Saints and our Saviour tells us that of such is the Kingdom of Heaven and they are to be no other then Saints and we are warranted by a Divine Testimony to look upon them as such which in their present Infant-state they cannot be liable to any suspicion of defeating by Hypocrisie as grown persons may The Author brings in Dr. Taylor whom he looks upon as his dear friend and he hath reason for it having helpt him to a great part of his Book The said Dr. saith he tells us very elegantly in his Lib. of Prophecy pag. 242. That this is truly to be Baptized whatsoever is less then this is but the Symbole only a meer Cere mony an opus operatum a dead Letter an empty shadow an Instrument without an Agent to manage or force to actuate it Repl. The Dr. wants not words but this signifies nothing against Infant-Baptism for all this may be as truly said of those that are Baptized when grown up that have not truth of grace But because I observe with what Reverence this Doctor is mentioned as if all were Canonical which he saith in their behalf and I find the Authors Book to swell with his Sesquipedalia verba I shall for prevention of delusion inform the Reader with some news which may be worth his hearing Know therefore that the said Doctor put forth a Book about 20. years since entituled The Lyberty of Prophecy in which he pleads for a Toleration as for others so also for those that dissent from Infant-Baptisme There he personates an Anabaptist and tells us he will draw up a Scheme or Plea for them and saith he though they be deceived yet they have so great excuse of their side that their Error is not impudent lib. of Proph. p. 223. and therefore may be tolerated Then doth he shew what they may say for themselves and concludes Thus far the Anabaptists may argue and they have been incouraged in their Error more by the accidental Advantages we have given them by our weak arguings then by any Truth of their cause or excellency of their wit The Doctor therefore having a mind it seems to shew the excellency of his own wit A worthy Testimony to be brought against Infant-Baptisme hath said more for them then ever they could before or since say for themselves so that his strong arguings for them hath eventually proved a greater encouragement to them then ever any of our weak arguings did before And yet after all the goodly Harrangue he makes in their behalf he at last shuts up with this viz. The use I make of it never dreaming what use H.D. would make of it is That since there is no direct impiety in their opinion they are by all means Christian fair and humane to be convinced and instructed but if they cannot be perswaded they must be left to God and I am of his mind And lastly adds for his own part he believes Infant-Baptism to be a truth but because some have thought the Doctor had spoke more in their behalf then he himself could well answer as Conjurers sometimes raise spirits they cannot lay he hath since put forth an Excellent piece stiled A Consideration of the practice of the Church in Baptizing Infants of Believing Parents and the Practise justified Printed by J. Elesher for R. Royston at the Angel in Ivy-lane M. DC L. II. in the Preface to which we have this account That as for those Arguments which in The Liberty of Prophecying Sect. 18. are alleadged against Paedobaptisme and in the opinion of some do seem to stand in need of answering he had it once in thought to have answered them but upon these considerations he forbore 1. Because those Arguments are not good in themselves or to the question precisely considered but only by relation to the preceeding Arguments there brought for Paedobaptisme they may seem good one against another but those in the Plea for the Anabaptists have no strength but what is accidental as he conceives 2. Because in this Discourse for Infant-Baptisme he hath really laid such grounds and proved them that upon their supposition all those arguments in the Liberty of Prophecy and all other which he ever heard of will fall of themselves 3. Because those Arguments to his sense are so weak and so relying upon failing and deceitful Principles that he was loath to do them so much reputation as to account them worthy the answering 4. Because he hath understood that his very worthy friend Dr. Hammond Dr. Hammonds Letter of Resolution to 6 Quaeties Printed by J. Elesher for R. Royston at the Angel in Ivy-lane 1653. hath in his Charity and Humility descended to answer that Collection I have transcribed all this that the Reader may mind this Information when ever he meets with any thing quoted out of Dr. Taylor as he shall at least eighteen times and sometimes very largely whole pages nay two pages and more at a time by our Antagonist in his Treatise of Baptisme And truly a man would wonder at his weakness that since the Doctor in his Lib. of Proph. doth profess himself for Infant-Baptisme notwithstanding all that he says against it personating an Anabaptist as he confesseth and since he doth so villifie them for their error and weakness the Author should undervalue his cause so much as to make use of such fallacious reasonings as the Dr. himself calls them Next we have him again at Mr. Baxter wronging both him and his Reader in what he citeth out of his Disputation with Mr. Blake as formerly Mr. Baxter saith the Author in his 10 Argument pag. 117 118. speaks to the same purpose viz. Christ hath instituted no Baptisme but what is to be a sign of present Regeneration c. Here he curtailes Mr. Baxters words on purpose to blind the Reader for Mr. Baxter adds at least to men of age The 4. End is signally to represent the Covenant and promise that the Believer enters into hereby viz. to dye to sin and live to Christ for which he cites Mr. Perkins Baxter and Dr. Taylor the two former we have spoken enough of in the first Chapter where we find them most professedly for Infant-Baptisme and have condemned the Author for wresting their sence they speaking of Adult persons or Aliens and not in opposition to the Baptisme of Believers children and for that of Dr. Taylor That Baptisme is called the answer of a good conscience towards God 1 Pet 3.21 which saith he can by no means be applyed to the Infant since they are not capable thereof till they know to refuse the evil and choose the good Repl. I. To this Dr. Hammond answers namely This is as true of that Baptisme which belongs to children as to any other only the duty of it is not required till they come to years and ability to perform it and then if they keep not a good conscience it will be little available And if this be of any force
that in time will produce its proper Actions It is certain that they can receive the new birth and are capable of it The effect of it is salvation if infants can receive this effect then also the new-birth without which they cannot receive the effect and he illustrates the point by a Similitude thus As the reasonable soul and all its faculties are in children Will and Vnderstanding Passions and Powers of Attraction and Propulasion yet these faculties do not operate or come abroad till time and art observation and experience have drawn them forth into action So may the spirit of grace the principle of Christian life be infused and yet lie without action till in its own day it is drawn forth and then he goes on Who is he that understands the Spirit so well as to know how or when it is infused and how it operates in all its periods and what it is in its Being and proper Nature or how or to what purpose God in all varieties does dispense it Then again if Nature saith he hath in Infants an evil principle which operates when the child can choose but is all the while within the soul Why cannot Infants have a good principle through Grace though it works not till its own season as well as an evill principle 4. Though Infants are uncapable of performing such duties as are incumbent upon professing men and women yet this hinders not but that they may be Church-Members Pray tell us what duties could those Israelitish Babes perform who notwithstanding their incapacity were asis before Members of the Church with their Parents And though they answer not all the Characters Christ gives his Adult Disciples which the Author objects against them yet they are capable of union to the Church and Fellowship in the priviledges thereof They are capable of her prayers and other pious offices and for whom the Church hath a more special care and obligation of tenderness for their souls than for others that are Without and why should this seem strange since they are Members of the Common-wealth and of the family and are capable of union with both estates and the priviledges thereof and yet cannot perform obedience to the State and Orders of either In like sort Infants are admitted Tenants but the Fealty or Homage is respited till they are of age 5. Lastly Christ himself as Mr. Baxter notes was head of the Church according to his humane nature in his infancy and this proves that the nonage of Infants makes them not uncapable of being Members And let any judge whether it be his will that no Infants should be Members For my part saith he when I consider that Infant State of Christ our head and the honour done to him therein it strongly perswades me that they know not his will who say they will not have Infants to be visible Members He farther Objects the Church of England who in their 19th Artiele do acknowledge that the visible Church is a number of Christians by profession This is down right Mr. Tombs's Examen part 3. pag. 41. only Tombes hath more charity for the Infants of Believers though not without some contradiction For he there acknowledgeth that in facie Ecclesiae visibilis Infants of believers are to be accounted Gods to belong to his Family and Church and not the Devils And what do any of us say more But mark Reader how Mr. Tombs doth esteem them such why saith he it is so as being in a near possibility of being Members of the Church of God by an act of opinion grounded on probable hopes for the future But to make them actual members of the visible Church is to overthrow the definitions of the visible Church that Protestant writers give particularly the Church of England Art 19. To which Mr. Marshall answers If overthrows it not at all for they all include the Infants of such Professors as Infants Male and Female too least you say that Circumcision made them Members I add also saith he Baptisme now as well as Circumcision of old is a real though implicite profession of the Christian Faith Next we have Dr. Owen whom he cites no less than four times in what follows in this Chapter whose judgement is sufficiently known to be against our Opposites And notwithstanding the misinterpretation the Author puts upon some passages in the Doctors Catechisme we have a particular account of his judgment in Print in a Book called A Declaration of the Faith and Order owned and practised in the Congregational Churches agreed upon and consented unto by their Elders and Messengers in their meeting at the Savoy Octob. 12. 1658. where to my knowledge he was present and the principal man of that Assembly and concerning the point before us we have it chap 29. Art 4. thus exprest viz. Not only those that do actually profess Faith in and obedience unto Christ but also the Infants of one or both believing Parents are to be Baptized and those only And in complyance herewith we have the judgment of the Synod of Elders Assembled at Boston in New-England appointed by the Court 1662. who strongly maintain by several Arguments in that printed piece That the Insant Seed of Believers are Church-Members and that being according to Scripture Members of the visible Church they are consequently the Subjects of Baptism See also the Presbyterian judgement upon the point in the larger Catechisme of the Assembly of Divines Baptisme say they is not to be administred to any that are out of the visible Church and so strangers to the Covenant of promise till they profess their Faith in Christ and obdeience to him But Infants descending from Parents either both or but one of them professing Faith in Christ and obedience to him are in that respect within the Covenant and to be Baptized we see here who they take to be of the visible Church and within the Covenant and to be baptized As for the Authority of particular Authors we have them on our side in great abundance Piscator hath it thus on the 28. of Matthew Porrò ad Ecclesiam pertinent non solùm adulti fidem profitentes sed etiam ipsorum liberi Not only grown persons who profess the Faith appertain to the Church but also their Infants Theodore Beza in his Absters Cat. Heshuii pag. 333. hath this passage Meritò arbitramur Infantes fidelium in peculio domini censeri We rightly judge the Infants of the faithful to be of the Lords Flock and he speaks of them there before Baptisme And in our Margent Bible we have this Note upon the first of Corinthians 7.14 They that are born of either of the Parents faithful are also counted Members of Christs Church because of the Promise Act. 2.39 Peter Martyr loc Commun cl 4. c. 8. p. 821 823. Non excludimus eos Infantes ab Ecclesia sed ut ejus partes amplectimur c. We exclude not Infants from the Church but imbrace them as parts John Calvin to whom
Arise and be Baptized and wash away thy Sins hath a favorable aspect upon Gods designing and blessing that Ordinance for the sealing of pardon in reference to grown Persons 2. To work Grace and Regeneration This is Mr. Tombes his 7th Argument against Infant-Baptism Exer. pag. 30. and to effect Salvation by the work done Although the Author knows all Protestants disclaim this and condemn it for a damnable Error yet he seems indirectly at least to charge it upon the Church of England which for my part I look upon it as very unjustly done What means else those reflections of his pag. 148. upon that passage in the Service-Book in the Rubrick before the Catechism viz. That Children being Baptized have all things necessary for their Salvation and be undoubtedly saved and then after Baptism the Priest must say We yield thee hearty thanks that it hath pleased thee to Regenerate this Infant with thy Holy Spirit just comporting saith he length and breadth with Pope Innocent's first Canons Answer 'T is fit the Church of England should be believed in what sence she intends those words Baptism by the Ancients was commonly called Regeneration or a new-Birth so 't is by the Scripture Tit. 3.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Washing of the new-Birth or Regeneration and we may learn it in her Articles which speaks her at an infinit distance from the absurd and irrational Error of Salvation by merit or ex opere operato and 't is not for others to put what interpretation they think meet especially such as are Obnoxious to her Lash Will you hear what Mr. Cotton of New-England an Independant as they call them speaks in Vindication of the Church of England in this particular matter and at a place where he needed not her favour and as I take it at a time when she could not help him which are circumstances that will not suffer us to suspect him of flattering or fawning We have it in his grounds and ends of Children's Baptism Notwithstanding saith he those expressions in the Service Book yet the Church of England doth professedly teach the contrary Doctrine not only in their Pulpits but in Books allowed by publique Authority She doth assert that the Scraments do not beget Faith nor Regeneration ex opere operato but they are signs and seals thereof Nor do I find that the publique Prayers of the Church are contrary hereunto but as in judgment they do believe that God by Covenant promiseth to pour clean Water upon us and our Seed Ezek. 26.25 Is 48.3 and that he Sealeth the Covenant and Promise by Baptism 3. That it was an Apostolical Tradition And for that we have the Testimonies of Origen and Cyprian as before Mr. Tombes his 4th Argument against Infant-Baptism Exerc. p. 28. Chap. 3. Part 2. who lived near the Apostles days and in which Chapter we have also shewn how Tradition is both by the Fathers of old and Reformed Churches taken in a safe sence different from that corrupt one of the Papists and not derogatory to the authority of the Scripture 4. That Children have Faith and are the Disciples of Christ Answer No Paedobaptists ever held Children had personally actual Faith for their condition is insufficient for the production of Intellectual Acts but as for the habit and grace of Faith the inherent infused power of believing it is more than any Antipaedobaptist in the World can prove they have not for 1. Their condition makes them not uncapable of Sin and Corruption in the Roots and Principles of it most of them confess it Anabaptistae ut Paedobaptismum prorsus tollerent peccatum negârunt Originale ut non sub esset causa cur Infantes Baptizarentur Dr. Prideaux Lect. 22. pag. 331. though some of them deny Original Sin and therefore not of the Roots and Principles of grace of which Faith is one for the acts of both are Moral and Intellectual But whether Infants Baptized have any such thing as a distinct habit of Faith or no this question of their Baptism depends not upon it It is a hidden thing The ground on which we give them Baptism must be visible and so it is viz. their being the Seed of Believers and hereby visibly entitled to the Covenant and so to the Seal of it We look not to what they have but to whom they pertain viz. to God as being the Seed of his Servants That they are Disciples is sufficiently proved Chap. 1. Part. 1. 5. That all Children of Believers are in the Covenant and federally Holy That 's abundantly made good Chap. 3. Part 2. 6. By defiling and polluting the Church viz. 1. By bringing false matter therein who are no Saints by calling being neither capable to perform duties nor enjoy priviledges Notwithstanding their inability to perform Duty yet they are capable of enjoying Priviledges as we have abundantly made good Chap. 6. Part 1. and are as true matter for the Church now under the Gospel as formerly under the Law as is there made out 2. By laying a foundation of much Ignorance and Profaness Cujus contrarium est verissimum The contrary is most true for 1. Infant-Baptism layes a singular good foundation for knowledg for in that Children are taken into Christs School they are in a near capacity to be taught and those who recommend them to that Ordinance are obliged to promote their knowledg and to see them brought up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Nurture and Admonition of the Lord. And we know the Liturgy of the Church of England But the neglect hereof is much to be lamented the Children are not lookt after as they should be nor do Ministers mind them of their duty gives charge You must remember that it is your part and duty to see that this Infant be taught so soon as he shall be able to learn And that he may know these things the better ye shall call upon him to hear Sermons and chiefly you shall provide that he may learn the Creed the Lords-Prayer and the ten-Commandments in the English Tongue and all other things that a Christian man ought to know and believe to his Souls health c. Secondly it laies a good foundation for Holiness They are minded by their Baptism to cast of the Devil's service as soon as they are able to reflect that they were from their very Cradles dedicated to God whose Livery they have worn And some have repelled great temptations by virtue of their engagement to God by Baptism in their Infancy hence saith Mr. Ford in his 2d Dialogue concerning the Practical use of Infant-Baptism pag. 87. There is a very Prophane Spirit fomented under the Wings of Anabaptism for how can it be otherwise than such which endeavours to extirpate so considerable a means for the advance of Conversion and Sanctification as he shews Infant-Baptism to be Hence saith he arise grievous prejudices against those Ministers Societies and Ordinances in which God hath been wont
and bitter to peaceable Authors that are forced to it than it is to the Readers And it 's pity that the Ministers of Christ should for 1500 years be taken up so much with a work that is so unpleasant to almost all It is unpleasant to the Adversary to have his Ignorance Errors Falshoods and Injuries to the Truth and Church made known to his disgrace and to have that proved an odious Error which he taketh to be a Beam from Heaven and of a Divine Off-spring and perhaps necessary to Salvation or at least some excellent thing which the Church cannot spare It is unpleasant to the sober pious Writer to think that he must thus displease and exasperate his Brother and all that are of the way which he oppugneth and that thereby he must provoke so many to esteem and defame him as an enemy to the Truth And it is not pleasant to think what hard study and labour it must cost us to procure this bitter fruit when by Ignorance Sloth or treacherous Silence we could have kept our peace and such mens Love And it is unpleasant to the best of Readers to find mens Minds thus manifesting their dissensions and to think of the Exasperations and wrath that will ensue and to see such Wars kept up among those who should be notified to the World by an Eminency of Love But it will be pleasant to those Hypocrites whose Religion consisteth in Opinions Parties and Disputes if they be of his mind whose Works they read and it will be bittersweet to those wise and pious men that find it Necessary For Necessary it may be and too oft is It 's hard keeping our own or the Churches Peace unless both Parties will consent As much as in us lieth and if it be possible we must live peaceably with all men But when it is not possible we must lament the want of what we are not able to obtain For all Christ's Ministers to stand by and see well-meaning ignorant people called as in God's name to sin against him and flattered or frightned from Truth Duty and Privileges and to let such work go on to the danger of Souls and distracting of Christ's Churches without contradiction will hardly consist with our Ministerial Fidelity Therefore as unnecessary Wars are the greatest complicate sins in the World and yet necessary Wars are the means of Peace so it is in these Theological Wars And as the valiant Defenders of their Country in necessary Wars have right to the praises given them by all so those that necessarily defend God's Truth and his Churches Rights deserve acceptance Among whom I judge the Reverend Author of this Treatise to be worthy of the Churches thanks on several accounts It is no contemptible Privilege which he vindicateth The Interest of all Christians Children in the World in the Covenant and Visible Church of Christ is a matter of greater moment than most that acknowledge it do duly lay to heart much more than the unthankful Rejecters of it understand The Title given to the Pelagians was Ingrati the Unthankful because they disputed against God's Grace which they themselves did need as well as others Such Cicero thought those Philosophers that disputed against the Immortality of Mans Soul And Mr. Tombes was long ago angry with me for giving that Title to them that so vehemently dispute all Infants out of the visible Church and Covenant But let the Evidence of the Cause well considered inform us and it will be too sure that Publick Repentance would far better beseem such Writers as Mr. Danvers than stiff persisting in this unthankful Error I have written somewhat my self upon Mr. Danvers vehement instigation once more on this Subject partly in answer to Mr. Tombes and partly to himself But let not the notice of that hinder you from reading this Treatise For I have dealt with Mr. Danvers only on the account of his pretended Witnesses for a thousand years after Christ and his quarrels with my self having neither leisure nor will nor patience all things considered to meddle with his Arguments or the rest of his History while I know how sufficiently they stand confuted in my own and many other mens Writings long ago But this Reverend Author hath dealt with him more particularly and answered his Arguments satisfactorily and search'd into those and all the rest of his pretended Antiquities and not only done that which I have passed by but the same also in a full Confutation And it is so sad a Case that after all our dreadful Warnings we should still be haunted with this unquiet Spirit which hath been exorcised or laid so oft and that under all our other Trials we should have the addition of these vexatious dividing Wranglings to turn mens hearts against each other that we owe the more thanks to such as the Author for bringing so much water to quench these flames especially in a time when so many disaffected Persons are ready to impute to Presbyterians Independents or any such other that they desire to defame the Errors of all about them whom they do not confute yea too oft also those that they do confute while some others betray the Cause by silence or silly unsatisfactory Arguings Pardon or chuse a man that offendeth all Sects by plain dealing for telling the World That if the Anabaptists had been no better confuted than the Papists and the Silencers have confuted them I verily think that so great a part of the conscientious though injudicious Vulgar would have followed them as would have made work and trouble for us all Farewell At the door of Eternity Rich. Baxter June 24. 1674. CHAP. I. The Authors first Argument That Believers Baptisme is the only true Baptism drawn from Christs positive Institution and Commission Mat. 28.18 19. Mark 16.16 Examined and Confuted THese are the prime Texts upon which Antipaedobaptists lay the greatest stress as conceiving they have sure warrant from hence for their practice and that from the same places Ours is condemnable Out of this Armory do they fetch their keenest Weapons and most triumphant Arguments And indeed all that they say besides is vox praeterea nihil a great sound of words to little purpose This is the Palmarium argumentum their victorious and unanswerable Argument as they imagine so None are to be Babtized but those who are first taught but Infants are not teachable Ergo they ought not to be baptized and again he that Believeth and is Baptized Infants cannot believe therefore must not be Baptized We say they follow the Rule of Institution you who are Paedobaptists cross it and cannot acquit our selves of Will-worship And I confess this is a plausible way of arguing and very taking with Vulgar capacities and I wonder no more of weak understanding and tender consciences are proselyted to their way They have the advantage of us to gain upon such Yet notwithstanding their great confidence that they have both Scripture and Reason on their side
Christ in whom the Covenant was confirmed to them and their seed Cottons Dialogue of Childrens Baptism p. 130. For as Mr. Cotton observes The Axe was laid to the Root of the Tree even to the stock of Abraham and all the Branches that grew upon it and were ingrafted into it so that now if they brought not forth this good fruit to believe in Christ who was then come whom the Jews generally rejected as an Impostor they and their children were cut off from the Covenant of Abraham and must say no more We have Abraham to our Father but if they held forth Repentance and Faith in Christ then the Covenant that was made to them and to their Children before did still continue to them and to their children and that 's the ground and meaning of Peters exhortation Act. 2.38 39. Repent and be Baptized every one of you in the Name of the Lord for the promise is to you c. Now what prejudice can this be to the Baptisme of Believers Infants who are admitted in the right of their Parents laying hold on the Covenant for themselves and their seed now under the new Administration as Members of the Church of Christ and in Covenant with God 2. Neither will we take the Authors word for what follows Nothing now but fruit meet for Repentance gives right to Baptisme without some qualification For first I demand what fruit of Repentance John saw in that great multitude which he then Baptized viz. Jerusalem Judea and all the Regions round about Jordan ver 5. which could not be less then some thousands of whom he could have no cognizance as to their fruits of repentance 2. I farther demand whether he could judge this great multitude which were strangers to him to be all the Spiritual seed of Abraham And since the Author observes from Johns words they had no right to Baptism from being Abrahams natural seed neither could he look upon them all as the spiritual seed let him tell us on what account he baptized them 3. It is like he will tell us they confessed their sins ver 6. and so were Baptized But will any man think they did all do so or is it said he baptized no other but such It will be hard for any man to prove that John did impose this upon them We find as Mr. Marshal notes that he Baptized them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Repentance not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as state in Actual Repentance and his calling upon them for Repentance and Preaching the Baptism of Repentance shews that this was the lesson which they were all to learn not that they all manifested it before he Baptized them For ought we can find from the Text the Pharisees and Sadduces were Baptized by him and had they been such Penitents it had been great uncharitableness to call them Vipers We have the Author over-lashing again in the next words for he lies open every where Nothing saith he short of the spirits birth can orderly admit to Water-birth and Spiritual ordinances But since you are not Infallible let it be supposed you have been mistaken in your judgment and have baptized a person which afterward appears to be unregenerate Did you admit him orderly or no you will say you did because he was Baptized under the apprehension of being regenerate The Church lookt upon him as such and saw nothing to the contrary Very good now you are come about to what I would have and indeed if the New Testament-Church did consist only of the spiritual seed real Godly ones how abominably is the Ordinance prophaned when it so happens as it often doth that any Hypocrites are Baptized and when it appears that the Title which they had to Baptisme was but seeming will it not follow that all that was done in reference to them was a Male-Administration and Null ab initio Mr. Blakes Covenant sealed and as God looks upon them as unbaptized though they have been dipt so ought the Church to look upon them and if these Hypocrits shall repent and be converted are they not bound to offer themselves a-fresh to Baptism and can the Church refuse them and thus according to the Authors principle there will be need of a Multiplication of Baptisms He concludes this Chapter with the sayings of two Doctors as wide in judgement from each other as the two Poles yet it seems he can make them meet to serve his purpose The first is Dr. Owen who is much engaged for his Elogy but nothing at all for wresting his sentences from his intention 'T is well known the learned Dr. like to the rest of his Brethren of the Congregational way is a zealous Assertor of Infant-Baptism and the import of what he says in his Catechisme is no more then what all Congregational men hold namely That the matter of the Church is a Society or Fellowship of visible Saints and this according to the singular dexterity of this Antagonist who beats us still with our own Weapons is found to be point blank against Infant-Baptism But we shall clear this point in the next Chapter under which it falls properly to be spoken of The other Gentleman is Dr. Taylor we have said enough of him before how much he was for Infant-Baptism notwithstanding he plays the Orator and tells us he will act the part of an Anabaptist and shew what may be said for them though they are in an Errour but let us hear what he says for according to the Author he doth rarely accomodate that which he thinks is truth when as it is only by bestowing a few complements upon an error we shall seldom meet with such a parcel of affected words delivered in such a strain as did notably fuit with the Genius of the times when he writ them that is before the turn of times when men were high flown and above Ordinances The Baptism of Children saith he is an outward duty a work of the Law a Carnal Ordinance it makes us adhere to the Letter without regard to the spirit to be satisfied with shadows to return to Bondage to relinquish the mysteriousness the substance the spirituality of the Gospel c. This is brave stuff indeed high towring language I never met with the like unless it were in Mr. Saltmarsh his shadows flying away and beams of Glory And is not the Baptism of Believers think you bravely accomodated with these Rhetorical Flowers Is there one grain of Logick or Reason in all he saith And then at last the Doctor doth so well accommodate that which H.D. calls the truth that he attempts to maintain it by two gross errors delivered in one breath for saith he if the Mystery goes not before the Symbol yet it always accompanies it but never follows it in order of time But first I would fain know who told the Doctor that Grace always accompanies Baptisme for that I take to be the plain English of Mystery and Symbol without the help
they shall be grafted into the Church again as before for as Mr. Marshall notes in his Defence of Infant Baptism pag. 134. At their first grafting in they and their children were grafted in at their casting out they and their children were broken off and when they shall be taken in again they and their children shall be taken in This Mr. Tombs himself grants that the Jews and their seed were rejected together yea and that they shall be taken in together pag. 66. of his answer Thus then we argue if it must be so with them it must be so with believing Gentiles now or else there will be a Schisme between Jew and Gentile in point of priviledges else there will be too distinct estates in the Christian Churches one of the Jews holy Fathers and children another of the Gentiles who have only personal priviledges none for their seed which is an absurd conceit as Mr. Geree speaks and would set up or keep up a partition-wall still contrary to that Eph. 2. I shall say nothing of other absurdities which are very numerous which come from the denying the Church-Membership of the Infant seed of believers The Author adds It is incongruous to reason and sense to imagine that little Children are any way concerned as Church Members either in the Dedications of the Epistles sent to the Churches or the Epistles themselves for they were dedicated to those who were called to be Saints c. I answer First that this is a meer Paralogism for what if we confess the Apostle directed his Epistles to such as were profest Believers and Saints by calling were none other but those or such like them concern'd in the Epistles What shall we think of carnal persons and unbelievers are they unconcerned in them This minds me with a passage in Mr. Paul's serious Reflections such another rigid Antipaedobaptist as our Antagonist He tells us pag. 9. That the Epistles were writ to particular Churches and that it will be difficult to prove they were also directed to particular Saints but saith Bunian a more moderate man although an Antipaedobaptist If this be true there is vertue indeed and more then ever I dreamed of in partaking of Water-Baptisme For if that shall take away the Epistles and consequently the whole Bible from all that are not Baptized he means after their mode of dipping being grown Christians then are the other Churches and also particular Saints in a very deplorable condition Would to God saith he of his Brethren they had learnt more modesty then thus to take from all others Nè autem existiment Corinthii hanc Epistolam ita ipsis propriam esse ut ad alios non pertineat addit Cumomnibus qui invocant nomen Domini nostri Jesus Christi in quovis loco tum ipsorum tum nostri Piscator in locum and appropriate to themselves and that for observing a circumstance c. But he better instructs Mr. Paul and turns him to St. Paul Rom. 16.5 and to the first Epistle written to Corinth and shews that the first Epistle of John was wrote to some who at that time were out of Fellowship that they might have fellowship with the Church Joh. 1.1 2 3 4. Secondly we grant the Epistles were directed some of them to professing Believers joyn'd in Fellowship directly and immediately and to their children if they had any and the children of all Believers in succeeding ages remotely and the contents of the Epistles concern both the Parents at present and the children when come to years of discretion A Father that hath several children some grown up to understanding others Minors or Babes may direct a Book or Epistle to them all Whatsoever was writ was written as much for our instruction as the Primitive Christians We know Moses and the Prophets directed what they writ to the Church under that Administration whereof their Children were a part and yet they were ignorant Babes and could not understand any thing or perform any duties But let it be considered that though they understood nothing of those divine Exhortations yet being within Gods Nursery and School they were in a nearer capacity to be taught their duty than Aliens and their Parents were injoyned to teach them the Ordinances of God and God gave this Testimony concerning Abraham that he knew he would teach his children and in the New Testament it was the commendation of Lois that she had instructed Timothy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ab Infantia when he was an Infant or little Child 3. Whereas the Epistles are inscribed with those Titles To the Saints Saints by calling sanctified in Christ Jesus chosen adopted which cannot saith our Author be spoken of Infants To this it may be thus replyed 1. Some of those titles may be predicated of children some not 2. The Apostle calls the Churches Saints either as looking upon them all as such i.e. truely regenerate for this is the famosius significatum of the word Saint but this could not be for he pointed at some that were sad Saints in the Church of Corinth and Galatia or else he calls them Saints Synechdochically because he judged the most of them to be such and so the whole Communion were judged Saints à Potiori from the better part 3. He calls them Saints by calling i.e. by the preaching of the word and so we acknowledge Infants are not and yet the same Apostle calls the Infants of Believers Saints 1. Cor. 7.14 Else were your Children unclean but now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are Saints or holy and 't is the same word the Apostle useth in his inscriptions of the Epistles to the Churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Saints and being he maketh use of the same word applying it to the children of believers it hints thus much to us that in Saint Pauls account who was guided by the Spirit of God in what he speaks the Infant seed of Believers are as much Saints as any who are such by calling Nor are they only foederally holy but they may be also inherently sanctified saith Mr. Tombs in his Examen They may receive the new birth and we say more they must receive it if saved Job 3.5 It is much controverted concerning the Text whether it intends grown persons or any persons of whatsoever age or sex but the Original if heeded would put an end to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Except one be born including all ages all sexes Children are so polluted in their first birth that they can never get to Heaven by that and therefore what the first birth cannot a second must saith Dr. Taylor And if it be objected that to the new birth is required dispositions of our own which are to be wrought by and in them that have the use of Reason besides that this as the Learned Doctor speaks is wholly against the Analogy of à New-birth in which the person to be born is wholly passive and hath put into him the Principle