Sin and Faith whereby they stedfastly believe the Promises of God made unto them in that Sacrament answ That is for answer hereunto Those that are baptized when adult are indispensably obliged thereunto and Infants when they come to years of discretion and thus our Church Catechism expounds her sense which Promise or Graces Children when they come unto Age are bound to perform It is a good Rule in the Civil Law Nemo tenetur ad Impossibile No Man is obliged unto the performance of that which is impossible to be done by any human power And then we cannot believe that he who is the God of Reason as well as Truth will oblige his Creature to a Duty which he is not able to perform by any Powers he hath created him with and suppose God should infuse into a Child an extraordinary and miraculous measure of Grace as well as Reason as he did into our blessed Saviour and St. John the Baptist who were sanctified from or in the Womb yet we read not tho' they had so great a proportion of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit that during the state of their infancy they magnified God and spake with Tongues antecedent to the use of Speech the manifestation of which Miraculous Power and the discovery of which Divine Gift the Jews at the Feast of Pentecost Acts 2.4 8 11. 10.46 and the first Gentile Converts shewed But to return Tho' these Graces are not needful to all in all circumstances for where there is not a capacity to act them there can be no obligation to their exercise yet that the Children of Believers have a right to the Covenant as soon as born and so have a right to the Seal that conveys the Title and are obliged to its Use if they will enjoy the Priviledges of the Covenant I hope hath been made appear beyond contradiction yet they are needful for some that are admitted unto that Holy Ordinance and this Distinction ought to be well understood and weighed If Baptism be allowed to those who have not the proper Qualifications then those Qualifications are not absolutely needful unto the Undertakers of that Holy Ordinance Faith is sometimes needful when Repentance is not so sometimes Faith and Repentance conjoyned and otherwise sometimes Acts 8.37 When St. Philip admitted the Ethiopian Eunuch to Baptism he only enjoyned Faith 2.41 38. not Repentance St. Peter when he made three thousand Converts at his first Sermon enjoyned Repentance only In short It is as the condition is or the needs of the Party require In Infants the matter is plain as to Repentance the non-performance whereof cannot hinder their being baptized because they having committed no sin are not obliged unto the Duty and yet this is as needful for being baptized as Faith So that this evidences they are not absolutely needful not to all not to Children but only accidentally so and if they may be baptized if they want one why not if they want the other is a Mystery that will not nay I am inclined to believe cannot be discovered by those that because they think the contrary are engaged to make the Revelation Besides I add Actual Faith is needful not to the undertaking but to the subsequent Products of that Holy Ordinance because the first Planters of Christianity admitted some tho' adult to Baptism who had no Faith but were only formal Professors and of this sort were Simon Magus Alexander the Coppersmith Demas and Diotrephes and Judas if baptized and also the Gnostic Hereticks For the Effect is from the Searcher of Hearts who knows our secret thoughts but the External Ordinance may be performed and undertaken by those who know not such Secrets And this is a clear Proof that that Faith which is needful to the product of the Holy Ordinance is not needful to its undertaking and if formal Professors may be partakers of it much more Children if to such as actually impede or hinder the product much rather to them that do not so If it be objected by the Antipedobaptists An Obj. The Church cannot tell but that those that say they have Faith may have it but she certainly knows Children have not I answer answ The Church cannot tell but Hypocrites stop the Product and oppose the Grace of Baptism but she can tell Children do not nor can make hindrance or opposition there is a possibility one may partake of the Grace but the second cannot stop its effects Moreover Children have Faith because they believe in the Holy Jesus St. Matth. 18.6 St. Mark 9.42 as we are told in Sacred Scripture in express words recorded by two Evangelists if one be not enough And that this is a satisfactory and sufficient Proof the Holy Scriptures do assure us when they tell us St. Joh. 8.17 that the Testimony of two Men is true and this witness and evidence it appears we have for the truth of this Doctrin that Children have Faith and that this their Faith was true sound and such as God will accept we may with good reason believe because he that is truth and will not therefore deceive us doth seem so to assure us Vid. pag. 89. as we have already made appear in this Chapter Whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me and therefore fit for his Blessing which is Divine The exercise of our understanding is no more necessary to make us fit for Grace than for Reason but we have seeds of Reason congenite and innate antecedent to the exercise of our understandings otherwise there would be no distinction between a Rational Creature and a Brute when first produced into being and brought to light Sparks and Seeds then of Reason there may be to use the words of the great African Father Per Infantis animan non ubi ratio nulla erat sed ubi adhuc sopita erat St. Aug. Ep 23. ad Bonifac. The Soul of an Infant hath Reason but as yet not capable of use like Fire raked together in the Embers So likewise there is a possibility of Grace being infused by the Divine Spirit as is clear in the fore-quoted Instance of the blessed Jesus and his Praecursor or Fore-runner St. John the Baptist who were sanctified in or from the Womb. Or else they may be said to believe by the Faith of those that present them unto the Holy Ordinance in the Sacred Place Fide gestantium Idem ibidem For to this I may add the Child hath the Faith of the Parent imputed to it and that the Faith of the Parent is imputable to the Child and available for great purposes is apparent because we read in the Holy Gospel That the Blessed Jesus makes the Faith of the Parent necessary unto the Healing of the Child From whence I argue thus That if the Faith of the Parent may be imputed for the recovering of the Bodily Diseases why may not the same be imputed for the curing the Distempers
understood the Nature and Difference of Covenants better I believe than any Antipaedobaptist in England To all which he made no return but after some Pause and an Harangue to the People he told me he would not be satisfied unless I brought him an Example out of the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament for any Child being Baptized or a Command for his admission into Covenant that way To which I urged the probability of Children being Baptized Acts xvi 15.33 when it is said That Lydia was Baptized and her Houshold and of the Jaylor That he was Baptized and all his straitway 1 Cor. 1.16 and when St. Paul saith I Baptized also the Houshold of Stephanas and to speak ingenuously the only thing considerable he said was the proving the probability there were no Children in those Families I am very sorry I have forgot what he said but if I could remember it I would do him that Justice as to relate it for I would pay my Adversary that respect as to declare all the Truth and Reason of him that his Cause will bear or that he can with good ground desire but that which is but probably true may notwithstanding be false However that I may allow my Adversary all he can reasonably ask supposing there were no Children in those Houses mentioned Dato sed non concesso disputandi gratia Allowing but not granting it as we say sometimes in the Schools for disputation-sake yet the Argument is not weakned because the Holy Apostle spoke those Words not with the consideration of there being Children in those Families but in allusion to known Customs among the Jews in their receiving Proselytes of Righteousness as we have made appear in the Book Afterwards he urged the necessity of a direct Command in the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament In totidem verbis for the Baptizing Children in so many Words whereupon I asked him If he believed such a Command necessary to which he replyed He did I returned upon him I thought it was undecent if not absurd so positively to assert a thing necessary and offer no Reason beside I said if he would give a Reason why he believed it necessary I would do that which by Rules of Disputation he could not oblige me to for no Man is bound to prove a Negative viz. prove it not necessary Hereupon he made a longer Pause than before and after he recovered himself made so long an Harange to those present I was forced to pull him by the Sleeve and desire him not to make my House a Meeting-place and assume or take so much Considence as to instruct my People unless he thought me not able for such an Employment which if he did I desired him to make proof and when he had done to make his complaint to my Reverend Diocesan Upon which with a sort of flattering smile he complemented me and told me he thought me able for my Office and said he and I might agree well in all points but one viz. Infant Baptism for he heard I was an Arminian and so was he Whereupon I told him I somewhat doubted whether he understood the Quinquarticular Controversie managed at the Synod of Dort and knew what an Arminian was but whether he did or no was not material now but I acquainted him I desired not to pass under any Character but that of a Christian nay that Honourable Name for the best things may be abused in some Cases and Circumstances if I understand St. Paul right where it is used for a Faction in opposition to Christian Peace is blame worthy Now this I say that every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas 1 Cor. 1.12 13. and I of Christ Is Christ divided was Paul Crucified for you or were you Baptized in the Name of Paul So that there were four Parties in the Church of Corinth And therefore did I affect to be called by a Name that should preserve Universal Charity I would espouse that of a Reformed Catholique without renouncing the Name Christian And then I offered a Reason why there was no necessity for an express Text of Holy Scripture in the New Testament for the Baptizing Infants because it was so long known in the Jewish Church before our Blessed Saviour's days and as he took the other Sacrament from the Jews Post-coenium or After-Supper so he took this from their way of admitting Proselytes of Righteousness before they Circumcised them And why should we not for the same Reason debar Women from the Lord's Supper as Children from being admitted by Baptism into the Covenant seeing there is no more Command for one than for the other So that Christ's not saying whether Children were admitted to Baptism is so far from being a cogent Proof that weighing the former Jewish Customs it is the strongest Motive to believe it But still notwithstanding all I said to shew the absurdity of his Request and the Arguments I offered to signifie the unreasonableness of such a Demand without answering one of my Reasons my Adversary importuned me for an express place of Holy Scripture in the New Testament for the Baptizing Children whereupon I asked him if I brought a place of Holy Scripture whose Sence could have no other tolerable meaning but the allowance of Infants to be Baptized it were not the same as if I brought express Words for Baptizing Children which he yielded Upon which it pleased God as if he would assist the defence of his Divine Truth for I thought not on it before this I own because I am not willing to ascribe any thing to my self to suggest to my Mind that place of St. Paul For the unbelieving Husband is sanctified by the Wife 1 Cor. VII 14. and the unbelieving Wife is sanctified by the Husband else were your Children unclean but now are they Holy Where Interpreters understand by the unbelieving Husband or Wife an Infidel and by the Wife or Husband that sanctifies a Christian from whence I drew this Argument That if Children as soon as born had a right to the Covenant by the Parents Faith where but one of the Parents is a Christian then Baptism being the Sign of the Covenant and not the Covenant as the Antipaedobaptists own It follows by the Argument à Majori ad Minus from the greater to the less if the Child when born hath a right to the Covenant he hath a right to the Sign Omne majus includit in se minus for according to the Logical Maxim The greater includes the less and he that should deny this would be as absurd as he that should say he that receiveth Ten Pounds receives not Five And then I told him there were but two sorts of Holiness with reference to Men though there may be a Relative Holiness with respect to things a Personal and a Foederal Holiness at which he stared on me as if he understood me not on which I
of its being administred to Infants never once questioned the Unlawfulness of it never urged it is a plain Case that those Times had no such Thoughts of Infant-Baptism as the Antipaedobaptists in our Days entertain For had they thought Baptizing Infants unlawful for want of an Holy Scripture Command or Example when any Persons had been exhorted to an early Baptizing their Children how easie an Answer had been at hand The Holy Jesus never commanded such a thing as Infant-Baptism the Blessed Apostles never practised such a thing as the Baptizing Infants There is neither Precept nor Example in Holy Scripture and therefore it is unlawful and we dare not do it But in regard there is in all those times not the least appearance of any such Objection or of any such Plea pretended for the delay it is evident they thought there was either Precept or Example in Holy Scripture or both or else that the want of either or both did not make it unlawful and so did not delay it on the Account of the Unlawfulness thereof And so all our Antipaedobaptists boasting of Antiquity for the Baptizing only Adult Believing Persons and against the Baptizing Believers Infant-Children affords them little Boast there is not the least strength added to their Cause nor weakness brought on ours I heartily wish those ignorant People that are deluded and cozened with the great Noise and gay Shew of Antiquity to take notice hereof that they be no longer deceived and imposed And now this grand prejudice is as I hope fully removed and all Objections I can imagine any way considerable have been endeavoured to be rationally and clearly answered in the following Book I shall now heartily desire my Readers to join with me in the pious and devout Suffrage of our excellent Liturgy in the Office of the Litany That iâ— may please thee to bring into the way of Truth all such as have erred and are deceived We beseech thee to hear us Good Lord. And now as I begun this large Preface with some of the Sens of a Learned Bishop of our Church in some of his Prefaces to his Books so I will conclude this large Account not only with some of the Sens but in the Words of the same Reverend Bishop I mean the Lord-Bishop of Ely In short then to shut up all if it had not been to fill up some vacant Pages and to be just to the performance of the Promise I made in the Title-Page of giving a Relation so far as my Memory would serve of a Conference publicly held with an Antipaedobaptist of no small Fame I had made almost as short a Preface as those Words of the Son of Syrach according to which I expect the Success of my Labour Ecclus XXI 15. If a skilful Mad hear a wise Word he will commend it and add to it But as soon as one of no Vnderstanding heareth it it displeaseth him and he casteth it behind his Back Examine all things and judge righteous Judgment July 26. 1692. A TABLE OF THE CONTENTS CHAP. I. AN Introduction unto the Subject discoursed upon Pag. 1 CHAP. II. Some Rational Arguments offered for Infant-Baptism Pag. 2 CHAP. III. The tru Sens of the Holy Jesus 's Commission unto his Blessed Disciples for the Administration of Baptism recorded St. Matth XXVIII 19. maketh for the Baptizing of Infants Pag. 4 CHAP. IV. An Exposition whereby the Sens delivered of St. Matth. XXVIII 19. is farther cleared Pag. 12 CHAP. V. The Exposition for clearing the Sens of St. Matth. XXVIII 19. farther enlarged Pag. 26 CHAP. VI. The Sens of St. Matth. XXVIII 19. proved by the Coherance and Connexion of the Words Pag. 38 CHAP. VII The Sens of St. Matth. XXVIII 19. farther evidenced from the Original Pag. 40 CHAP. VIII The Sens of St. Matth. XXVIII 19. confirmed by an Exposition of Acts II. 39. in general Pag. 48 CHAP. IX A farther Confirmation by a particular Exposition of Acts II. 39. Pag. 53 CHAP. X. The Sens of St. Matth. XXVIII 19. strengthened by an Exposition of 1 Cor. VII 14. Pag. 57 CHAP. XI Some General Observations upon the Sens and Expositions given Pag. 62 CHAP. XII A defence of the Expositions delivered from Jewish Customs Pag. 68 CHAP. XIII Authorities of the Ancient Fathers to establish the Sens of the Three Texts of Holy Scripture Pag. 72 CHAP. XIV The just Complaint of the Jews if this Doctrin be not tru Pag. 76 CHAP. XV. An Answer unto an Objection that would overthrow the Sens given of St. Matthew XXVIII 19. Pag. 79 CHAP. XVI An Answer unto an Objection that would undermine the Sens offered for Acts II. 39. Pag. 91 CHAP. XVII An Answer unto an Objection that would overturn the Sens delivered of 1 Cor. VII 14. Pag. 125 CHAP. XVIII An Account whence Infant-Baptism results Pag. 137 CHAP. XIX An Appeal unto the Reason of Mankind Pag. 140 CHAP. XX. The Conclusion Pag. 142 A Prayer used at the end of these Dicourses by way of Humble and Importunate Address unto the God of Truth sitting upon his Throne of Grace his Mercy-Seat the true Scheinah or Symbol of his Divine Presence to implore the Descent of the Heavenly Blessing upon this charitable and well-intended Design Pag. 145 CHAP. I. An Introduction to the Subject discoursed upon SEeing some Men of ill Principles and Separatists from our excellent Church have with an evil design set up a Meeting in this Parish as we may reasonably conjecture without breach of Charity I think it my most indispensible Duty to confirm and settle you in those necessary and fundamental Truths our Church holds by the clear Testimony of Holy Scripture and the evident Dictates of Reason that you may not be seduced into dangerous Errors by weak or cunning Men that lie in wait to deceive I have formerly made appear I hope to the satisfaction of unprejudiced because dis-interested Persons that the Place of Holy Scripture the Enemies of Infant-Baptism so much insist upon and boast of viz. St. Matth. xxviij 19. Go teach all Nations baptizing them is no more against the Comfortable and Christian Doctrine of Infant-Baptism than Gen. 1.1 In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth And now I will endeavour to prove That that Place of Holy Scripture if rightly understood is not only not against us but for us and against them And this I will attempt to evince and make appear by the Evidence of Reason and the Testimony of Divine Revelation CHAP. II. Some Rational Arguments for Infant-Baptism THE Argument I offer in short is plainly this which I will reduce into the form of a plain and proper Syllogism That Principle which hinders the Propagation of Christian Religion can be no Christian Doctrine But the denying Baptism to Infants hinders the Progress of the Christian Religion Therefore such a Principle can be no Christian Doctrine The Major all Christians even our Adversaries allow but the making out the Minor is the Difficulty for which
only a distinction in the manner of Conveyance why should any barr lie against the Admission of Children now more than formerly Is Baptism an higher spiritualized Rite than Circumcision That is not possible because Circumcision is an Evangelic Institution I mean an Institution of that Doctrine which was to Abraham delivered of old And if the Spirituality of outward Ordinances is to be drawn from the design of their Appointment then Circumcision was as much spiritualized as Baptism because it truly seals the same Covenant and assures the same Grace and was a Rite of Admission for the same spiritual stock of the Father of the Faithfull as Baptism is among us Hereupon if Circumcision as a Sacrament was the same formerly that Baptism is now it must be consequent That Infants now are as capable of the One provided there is no Precept de novo or a new to exclude them as formerly they were of the Other If it were not absurd that Children then were allowed to be Members of the Church why should it be so under the Holy Gospel If the Almighty allowed them under the former Dispensation to be imbodied into the Church without a Precept to forbid them there is reason they should be allowed the same favour now Nay if Children were made Members of the Church when the Admission was more harsh how irrational is it not to allow them an Entrance now when the way of Admission is more suitable to the Tenderness of an Infant Surely if Jewish Children were Circumcised by blood made with hands Christian Children without a Prohibition of Holy Scripture should be allowed the Spiritual Circumcision which is Baptism Whom the Lord hath admitted an Heir to the Glory above and given an Interest in his Church below no Man should dare to hinder his Title that seals the Inheritance and offers the Privilege But yet so impertinent and censorious have some Antipaedobaptists been Vid. Case of Infant-Baptism p. 30. as to say Children are as unfit for Baptism as the Off-spring of Brutes and that it is as nugacious and triffing to Invocate our Heavenly Father for the Descent of his Divine Spirit as to beseech him to enlighten a Stock or a Stone So that upon this Hypothesis or Supposition That Children are not fit to be Baptized the Antipaedobaptists generally affirm That admitting Children to it is a reproach to the Sacrament a very Nothing an uncommanded Duty and thereupon in contempt term it Baby-Baptism as I have heard some of them phrase it though in truth the strongest Arguments I have heard from them or met with in their Books may more properly be called a Baby than a Manly Defence of their mistaken Principles Not remembring at the same time that Circumcising Children was no Reproach to the Sacrament of Admission into the Jewish Church but had a proper sence and signification so that the Antipaedobaptists might as well say there was Baby-Circumcision and Baby-Baptism under the Mosaic Dispensation both being used to Children among that People Obj. The main Argument they offer against it is drawn from Childrens unfitness for some Purposes of that Ordinance which can be performed by none but such as are Adult who have the use of Reason to know the terms of the Covenant they are admitted to and to exercise the Graces proper for that Ordinance and to confirm those Graces by such an Exercise but Children cannot undertake these things and therefore should not be allowed the use of that Ordinance whose design is so much disappointed in the Application thereof Answ But this Argument or Objection how pleasing soever at first sight is not good 1. Because it is deceitfull in its Consequence and therefore the Conclusion will not hold 2. Because it is a reflection upon some of the former Dispensations of the Wiseft Being 1. Because it is deceitfull in its Consequence and therefore the Conclusion will not hold and that for a Reason I find urged by a Learned Man in his Excellent Tract called The Case of Infant-Baptism which is so strong that if well understood would fully answer if not for ever silence this Objection His Reason is this Because this way of arguing takes away the difference between a strict Institution which is appointed to answer one or more Purposes and particularly for persons of one kind and an Institution of Latitude which is appointed for several Purposes and for different kinds of Persons differently qualified for those several Purposes Of the first kind was the Institution of Fringes which could only be worn properly by those that were Adult because they alone were fit to perform the design of their appointment viz. To look upon them and remember the Commandments of the Lord And these you may suppose were those Phylacteries the Pharisees did wear and because they were Ostentatious Men affected to make them broader than others which Hypocrisie and Dissimulation our Blessed Saviour the Holy Jesus did severely reprove in them and tartly upbraid them for and with And of the other kind is the Sacred Institution of Matrimony which was Instituted by Heaven for several Purposes and for those that are differently qualified and fitted for those several Purposes inasmuch as Persons that are not fit for some Purposes may yet lawfully enter into that State of Life because they are fitted for other ends thereof All the Purposes for which it was Instituted cannot be performed but by such as are past the Age allowed by all for the begetting Infants yet such as have out-grown those years are not wholly unfit for that State Nor is their Matrimony of no force or an Impeachment of the Sacred Institution of Matrimony because they are only fitted for one Purpose for which Matrimony was Instituted and that is the last End for which our Excellent Church tells us Marriage was Ordained viz. the mutual society help and comfort the one ought to have of the other in prosperity and adversity This one Instance declares how deceitfull our Adversaries Argument is against the admitting Children to Baptism because of their unfitness for some Purposes for which it was Instituted they should first offer a Proof for what they would have allowed but have no reason to expect viz. That it was a Sacred Appointment of the former kind which I term a strict Institution and then their way of arguing would hold But this I am well satisfied they can never do because that Ordinance came in the place of Circumcision which was a Sacred Appointment of the second kind and because the Blessed Jesus underwent Baptism in whom there was more unfitness than there could be in Children The Baptist in truth used the Baptism of Repentance and thereupon assured the World of the Pardon of Sins and on that account knowing our dear Saviour stood in no necessity thereof was not willing to admit him to it St. Matth. iij. 14. But John forbad him saying I have need to be baptized of thee and comest thou to me But our Blessed
with our Adversaries I will give them two Concessions which I think is all they can reasonably ask 1. We will allow that St. Peter designed to support their Spirits as to their Infants upon their outcry when the Roman President declared himself innocent of the Blood of that just Person St. Matth. xxvij 25. upon which they exclaimed His Blood be upon us and upon our Children 2. We will allow that it is not impossible but that by Children here may be understood adult Persons yet in the words are several particulars so clear as will be strong enough to defend our Orthodox Principle 1. That the Promise here offered to them and their Children was the New Dispensation the Holy Jesus was Author of and the same Dispensation which tho' in obscurer terms and times had been declared to the Father of the Faithful which Dispensation also included Father and Son 2. That except St. Peter did in this Promise include their Children they had not been strongly supported under the Curse they wished for themselves and their Offspring upon supposition they should depart this World before actual Repentance 3. They had no reason to believe their Infants included in the Promise except they had been qualified for the Sign and Sacrament under the New Dispensation as they were of the Sign of the Old Covenant for all visible Confirmation is by Seal and by this account we may understand the full sense of what is said Ver. 41. And the same day were added to them about three thousand Souls viz. Masters of Families becoming Christians Infants and all in their House according to the Terms of the Covenant and Usage of the Jews were admitted and received to Baptism otherwise how should three thousand Souls be particularly taught for it is not probable that St. Peter's Sermon did reach the ears of all that were there present and moreover as our Adversaries would perswade us they must every one be treated with and spoken to which was morally impossible for so few Apostles as may probably be conjectured to be there and in so short a time as we may reasonably suppose they stayed where they were But to all this our Adversaries gainsay because the Text tells us not An Obj. they and their Children were receiv'd to Baptism but they only that gladly receiv'd his Word Answ To which I make this return 1. This Text doth not so evidently conclude the thing done that Children were then receiv'd to Baptism tho' it may properly enough infer it from what hath been offered in the general Account as their Title to it by force of their being adopted into Covenant by virtue of their Parents Faith 2. That the Infants were receiv'd to Baptism is not specified becauset here was no necessity for doing that which might be reasonably supposed 3. Because the Covenant for substance was the same with that delivered to Abraham of old time the Administration made the sole distinction 4. There being three thousand Souls added to the Church they could not be admitted Members thereof without Baptism and this being all done in one day it is not in the least probable they could all be adult Men or if they were it is as highly improbable so few as the Holy Apostles then were could have time which our Adversaries think necessary to treat with and discourse every person 5. Because all is not expressed in Holy Writ that was tranfacted and when an Historical Account is rehearsed some Particulars are inserted not named in the prior or former Declaration As for instance In the Story of the Holy Apostle of the Gentiles his miraculous Call is taken notice of three times and his being baptized more than once and yet in the second Relation concerning his Baptism there is something added to the first Account Acts xxij 16. Arise and be baptized and wash away they sins calling on the Name of the Lord declaring the Scope and Design of Baptism as well as how necessary it was and it is probable had there been reason to rehearse this Account related Acts ij as there was of St. Paul's other matters possibly this of admitting Infants to Baptism had been inserted 6. By way of Retortion to return their own Argument upon them because Women are not named neither in the Commission St. Matth. xxviij 19. nor Acts ij 41. to be baptized both being rendred by the Greek in the Masculine Gender I may therefore according to their way of arguing urge because it is not declared in the Sacred Text that they who gladly received the Word with their Wives were baptized I might therefore according to their manner of disputing say no Women had as yet received Baptism for it was after this time that we read in Samaria Women were baptized by St. Philip. Acts viij 12. So that tho' the Design of the Covenant be known yet not always declared in Holy Writ and the baptizing of Infants may verily be believed to be of this kind CHAP. X. The Sense of St. Matth. xxviij 19. strengthned by an Exposition of 1 Cor. vij 14. THE second place is that of St. Paul the Holy Apostle of the Uncircumcision or the Gentile World 1 Corinth vij 14. For 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 This place of St. Paul is a strong confirmation of the Sense and a clear conviction of the truth of the Interpretation I have given of the first Text of the last quoted place of St. Peter St. Paul was a Pharisee the most learned and strictest Sect among the Jews and was so well instructed in the Christian Religion that he himself saith he was not a whit behind any the best and most knowing of the Holy Apostles and for the encouragement of the Pagan World to embrace Christianity he publickly declares and assures them that the believing Paganish Husband or Wise should have a Power and Priviledge to transmit and convey their Faith to their Seed so that their Children after such a conversion of the Parent should be capable of a Federal or Covenant-Holiness which should be of such efficacy and vertue as to impute and make over to them a Right to the Covenant and then by the Seal of Baptism to be receiv'd into the Church admitted to the favour of God and made Heirs of Heaven by virtue of their Membership in the Covenant of Grace Thus we plainly see by the Testimony of Holy Scripture and by the Evidence of Reason a Reason so infallible and unerring that it is conducted by the Light of Divine Revelation what is the plain natural and proper sense of the Holy Jesus's Commission to his Blessed Disciples St. Matth. xxviij 9. Go teach all Nations baptizing them So that he who shall from a mistaken sense of that place of Holy Scripture deny Baptism unto Infants hinders the Propagation and Progress of Christian Religion makes the
Covenant of Grace less beneficial and extensive than the Covenant of Works and so consequently doth not allow as great Benefits Priviledges and Immunities to the Covenant of Grace which he doth to the Covenant of Works all which are the dangerous Consequences of Antipedobaptism as I hope I have sufficiently proved and convincingly made out and in the evincing or proving this Argument I have plainly shewed that we have the proper meaning of three Texts of Holy Scripture which I think to any Man of sense is as clear a Proof and as powerful an Evidence to engage our belief to the truth of any Doctrin propounded to us as if we had brought the positive and express Words of Holy Scripture which is as strong a conviction as any Man can with the least shew of reason desire So that if the true sense of the Holy Jesus's Commission to his Blessed Disciples be duly considered and that no other meaning can tolerably be put upon them being backt with the Authority of two other places of Holy Scripture and a threefold Cord is not easily broken no Antipedobaptist that is a Man of sense will hereafter press for a positive and direct place of Holy Writ because he hath no reason to expect a Tautology in Sacred Scripture to please an Humour or serve an Interest and because he will thereby weaken his Cause and then have great reason to be ashamed of if not repent for the Injury he doth his Principles and he will see the vanity of demanding express words for a confutation when he hath plain sense against him for the Holy Scriptures are to be expounded and interpreted by their Sense and not by their Sound by their Spiritual Meaning and not by the bare Words Syllables and Letters for they are best understood by their proper Design and Purport or a true Relation to their Coherence and Connexion with what preceeds and follows after And now give me leave to offer one thing that will confirm the sense of the Texts I have delivered and will also further shew how unreasonable and absurd weak and trifling the Antipedobaptists are for being so peremptory and positive in demanding an express place of Holy Scripture for the baptizing of Infants and this I will endeavour to evince from Customs among the Jews well known to all learned Men. Three things were required by the Jews to make a Male Proselyte of Righteousness Circumcision a kind of Purfication by Water which was an Allusion to Baptism and Oblation which was commonly two Turtles or Pidgeons To a Female Purification by Water and Oblation Now because the Jews since their Dispersion have neither Altar nor Sacrifice they say For the Male Circumcision and Purification by Water are sufficient For the Female Only Purification by Water In David's time they tell us many Thousands were added to the Church without Circumcision by Purification only Hence we may observe that a kind of Admission by Water into the Church was long in use among the Jews tho' it were not Sacramental till the Blessed Jesus's Institution therefore it may seem to be used by them because they looked for it as a Sacrament at the coming of the Messiah as is evident by their coming to St. John the Baptist not so much scrupling his Baptism as his Authority by what Power he baptized St. John i. 25. And they asked him and said unto him Why baptizest thou then if thou be not that Christ nor Elias nor that Prophet By which three different words they meant the Messiah because he was well known to the Jews by those Terms or Phrases to be foresignified so that had he owned himself for such they would not have doubted his Commission but Christ being plainly proved the Messiah he was Lord of the Sacrament as well as of the Sabbath and so had a sufficient Power to institute a New Sacrament and so substituted Baptism in the room of Circumcision which whosoever believes not to be as extensive as the other is so irrational as to make the holy Jesus not so merciful a Legislator as Moses which shews the unreasonableness and absurdity of demanding an express Text of holy Scripture for Infant Baptism which was the Truth to be cleared and I hope is sufficiently made apparent and manifest CHAP. XI Some general Observations upon the Sense and Expositions delivered LET me now offer some general Observations upon the Sense and Expositions of those Texts I have brought for the Proof hereof and I will begin with the Observation of Chemnitius in his Plea he makes against the Antipedobaptists of Germany * Ego sane qui simplicitatem amo etiamsi nec intelligam nec explicare possim quomodo Infantes qui Baptizantur credant judico tamen suffitire firmissima illa testimonia explicata Infantes esse Abaptizandos neque enim ab illis propterea discedendum etsi non possim vel intelligere velexplicare quomedo credant Infames Chemnit Exam. Conc. Trid. part 2. Tit. de Baptismo ad Canon 13. I do so truly love Simplicity and Truth that altho' I cannot tell how Children who are baptized believe yet I judge the Testimonies from Holy Scripture above-named most strong Evidences and a sufficient Proof for this Christian Practice neither ought Christians to depart from this Truth tho' I cannot understand or explain how Children believe In some things we should take St. Paul's Advice And become Fools that we may be wise 1 Cor. iij. 18. Obedience being more acceptable than burnt Offerings 1 Sam. xv 22. And we should offer up our Understandings to divine Revelation where there is clear Reason to submit to it Faith is the wisest and most well-pleasing Service we can offer to God Nescire ea quae docere non vult Magister maximus erudita est inscitia not to know those things our great Master would have us ignorant of is if I may so speak without a Solecism a learned Ignorance But prais'd be Heaven I have yet met with no Arguments of the Adversaries so strong as to need such an Apology or Plea We find not any Accusation laid to the Charge of Christianity by the Jewish or Pagan World upon this Account which certainly would have been done by some of the Enemies of our holy Religion if the Jewish Believer had not enjoyed the same Immunities when Christian that he did before Or if the first Planters of Christianity had preached the same Doctrin the Antipedobaptists do now how would the Enemies of our holy Religion have declamed against us and declared the Doctrin they preached was not the same Covenant God offered to the Father of the Faithful and the People of Israel because that included Father and Son as to the Covenant and the Sign that conveyed the Benefits of the Covenant An Obj. Now because the Antipedobaptists call upon us for an Example of any baptized in a gathered Church without Faith and that herein the holy Scripture is silent Answ To which I
in the least trusting to my self but earnestly begging the Aid of Heaven that the God of Truth would enable me to maintain what was true And this I the rather did because I believed this one of the Doctrins of Faith once delivered to the Saints St. Jude vers 2. St. Jude exhorts Christians earnestly to contend for When the Day was come I waited till about ten or eleven of the Clock before my Antagonist appeared about which hour he came and knock'd at door which when I opened I saw him and a great Crowd I let in as many as my room I intended for our Dispute would hold for so many crowded in There were some scores After I let him in he walked somewhat briskly and with a sort of Smile as if I were to be led in Triumph as the Roman Victors dealt with their conquered Slaves at the end of my Hall attacks me with a Challenge to dispute in the Church I told him there seemed some Vanity in the Request as if he designed Noise more than Argument Whereupon I desired him to look into my Parlor which I told him was large enough for as many as were fit to hear us Beside I told him to dispute in the Church might be accounted a Riot and I asked him if he would secure me from the damage I might sustain by undergoing the Penalty assigned for the Transgression of the Laws Whereto he answered he thought the Act for Liberty of Conscience was my Security To which I replyed though I had the use of my Church for Preaching as he his Meeting-place to Hold-forth in yet I did not believe the Law allowed the Church to be a place for Disputation nor was it fit it should because it was improper where the Holy Gospel of Peace was Preached there Contention or Controversie should be managed However if he would go to my Reverend Diocesan and request his leave upon License from him I would comply After which he walked into my Parlour to enter into Discourse I told him being so many were gathered together we should act with good Intentions designing the People's satisfaction that they might be convinced which of us had Truth on his side being our Principles were diametrically opposite and directly contrary not consulting our Credit as if we contended for Victory more than Truth and being we of the Church of England had the Laws on our side for what we professed and as we thought Truth in Possession he ought by strong Reasons to shew our Title was not Good before he attempted to dis-seize us of the Truth we hoped we justly possessed But before we begun I desired one thing which I thought was reasonable because for the Good of the Auditors and that was I had a License from my Lord Bishop to teach School and on that Account I had an Usher that did write a fair and swift hand and desired he might write the Argumentative part of our Discourse and such Collateral Proofs we urged to strengthen our Arguments and after our Conference was done the Writing might be viewed by such as heard us and they have Liberty to judge which had spoken most Truth and that he might be sure he should not be imposed on I told him the Man that wrote what he spoke should read it and ask him if it were his Words and his Sens or if he could read Written-hand he should read it himself which I had not said but he moved me by asking an impertinent Question before but he answered he would have nothing writ on either side That Proposal being denied I had another to make which was as reasonable viz. That I might propose two or three Cases that should include the greatest part of what was necessary for solving the Doubts and answering the Objections against Infant-Baptism and if he would allow any of his Party to understand the Principles of Antipaedobaptism better than himself I would appeal to him whether they did not or if he thought I imposed too much by such a Proposal for I had resolved before his coming to treat him with civility I would allow him the Liberty I desired to take provided the Questions he should ask were as proper as mine for I am of the Poet's Mind Damus petimusque vicissim The Answer I had was He should not ask me a Question nor should I ask him one upon which I replyed That his coming was to wrangle â—ot dispute and I was sorry the People were so disappointed however I was willing they should hear what he had to say on which I desired him to begin but I perceived which he ought not to have done for a Reason I have hinted he expected I should begin whereupon I did But before I give an Account of what was said I will give you the three Cases propounded for a resolution of The Antipaedobaptists Object An Obj. Baptism is only to be administred to the Adult and those of years of Discretion For the making out of which in Answer to what is objected it is desired these things appear If Children are to be Baptized answ 1 then it seems necessary there should be an express place of Holy Scripture to enjoyn it though the former part of the Proposition be allowed yet the Consequence follows not and therefore is desired to be proved If a Party be admitted into Covenant answ 2 then it seemeth needful the Party should understand the Articles of the Covenant he is admitted to but in some Cases this is as inconsequent as the former and therefore it is desired that the Consequence of this Hypothetic or Conditional Proposition be evinced or made out to be universally true in all Cases and in all Times answ 3 If there was an express place of Holy Scripture for the Circumcising of Children under the Law then it seems reasonable there should be an express place of Holy Scripture for Baptizing Children under the Blessed Gospel and this likewise is desired to be made evident and because according to the Logicians Rule Affirmanti incumbit probatio The Proof lies on his side that Asserts and the Antipaedobaptists do affirm these things it is desired they make proof or else they have no Reason to expect we should entertain a Belief of them And now being I was engaged to begin I will give as true an Account as I can of what I offered and he answered I told him I thought it as reasonable Children should be admitted into Covenant under the Holy Gospel as under the Law there being nothing more in the Holy Gospel-Covenant to debar them an admission thereto than there was in that under the Law besides it adds strength to the Argument if we consider that the Covenant made with Abraham and the Holy Gospel Covenant are for substance one and the same as St. Paul tells us expressly Gal. iii. 8. and as we have made appear in the Book Vid. p. 97 98. of this Book and certainly the Holy Apostle
An Obj. that our way is not Baptism or Baptizing but Rantism or Rantizing I Answer Answ Though our Church alloweth dipping in some cases and circumstances as supposing the Parents desire it and the Party's health is not in the least endangered and of that there may be much greater hazard in our cold Northern Climate than in those hot Eastern Countries where Baptism was first used and of the Party's health our excellent Church taketh such care in her Rubric that she Orders if it be done at all See the Liturgy in the Office of Publick Baptism it shall be done with great discretion and wariness and not without the Sponsors and Undertakers certifying the Child may with safety endure it but if the Party's health may in the least measure be endangered thereby there cannot by any means be a necessity for it for this good Reason Hos VI. 6. St. Matth. IX 13. XII 7.3.4 St. Luke VI. 4. Levit. XXIV 9. because the God of Heaven will have Mercy and not Sacrifice i.e. The Almighty God and best of Beings dispenseth with his own Institutions in such cases as is plain from the Instance of David eating the Shew-bread when he was well an hungred and they that were with him which was not lawful for him to eat neither for them which were with him because it was lawful for none but the Priest's alone So that for the Reason I have offered the Objection lieth not directly against the Church of England or any that own her Rational because Scriptural Principles yet the Judicious Mr. Walker hath made it demonstrably and therefore unanswerably appear from Divines Grammarians and Lexicographers Vide Mr. Walker 's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Doctrine of Baptisms which whole Book with his Modest Plea for Infant Baptism is very well worthy any Man's perusal that neither the Primitiv Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor the Derivativ Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie only to dip and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not always signifie a total Immersion and that the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not restrained to a total Immersion among Christians by the practise of the Jews Nay farther he hath clearly evidenced that sprinkling was used in the earliest Centuries or first Ages of the Primitiv Church besides he hath given probable Arguments to incline if not engage any unprejudiced Man's Belief that sprinkling was the Custom in the Holy Apostolic times even in those early days when the first commissionated Teachers went forth into the several parts of the World to publish the Sacred Gospel and more than all this he gives great probability of believing See Mr. Walker 's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Doctrine of Baptisms Chap. X. that our ever Blessed Saviour the Holy Jesus when he was Baptized by St. John the Baptist in the River Jordan did not undergo a total Immersion And this I think is abundantly sufficient if not more than enough to Answer if not for ever silence that Objection but they that would have a more ample and larg Account may receiv a full and clear satisfaction from what that excellent Man hath said on that Subject to whom I referr the Readers I know but one Objection that is any thing at all considerable for I would not willingly neglect any that are worth answering I hav not mentioned and that I find started by Mr. Walker in his late excellent Book I have so oft quoted It may be met with in his Preface and because he hath stated it so fairly and answered it so strongly I will give it you in his own Words because I cannot better express it either as to Sens or Words object Because there is no one prejudice holds a stronger possession of our Antipaedobaptists than what springs from that bright Evidence they have of Baptizing Adult Persons in all Ages of the Church and of Persons deferring either to be Baptized themselves or to Baptize their Infants in several Ages of it and those especially that were nearest the Primitiv Times and the removal of that Prejudice and answering that Objection may be a fair Introduction to their depositing and laying down all the rest answ Therefore I will endeavour by way of Conclusion and Answer to remove that and if I can shew the delays of Baptizings which the Antipaedobaptists so greatly insist on in the ancient times were on other Grounds from those they alledg in the Case and plead for a defence of their erroneous and mistaken Principles then that Plea of theirs from the Practice of Baptizing the Adult in the early Ages of the Church and deferring the Baptizing Infants will neither serve their Hypothesis or Principle nor disserve ours The Grounds as I understand on which our Antipaedobaptists refuse Baptizing of their Infants and deferr their Baptism till they come to full Maturity or Ripeness of Age are because as they suppose there is no Command in Holy Scripture for it and because there is no Example in Holy Scripture of its practice either of which if there found our Adversaries would hold it lawful and because they find neither of them they hold it unlawful Now if it appear the Unlawfulness of Baptizing Infants for the want of an Holy Scripture-Command or Example was none of the Grounds on which the Ancients did delay their Baptizings And if it be likewise evident that never any such thing was in the Primitiv Times pretended or pleaded by any Persons to justifie or excuse that delay then I hope the Case will be clear that their delays of Baptizing on other Grounds can afford no Protection to or Defence for the Hypothesis or Principle of our Antipaedobaptists who deny Baptism to Infants on the Account of its Unlawfulness That never any such Plea was made by any in the Primitiv Times even for Five hundred years against Infants being Baptized I rationally presume because I find none yet produced by any of the most learned of our Antipaedobaptists who I believe have searched through all the Writings of the Ancient Fathers and Ecclesiastic Historians and ransacked every Page and rifled every passage in them for some Patronage to their Hypothesis or Principle And as they are quick-sighted enough to have espied it if there had been Quotation or Authority from them to have produced it in their behalf so on the most curious and diligent Enquiry I have been ever able to make I profess I have not been able to find any And then learnedly from Tertullian St. Gregory Nyssen St. Basil St. Gregory Nazianzen and St. Chrysostome he gives Eighteen or Nineteen Instances of several Cases for the deferring of Baptism and afterward brings in three or four other Cases which are all I think could be reckoned up Upon which he saith that I may draw to a Conclusion and now so many Reasons being alledged for the delaying of Baptism so many shifts used for the putting it off in the Primitiv Times and yet the Lawfulness