants baptism The new Testament and this Sacrament of it must for ought I see ever stand and fall together both standing upon one bottom Catholick Tradition which must bear up both or neither not being able to support the one if it cannot support the other also § 6. I will not say but that some few one or two for many hundreds of years may have thought it not necessary to be administred so soon as in the prime of Infancy unless in case of death But their not thinking it necessary then is a sufficâ—ent evidence of their opinion of its lawfulness at other times For what is not lawfull at other times cannot be necessary even then § 7. And what ever reason we find any of the Ancients had to think it fitter to defer it I am of opinion we shall never find the unlawfulness of it to have been any of their reasons Tertullian thought the deferring of it Quid enim necesse est Sponsores etiam periculo ingeri quia ipsi per mortalitatem destituere promissiones suas possunt proventu malae indolis falli Tert. de Bapt. was more profitable but not the doing of it unlawful to be sure he does not say so And what 's his reason against the necessity of it That the Godfathers might not be brought into danger of failing in their undertaking by their own mortality or the Infants untowardness The deferring of it might then be prudential but that makes not the doing of it unlawfull And if he thought it prudential to defer it others as judicious as he have thought it no less prudence to hasten it And so his opinion in that case signifies nothing as to our present concern § 8. Perhaps some might think it prudence to defer it to avoid the exposing of so sacred an administration to the jeers of profane scoffers Dionysius the Areopagite mentions Eccl. Hier. c. 12. some such in his days as jeer'd at the Sureties being interrogated and answering in the Infants name And no doubt there are now such in our days as think that practice ridiculous enough But still be it as ridiculous as any has imagined it that renders it not unlawfull And if every thing must be laid by that any will think ridiculous we shall have little left either of our Worship or Doctrine When some heard of the Resurrection they
se habeant quae insania est paucis de Filio Spiritie Sancto commutatis quae apertam blasphemiam praeferebant caetera ita ut fâ—ripta sunt protuliste in medium impia voce laudâsse cum utique illa ista de uno impietatis fonte processerint D. Hieron ad Avitum Tom. 2. Col. 218. A. B. Paucisque testimoniis de Filio Dei Spiritu Sancto commutatis quae sciebas diâ—plicitura Romanis caetera usque ad finem integra dimisisti hoc idem faciens in Apologia quasi Pamphili quod in Origenis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translatione fecisti D. Hieron l. 1. Apolog. adv Ruffinum Tom. 2. Col. 296. B. for his overmuch fidelity in translating some of Eusebius and Origens works and changing onely some few things concerning the Son and the Holy Ghost likely to grate upon Roman ears and letting the rest go intire and publishing them so as they were written Besides what should move Ruffinus to falsifie Origen in this place How came he concern'd to make any such Interpolation what advantage to himself or any party could he intend herein But what if after all this that piece of Origen on Rom. were translated by St. Hierom himself and this be owned by him in his Epistle to Heraclius prefixt before the Commentary why then all the dust about Ruffinus his corrupting of Origen in this particular vanishes into smoke and we have St. Hieroms Authority as Dr. Dr. Hammond Inf. Bapt. §. 42. †Cum igitur constet Anabaptistas agi sanatico spiritu non moveat nos corum autoritas ut discedamus à communi consenâ—is veteris Ecclesiae de baptizandis infantibus Nam vetustissimi Sâ—riptores Ecclesiastiâ—i probant baptismum infantium Otigenes enim in 6 cap. ad Rom. sic scribit Itaque Ec clesia ab Apostolis traditionem accepit etiam parvulis dare baptismum Sciebant enim illi quibus secreta divinorum mysteriorum commissa sunt quod essent in omnibus genuinae sordes pâ—ccati quae per aquam spiritum abolere deberent Haec sunt Origenis verba in quibus utrumque testatur baptizari infantes consequi eos per baptismum remissionem peccati originalis hoc est reconciliari eos Deo Melancth Loc. Com. de Baptismo Hammond saith to secure us that these are Origens words And that Origens words they are †Melancthon doth expresly say And lastly why Origen should be so much as suspected to be corrupted in this Place unless in some other of his writings he had declared himself to the contrary which I see not pretended is no easie thing to say and the suggestion of it is nothing else but a miserable shift of persons enslaved to an Hypothesis and resolved to say any thing how irrational and groundless soever for the maintaining of it And though this place were laid by as likewise that of his in Levit. yet whilest his 14 Homil. on Luke of unquestion'd Authority shall be extant there will be a witness of Origens to be produced for Infants Baptism Lastly for Cyprian his not urging it as an Apostolical Tradition or Precept doth not prove it was none However his delivering his Judgment for Infants baptism is a sure evidence that he thought neither Scripture precept nor Apostles practice nor Church Tradition was against it And it cannot be thought a private opinion which was so early concluded in a Council of no fewer than 66 Bishops And though H. D. meets with no such Council nor can tell where it was held yet St. Augustine doubtless was satisfied concerning the truth of it and St. Hierom too or else he would never have appealed to its Authority in the case Nor does St. Cyprians mentioning it to be defined in a Council prove it no Apostolical Tradition because it was delivered for an Apostolical tradition before that Council Nor was it properly Infants Baptism that was defined in that Council but whether Infants might be baptized before the eighth day Whether the grounds upon which that Councils Conclusion was grounded wear weak and frivolous as they are confidently enough said to be is not now under my consideration though to wiser persons than I they may for ought I know seem strong and weighty but whether they did so conclude or no which so good a witness as St. Cyprian is sufficient to prove Nor do I find it so much contradicted by his great Master Tertullian whom he so much reverenced who disputed Inf. Bapt. Par. 2. chap. 7. indeed against the hastening but not against the lawfulness of Infants baptism to which disputation I have given an Answe in part and Mr. Wills more fully And therefore I shall rather believe St. Cyprian himself declaring himself to be for Infants Baptism then Baronius if he assert or suggest that he was against it And if other things have been fathered on Cyprian yet till that Epistle of his to Fidus be demonstrated to be spurious which H. D. doth not tell us is yet done no not by Daille himself I shall presume it is his own And well may having it own'd for his by two so early and eminent Authors as St. Augustine and St. Hierom †Beatus quidem Cyprianus non aliquod decrecum condens novum sed Ecclesiae fidem firmissimam servans ad corrigendum cos qui putabant ante oâ—tavum diem nativitatis non esse parvulum baptizandum non carnem sed animam dixit esse perdendam mox natum rite baptizari posse cum suis quibusdam cocpiscopis censuit D. Aug. Ep. 28 ad Hieron Tom. 2. Col. 108. B. the former of which in his Epistle to Hierom appeals to it * Ac me putes haeretico sensu hoc intelligere beatus Martyr Cyprianus cujus te in Scripturarum testimoniis digerendis amulum gloriaris in Epistola quam scribit ad Episcopum Fidum de Infantibus haptizandis haec memorat Porro autem si etiam gravissimis delictoribus c. D. Hieron l. 3. adv Pelag. Tom. 2. Col. 47. C. the latter in his third book against the Pelagians not onely doth that but transcribes a considerable part of it Nor shall I ever the unwillinger receive from him a Catholick Verity for his having held other I will not say with H. D. corrupt and Antichristian Tenents which I should tremble to say or think of so pious a person and eminent a Martyr but private opinions as Tertullians and Gr. Nazianzens for the delay of Infants Baptism are said to have been which if no worse than that of the Churches being founded upon Peter and that sprinkling might serve in stead of baptizing in both which I can assure the Reader he hath good company may prove not to deserve so heavy a censure nor he for them to be adjudged a Notable Factor for Antichrist and one in whom the mystery of iniquity did strongly work which is a character strangely inconsistent with that estimate that by the Catholick